• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Do Americans care less about their fellow citizen compared to other modern countries?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Well, I know Americans donate a lot, as do I, but why not go further and allow the government to help people better as well?

I always hear conservatives say, well churches will step in and take care of the sick. Really? Come on. Why not have universal health care like every other modern country and be done with it?

That is why I asked this question. Really just focusing on healthcare here.
 
Well, I know Americans donate a lot, as do I, but why not go further and allow the government to help people better as well?

I always hear conservatives say, well churches will step in and take care of the sick. Really? Come on. Why not have universal health care like every other modern country and be done with it?

That is why I asked this question. Really just focusing on healthcare here.

Americans are more susceptible to propaganda? Or they just have more thrown at them?
 
Well, I know Americans donate a lot, as do I, but why not go further and allow the government to help people better as well?

I always hear conservatives say, well churches will step in and take care of the sick. Really? Come on. Why not have universal health care like every other modern country and be done with it?

That is why I asked this question. Really just focusing on healthcare here.

If you wanted to ask about healthcare, then ask about healthcare. Don't bring up this bs about Americans not caring about their fellow citizens when they are some of the most giving people.
 
some people in this thread need to actually see a food drive and the toy donations at Christmas before they make up their minds.

I know the amount I saw donated in Birmingham AL of all places is near impossible to top.
everyday this huge warehouse would be filled up then shipped off for an entire month.


on the little things, you don't just give a person money if they are hungry or money if they ran out of gas. you buy it for them.
 
It's kind of an easy question actually. By and large americans care more about giving people what they "deserve". They will gladly give away money, but they want the people receiving that money to know they are being done a favor, and want to know themselves that they are doing them a favor, they don't want to be "forced" into this. In Europe most people simply believe that everone is due a certain amount of comfort (yes, comfort) simply by existing. Hence a lot of stories about people feeling "entitled" that enrage americans (and other people too of course but this sentiment is more prevalent among americans).

ding ding ding!

Alot of Americans would rather actively participate in forms of donations and helping other citizens rather than through a passive method of taxing. Efficiency is another debate.
 
ding ding ding!

Alot of Americans would rather actively participate in forms of donations and helping other citizens rather than through a passive method of taxing. Efficiency is another debate.

Pretty much. I was typing some things about entitlement and how Americans hate that, but I decided just edit it out.
 
ding ding ding!

Alot of Americans would rather actively participate in forms of donations and helping other citizens rather than through a passive method of taxing. Efficiency is another debate.

Oh wow, what you quoted does hit the nail on the head.

For the OP, universal healthcare will happen eventually here. Give it time. Easily within a decade, and I'd say it'll be a reality within the next presidential term.
 
Unless they are abusive to NHS staff and have been refused service on a personal level, no. Everyone receives some level of care, and the vast majority get everything they need. Some treatments are too expensive to be paid for by the NHS, but there will always be some sort of alternative treatment available, and you're not prevented from seeking treatment privately.

I understand about the personal abuse or faking injury etc. Thank you.

My assumption is the reason the government can create an all inclusive system is probably because is can require people to fund it regardless if the individual wants to or not. If it was optional for each citizen to fund the NHS would it still be able to be all inclusive?
 
ding ding ding!

Alot of Americans would rather actively participate in forms of donations and helping other citizens rather than through a passive method of taxing. Efficiency is another debate.
Name one charity that has the buying power of the U.S. government.

A charity may give some people (who probably already qualify for Medicaid) some help, but does it do anything to lower costs?
 
If you wanted to ask about healthcare, then ask about healthcare. Don't bring up this bs about Americans not caring about their fellow citizens when they are some of the most giving people.

I was just focusing on healthcare in that post, but our safety net is one of the weakest in the west as well as I said in the OP. So, I wanted to make it a question about whether we care about the neediest among us.

It is great to give to charity, but I would think it is more effective to just let the government do these things since charity can't do everything.

ding ding ding!

