No wonder the lefties are distrusted.

If you are going confuse this issue with fact I'm not going to play.

Could this be a case of "Lies, lies, damned lies, and statistics," perhaps? Fredrik

quote:

Originally posted by BigH47:
If you are going confuse this issue with fact I'm not going to play.

Ha! Sorry, I forgot it was American politics we were discussing. As you correctly point out, that's no arena for facts, to be sure.

Sadly, I wonder if the US is ready for either a black president or a woman president... I also worry, in the event of a Clinton/Obama ticket, which one would be the favored target for nutburger would-be assassins.

Much to dislike about this nation I call home.

quote:

Originally posted by Mick Parry:

Despite all of the political correctness, your average Yank is not too keen on blacks or women.

Actually, the majority of Americans have no problem with the idea of a woman or black president. In a recent poll 94% said they'd vote for a black candidate, and 88% said they'd vote for a woman. Even if you take a substantial deduction for those who say one thing but vote another, it's still a clear majority.

All best,
Fred

Fred

How old are you ?

The average Yank is very religious and conservative and blacks and women just do not fit in.

Forget the polls, just wait for the next election.

Going back to Katrina, it was mainly the fact that it was blacks who got displaced that got the "haves" up in arms about spending the taxpayers money.

If they had been white, the money would have poured in. Americans are good at saying one thing and doing something else. They talk green and then jump in a SUV or aircraft and go 200 miles up the road without batting an eyelid.

Regards

Mick

quote:

Originally posted by Mick Parry:
Jay

Despite all of the political correctness, your average Yank is not too keen on blacks or women.

So goodness knows who is going to be the next President.

Regards

Mick .. before anyone starts moaning, my favourite PM is Margaret Thatcher and I like Trevor Mcdonald.

Mick,

You haven't a clue what the average American thinks, feels, wants, needs, knows, believes, does, or is capable of. Your every post on the subject pathetically illustrates this fact.

Jay

Ok have it your way.

You are the country who pollutes the world.

You are the country who still allows the KKK to survive

You are the country where the deep south and its attitudes still survive.

You are the country with the Neo Cons

You are the country with the insane gun culture and the NRA

Be honest, America is conservative with a capital C.

You can deny it but no one will believe you.

Regards

Mick

Mick, your "knowledge" of America and Americans was gathered on a cruise ship (and frankly, it shows). So it isn't just your data that's suspect, but your methodology as well.

Grab a shovel and continue to dig, if you like. The thread is yours, and I suspect you'll continue to make my points even more eloquently than I could. It seems to be your nature.

quote:

Going back to Katrina, it was mainly the fact that it was blacks who got displaced that got the "haves" up in arms about spending the taxpayers money.

If they had been white, the money would have poured in.

Jay

Would you agree or disagree with that statement.

Regards

Mick

quote:

Originally posted by Mick Parry:

quote:

Going back to Katrina, it was mainly the fact that it was blacks who got displaced that got the "haves" up in arms about spending the taxpayers money.

If they had been white, the money would have poured in.

Jay

Would you agree or disagree with that statement.

Regards

Mick

You present "agree" and "disagree" as if they are the only two options. There is, however, a third choice:

get your facts straight

It's a good rule in general.

Hello Mick,

I've only read a few posts on this thread but from what I have seen (initially) then I am with you.

Sarkozy may well be perceived as a "Thatcher in trousers" but it has to be said that France needs a major shake up, and he is the man to do it. They are lagging behind in Europe (make that the world) economically and his plans will hopefully, for them, make them a more competetive and prosperous country.

Mark

Jay

You are side stepping.

I will re phrase the question, if N O had been a predomomantly white area, do you think that the money would have poured in or not.

Regards

Mick

quote:

Originally posted by Mick Parry:
Jay

You are side stepping.

I will re phrase the question, if N O had been a predomomantly white area, do you think that the money would have poured in or not.

Regards

Mick

Mick,

You are asking a loaded question. Your question presumes money did not, in fact, pour in. Define "pouring in", then we can decide if it actually occurred.

(Hint: by August 29, 2006, more than $4 billion in donations from individuals and corporations had made its way into the relief effort. Is that pouring in? Could pouring in be reasonably defined as half that amount? Twice that amount? Define your terms.)

quote:

Originally posted by Rasher:
The problem with coming across instances of this is that it is easy to make a generalised judgement and end up being cynical. Much better to remember your own principles and act upon them, and do not allow yourself to lose sight of what you believe to be right. You shouldn't allow yourself to be disillusioned by those that abuse the good in others, because if you do, if you lose those principles, you have nothing left.
You can call it naive, and maybe it is, but just because some people don't seem very bright, it doesn't necessarily make them bad people.
As long as you can look back and respect yourself and your own actions, then that's all that matters. You'll be a happier person for it too.