Alot of Americans would rather actively participate in forms of donations and helping other citizens rather than through a passive method of taxing. Efficiency is another debate.

Well, I also agree with that, but charities aren't really that effective. They can't pay a $50,000 cancer treatment, or help poor people rise up from poverty.
 
I understand about the personal abuse or faking injury etc. Thank you.

My assumption is the reason the government can create an all inclusive system is probably because is can require people to fund it regardless if the individual wants to or not. If it was optional for each citizen to fund the NHS would it still be able to be all inclusive?

Wait what? NHS comes from taxation, as do other government programs. Of course it couldn't be as effective if paying for it in taxation was optional, but a core principle of the NHS is that it will cover everyone and be free at the point of service, so it couldn't be the same system without it covering everyone.
 
Did you know the majority of Americans would prefer universal health care over employee based health care?

I have tried to say it again and again. Talk shit about our government as much as you want, we do it too. But don't extend it to the american people. "On average" is a remarkably stupid way to sum up such a large and diverse nation.

I think it was around 55-60% who support universal health care iirc. But the thing is Americans keep electing republicans in office, and republican don´t want universal health care. It´s a paradox since republicans control the House. That tells me a lot pro universal health care don´t vote. Maybe it´s how electoral districts work.
 
Are you people in this thread for real? Or just out of touch? I grew up in a working class neighborhood, with a father who has working class morals but works a white collar job. He and many other parents taught my friends and I to help out the old, the sick, and to lend a hand whenever needs be. Granted, many of the kids I grew up with are loosing touch with that uprising because they lack ambition and an insight into the future however they will eventually mature into a similar person of who their parents are.

I must say, Americans between the ages of 30-55 are very nice and generous to their friends and neighbors. My father and I still to this day shovel our elderly neighbors driveway so her husband can safely get to the hospital for kidney dialysis. We would be up at 5am to shovel over a foot of snow so the transport vehicle can back into the driveway to then shovel again a few hours later after another foot of snow accumulated atop of what we already shoveled. Now that my father has a snowblower, he still takes care of our elderly neighbors but also lends it out to younger, more capable neighbors just because it's the right thing to do.

Many Americans do this. Whether it's pooling money with the neighborhood to buy a piece of equipment to lending a hand to someone new in the neighborhood to make them feel welcome. I can't speak for everyone in here, but this happens all the time in a small rural town 5 miles inland from the shore in New Jersey. I honestly feel a lot the people saying otherwise are either from a large city, or just generally out of touch because the media focuses on a very small minority of shitheads. The best advice I can give is to focus on your community, and condense it even more to your specific neighborhood. It is amazing how generous and helpful neighbors and people in your general neighborhood are. It's only unnoticeable if you don't play your part.
 
Wait what? NHS comes from taxation, as do other government programs. Of course it couldn't be as effective if paying for it in taxation was optional, but a core principle of the NHS is that it will cover everyone and be free at the point of service, so it couldn't be the same system without it covering everyone.

I am just trying to think through your argument about how only a government program can be all inclusive.

So in my head I was wondering could you create a private or non-profit organization that could be all inclusive. It gets muddy pretty quickly but having the ability to require funding from every citizen would go along way to create that non-profit all inclusive organization.

EDIT: I apologize. It's more a silly thought experiment. And I should have just kept it to myself instead of involving you in it. Thanks for the info on the NHS.
 
I am just trying to think through your argument about how only a government program can be all inclusive.

So in my head I was wondering could you create a private or non-profit organization that could be all inclusive. It gets muddy pretty quickly but having the ability to require funding from every citizen would go along way to create that non-profit all inclusive organization.

EDIT: I apologize. It's more a silly thought experiment. And I should have just kept it to myself instead of involving you in it. Thanks for the info on the NHS.

lol no problem, I was kinda thinking about the idea of an independent organisation having free at the point of service universal coverage but the idea is kinda crazy and I genuinely don't think it's possible. Especially if it's for profit.
 
Are you people in this thread for real? Or just out of touch? I grew up in a working class neighborhood, with a father who has working class morals but works a white collar job. He and many other parents taught my friends and I to help out the old, the sick, and to lend a hand whenever needs be. Granted, many of the kids I grew up with are loosing touch with that uprising because they lack ambition and an insight into the future however they will eventually mature into a similar person of who their parents are.

I must say, Americans between the ages of 30-55 are very nice and generous to their friends and neighbors. My father and I still to this day shovel our elderly neighbors driveway so her husband can safely get to the hospital for kidney dialysis. We would be up at 5am to shovel over a foot of snow so the transport vehicle can back into the driveway to then shovel again a few hours later after another foot of snow accumulated atop of what we already shoveled. Now that my father has a snowblower, he still takes care of our elderly neighbors but also lends it out to younger, more capable neighbors just because it's the right thing to do.

Many Americans do this. Whether it's pooling money with the neighborhood to buy a piece of equipment to lending a hand to someone new in the neighborhood to make them feel welcome. I can't speak for everyone in here, but this happens all the time in a small rural town 5 miles inland from the shore in New Jersey. I honestly feel a lot the people saying otherwise are either from a large city, or just generally out of touch because the media focuses on a very small minority of shitheads. The best advice I can give is to focus on your community, and condense it even more to your specific neighborhood. It is amazing how generous and helpful neighbors and people in your general neighborhood are. It's only unnoticeable if you don't play your part.

I really meant on a national level. I was wondering why all this "niceness" of Americans doesn't translation into national programs to help people like other countries.

Don't really care much about charities. Their impact really isn't that effective on many important factors.
 
Americans are certainly more individualistic than any other comparable nation. It's an important part of the culture; individualism has always been deeply mixed with notions of freedom (and value repetitively attributed to this 'freedom'). There's less importance placed on communities, meanwhile, and individuals are less likely to feel any connection with their neighbours.

Many Americans are still good, compassionate, charitable people. But there is an incredible alienation between different economic classes that's constantly rationalized by deeply ingrained beliefs and the fact that the gap is becoming more significant each year.
 
I really meant on a national level. I was wondering why all this "niceness" of Americans doesn't translation into national programs to help people like other countries.

Don't really care much about charities. Their impact really isn't that effective on many important factors.

Ok, so you are saying that a lack of national government subsidized social programs means Americans don't care. Why even pose the question? People here are trying to say that even though we don't have them:

a) many Americans want them
b) Americans show they care in other ways.

but you don't care about those, so you don't care about an answer to your question.
 
lol no problem, I was kinda thinking about the idea of an independent organisation having free at the point of service universal coverage but the idea is kinda crazy and I genuinely don't think it's possible. Especially if it's for profit.

You are probably correct. I was trying to remove the profit motive by attempting it with a non-profit organization.

Thanks for the help and info Maleficence :)
 
Ok, so you are saying that a lack of national government subsidized social programs means Americans don't care. Why even pose the question? People here are trying to say that even though we don't have them:

a) many Americans want them
b) Americans show they care in other ways.

but you don't care about those, so you don't care about an answer to your question.

Where am I disregarding anything? I simply said charity isn't effective enough.

a) Not enough people want them, or it would have happened already.
b) It isn't effective enough. It is like putting a band-aid on a open wound and patting yourself on the back. Also, based on GDP, the American donations are pretty low compared to other countries.
 
Where am I disregarding anything? I simply said charity isn't effective enough.

a) Not enough people want them, or it would have happened already.
b) It isn't effective enough. It is like putting a band-aid on a open wound and patting yourself on the back. Also, based on GDP, the American donations are pretty low compared to other countries.

Well I have stopped caring about this thread anyway. So that is something.
 
I really meant on a national level. I was wondering why all this "niceness" of Americans doesn't translation into national programs to help people like other countries.

Don't really care much about charities. Their impact really isn't that effective on many important factors.

Open your eyes a little more.