I like you, Rasher.

quote:

Originally posted by jayd:

quote:

Originally posted by Mick Parry:

quote:

Going back to Katrina, it was mainly the fact that it was blacks who got displaced that got the "haves" up in arms about spending the taxpayers money.

If they had been white, the money would have poured in.

Jay

Would you agree or disagree with that statement.

Regards

Mick

You present "agree" and "disagree" as if they are the only two options. There is, however, a third choice:

get your facts straight

It's a good rule in general.

Jay,

Just read your link. If you think that the views of the Guardian are representative of the British population then you are mistaken. I hadn't seen that comment before but quite frankly it doesn't surprise me. It would appeal to their stereotypical readers as they 'grow their own denim and knit some yoghurts'.

Mark

quote:

Originally posted by markah:
If you think that the views of the Guardian are representative of the British population then you are mistaken.

Yet Mick gets his information about America from people on a cruise, and you publish your support of him. Interesting. (And if you think The Guardian was the only media outlet imposing a racial bias on Katrina, you're mistaken as well.)

I get all my cultural information on GB from the movie A Clockwork Orange.
Others on this forum (Mick excepted for this one) seem to get their info on America from The Simpsons.
"The average Yank is very religious and conservative and blacks and women just do not fit in."
I know a lot of "Yanks" (if by that you mean WASP Americans that live in the North East) and I can't define any "average" out of that group. On the whole they're tolerant of many groups (excepting the French) and I think they'd support the right woman or black.
Colin Powell always gets high support from the Yanks. Though he'll not likely run. Most are waiting to see what Obama will do, he is inexperienced. Hillary, on the other hand, is so polarizing that it will be a political nightmare if she runs or wins.
David

quote:

Originally posted by jayd:

quote:

Originally posted by markah:
If you think that the views of the Guardian are representative of the British population then you are mistaken.

Yet Mick gets his information about America from people on a cruise, and you publish your support of him. Interesting. (And if you think The Guardian was the only media outlet imposing a racial bias on Katrina, you're mistaken as well.)

I doubt that Mick gets information about people from America purely from a cruise. However, my initial post was more to do with his comments about the French elections, not America - which doesn't concern or interest me.

"And if you think The Guardian was the only media outlet imposing a racial bias on Katrina, you're mistaken as well." - sorry Jay, did I say or imply that?

Mark

quote:

Originally posted by acad tsunami:

quote:

Originally posted by Mick Parry:


The riotors were lefties and low income immigrants.

Regards

What is your point here? Is there a right wing racist elitist sub-text? Do low income immigrants have less rights in your view? Are they a sort of scummy untermensch?

Voltaire said that the 'only thing history teaches us is that history teaches us nothing' if France thinks it can be saved by adopting Thatcherite policies it is clearly doomed. The UK may have the world's 4th largest economy but it has the worst social problems in the whole of Europe (with the possible exception of Romania and Russia). This is another legacy of The Hag-Bitch from Hell. One really can't judge a whole country by its economy. Children in the Philippines do not commit suicide, they are not in therapy and they are not on anti-depressants.

Low income immigrants do not necessarily have less rights (unless they are illegal I presume) - they also do not have the right to riot.

Children in the Philippines unfortunately die a lot younger than in the UK. Check out infant mortality rates. A fine example to use.

Mark

quote:

Originally posted by Mick Parry:
Fred

How old are you?

53. But why do you ask? What's that got to do with it? Is it older or younger than you suspected? And how old are you?

quote:

The average Yank is very religious and conservative and blacks and women just do not fit in.

No, the average American is moderately religious. The fundamentalist zealots are still a minority. Again, I'd suggest you check the facts. As the Late Senator Moynihan said, you are entitled to your own opinions, but you are not entitled to your own facts.

quote:

Forget the polls, just wait for the next election.

In 2000 more Americans voted for Al Gore than for George Bush. That's a fact.

Look, I'll be the first to acknowledge the many problems with American culture and its government's policies. But the cultural problems are not exclusive to the USA, and as far as our current rogue government, well, it seems almost everyone else outside the US understands that it's the cabal in power that's the problem, not its constituents. Perhaps you didn't get the memo.