Private charity assistance to make a better world: http://www.ted.com/talks/bill_gates_unplugged.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-gates/charting-a-course-to-end_b_1020960.html

In the past 10 years, the number of people who die from malaria has declined 20 percent.

For the past three days, the global malaria community has been meeting in Seattle, talking about what it's going to take to get rid of the other 80 percent. The eradication of malaria is an ambitious goal and a long-term goal -- but a goal Melinda and I are 100 percent committed to.

People used to say eradication was impossible, but we remain optimistic because human beings have a spectacular ability to innovate.


US government, national assistance: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/17/george-bush-aids-africa

It may be the shining moment of George Bush's rule, but he rarely talks about it.

Over the past five years, the President's Emergency Plan for Aids Relief (Pepfar) has saved close to two million lives by providing antiretroviral drugs to HIV-positive Africans. It has helped ensure 240,000 babies are born without the virus by giving their mothers drugs to prevent them passing it on at birth.

The programme supports nearly 10 million people affected by Aids, such as children living with HIV-positive parents, with food, housing and education.

Yet the initiative has gone largely unnoticed outside its core focus, sub-Saharan Africa.


These efforts, both private and public, will end up saving millions of lives.
 
The lack of quality education for the less fortunate in this country is the main thing that frightens me. .

I wonder if it's some weird conspiracy to keepv steady the number of required white-collar jobs, so only a few selected will be able to afford college and those little few will fill the number of job offers that require a college degree.

That means that let's say, there are only 10 jobs that require a college degree, and 100 in mcdonald's flipping burgers that barely require high school.

itsaconspiracy.png

It might not be too far from reality, i've read that there are too many "overprepared" people who can't get a decent job because companies don't need too many PHD's.
 
I really meant on a national level. I was wondering why all this "niceness" of Americans doesn't translation into national programs to help people like other countries.

Don't really care much about charities. Their impact really isn't that effective on many important factors.

Mainly because America was founded on the principles of freedom of speech, freedom to practice any religion and to avoid high taxes. However, I believe Americans would be more disposed to support those types of programs if there was a balanced budget, a reduced deficit, and lastly less corruption and wasteful programs that eat away our paychecks. I'm very confident many Americans would be in favor of programs that help the elderly, children, students and single parents if the amount of waste in our budget was just completely cut out of it. Or, in other words, maximize our tax revenues by investing in programs that are beneficial to the people who are in need of some assistance. Also, place more accountability on the individual who receives those benefits. Like, get caught spending your food stamps on cigarettes? Sorry your irresponsibility has earned you a suspension on your EBT privileges, live of strictly roman noodles for a month as your punishment.
 
Open your eyes a little more.

Private charity assistance to make a better world: http://www.ted.com/talks/bill_gates_unplugged.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-gates/charting-a-course-to-end_b_1020960.html




US government, national assistance: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/17/george-bush-aids-africa




These efforts, both private and public, will end up saving millions of lives.

I am pretty sure I said fellow citizen, not foreigners. I definitely know the US gives a ton of money to people all over the world.

It is fine. I got my answer.
 
This is a complicated question. Firstly one has to note that this country is incredibly divided in a multitude of ways at this point. I really feel that there is not enough harmony throughout the nation to cement a sort of universal will of the people. That is, can we really say there is such a thing as "american values" anymore? A bunch of us have grown fond of welfare and become supposed entitled little shits, while there remains a good chunk of the population that remains faithful to a set of values that we would traditionally think as "american". It seems that nowadays, asking what would americans do or think as a single entity is completely devoid of any sort of value(one could argue that this sort of blanketed stereotyping is fundamentally flawed).

To answer your question specifically, if we are to assume that we live in a country with a functioning democratic process, the displayed states of our welfare systems seems to indicate that there is a sort of general apathy held by the MAJORITY towards others. Now this is a huge leap of faith, i recognize. Some people feel that helping on a personal basis is more fruitful than through the hand of government(they are wrong, but nevertheless). My personal biased view, and again it's very difficult to bridge generalizations from one's individual microcosm to the general trends manifested throughout society, i feel that americans in general( if i may be allowed to generalize in order to advance the conversation :) ) seem more concerned with the satisfaction and expansion of their individual designs and the maintenance of their privacy and comfort.
 