All best,
Fred

Fred,

I have re-read this thread, paying particular attention to Mick's comments and yours.

Mick's position is set out very clearly in his post of May 16th at 22:19. It is a view shared by me and I imagine by a high proportion of American and French voters, but clearly not by you, Phil, Howard and lots of others on this forum.

The nub of the matter, as ever, revolves around the extent to which people should be able to rely on others for help, as opposed to relying on themselves; and also revolves around the nature of that help eg should it be gifts or encouragement. In my opinion extreme positions are neither morally justified nor viable.

Most of us live in family groups and this arrangement, to a large extent, provides sufficient help for most needs. However some individuals and some families, through misfortune, are unable to cope. It is my opinion that society should support such people in the short term with gifts and help them by encouragement to take up new opportunities to enable them to become self-reliant (again). [Gifts include financial aid; encouragement includes education in its broadest sense]

Other individuals and families are simply lazy scroungers, capable of looking after themselves but unwilling to do so. It is my view that we support these people only to the most basic point of avoiding starvation and contagious ill-health.

Differentiating the unfortunate from the lazy isn't always easy. Tough, that's life.

Based on the views expressed in this thread, it seems to me that you and many others on this forum would hand out gifts to raise the standard of living of both the unfortunate and the lazy to the average standard of self-reliant people. Please correct me if I am wrong.

If I am not wrong, I presume that you, your political associates and the others on this forum of like mind, are able to confirm that you have never taken a holiday, that you donate all your disposable income to good causes, and are yourselves living at a subsistence level just above the breadline - other than owning Naim hifi, owning a computer, and being able to enjoy music of course.

Returning specifically to the issue of non-insurance before Katrina. If poor people could afford to buy/own a house, they should have bought something slightly cheaper and bought insurance as well. They should have sustained this situation. If they couldn't afford to buy and insure a house, they should have rented and simply insured their belongings.

I could quite happily take up your (presumed) offer that I forget about buying insurance for my home, my car, my other possessions, my holiday etc etc - This will enable me to buy quite a few more nice things that I really would like. However, before I adopt this new-found enlightenment to an easier lifestyle, can I rest assured that you, Howard and a few others on this forum, will restore me and all my possessions to their current health and glory if they should ever be lost due to any misfortune or lazyness on my part?

Cheers

Don

quote:

I could quite happily take up your (presumed) offer that I forget about buying insurance for my home, my car, my other possessions, my holiday etc etc - This will enable me to buy quite a few more nice things that I really would like. However, before I adopt this new-found enlightenment to an easier lifestyle, can I rest assured that you, Howard and a few others on this forum, will restore me and all my possessions to their current health and glory if they should ever be lost due to any misfortune or lazyness on my part?

Sometime back there were terrible rains in Malibu, CA and mansions started sliding down the hills and into the ocean. I’ve visited that area several times, it is one of the wealthiest strips of beautiful West coast beachfront you can imagine.
There was a deafening chorus of "Oooh, the poor millionaires! How can we help them regain their dignaty and rebuild their homes? Insurance may not cover all their losses."
What a bunch of crap.
David

Alternatively you could persue the insurance policy I always have: Insure nothing not required by law! Thus I have a very good and reliable Third Part Insurance on my car and none other.

The trick is to make sure you can either have enough fat in the bank to cover any potential loss, and also be sure that you never spend money once you could never affords to spend twice, OR if you do get something nice, like my record library, then you accept it is back to square one if it is lost.

This stricture on spending works two ways. You don't aquire much and nothing you cannot afford to loose, so your money stays in the bank. Nice for rainy days which do happen.

ATB from Fredrik

quote:

Originally posted by markah:
"And if you think The Guardian was the only media outlet imposing a racial bias on Katrina, you're mistaken as well." - sorry Jay, did I say or imply that?

Mark

No more than I said or implied that I thought the views of the Guardian are representative of the British population. If you get my point.

Don, I do want my tax dollars to help those who truly need it (that is, not corporate welfare). I do contribute some of my disposable income to charity. Why should my compassion be questioned because I don't contribute every penny of it? If we all pitch in a little we can accomplish a lot.

For many the choice is not between a "slightly cheaper" house or no insurance. In many cases, there is no cheaper house. They can't afford to insure their house. They can't afford to insure their belongings. Rent can often amount to more than a mortgage payment. Laziness has nothing to do with it.

All this "They [the poor] should do this, they should do that" talk is just so much "let them eat cake" and "why don't they pull themselves up by their own bootstraps."

All best,
Fred