Pretty much. I was typing some things about entitlement and how Americans hate that, but I decided just edit it out.

I mean, I *hate* the term "entitlements". Which I've only heard used recently by Republicans to kinda insinuate how pampered the American public is on public programs.

Fuck that, I've payed into social programs my entire life. And I really don't mind as long as the money isn't just being sucked down into overhead and not actually helping people.
 
I love this clip from Milton Friedman and I think it expresses some of the American views, I know it does for me. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RDMdc5r5z8&feature=related

I think a lot of it has to do with accountability, and I don't agree with people saying private charity is less efficient then public charity. I don't really trust our government to do anything efficiently, they are hugely wasteful. At least if I donate my time and money to private charity I have better ownership over it. If I find they aren't using it wisely, especially if its a local charity I can see that and change where that goes.

However government outreach, there is no accountability. If I don't like how the government is spending my money I have no recourse. I think that is one of the common American ideals.
 
The original question is way too overreaching; Americans are just as capable of compassion towards their fellow countrymen as anyone else, and also capable of equal amounts of dispassion as well.

The US is a country that developed in a landscape that encouraged philosophies and attitudes that were often individualistic and at times isolationist. Add the increasing diversity that unfolded over the years and you end up with cultural attitudes that increasingly veers into sharp regionalism between different parts of the country. Also, keep in mind that as a nation the US has arguably the most spread out population distribution of any country on earth, which would feed into these mentalities.

There's much more to it than this, but I think these are reasonable observations on why US is the way it is on a lot of larger political issues.
 
I love this clip from Milton Friedman and I think it expresses some of the American views, I know it does for me. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RDMdc5r5z8&feature=related

I think a lot of it has to do with accountability, and I don't agree with people saying private charity is less efficient then public charity. I don't really trust our government to do anything efficiently, they are hugely wasteful. At least if I donate my time and money to private charity I have better ownership over it. If I find they aren't using it wisely, especially if its a local charity I can see that and change where that goes.

However government outreach, there is no accountability. If I don't like how the government is spending my money I have no recourse. I think that is one of the common American ideals.

I hate Milton Friedman so much. The guy makes these arguments, but the implications are frankly atrocious. The man has called the minimum wage racist against blacks. He clearly has a lack of understanding for modern macroeconomics and behavioral finance.

He actually implies that the public school system should be privatized in that video.
 
Add the increasing diversity that unfolded over the years and you end up with cultural attitudes that increasingly veers into sharp regionalism between different parts of the country. Also, keep in mind that as a nation the US has arguably the most spread out population distribution of any country on earth, which would feed into these mentalities.

I would imagine that any geographically large country has these same issues. You just notice it more in your own country.
 
I hate Milton Friedman so much. The guy makes these arguments, but the implications are frankly atrocious. The man has called the minimum wage racist against blacks. He clearly has a lack of understanding for modern macroeconomics and behavioral finance.

He actually implies that the public school system should be privatized in that video.

Minimum wage is racist against black people.
 
Another thread about how mean and bad Americans are. How Original.

I guess you don't need to worry about your own problems as long as you have Americans to say you are better than.......



I like to think that I am fairly well traveled. Lived in Germany for a few years and spent time all over Europe and I really don't think people are that different and on the micro levels their lives really aren't drastically better or worse. Neogaf just has a consensus that its cool to hate America. Well hate on hipsters because I like it here despite its problems.
 
I live in the US.

So?

What difference does that really make?


Doesn't change the fact that much of the nagativity towards the US on these boards is unwarranted. We have our problems but in general they are no more/less severe than countries that people on these board love to compare us to.
 
So?

What difference does that really make?


Doesn't change the fact that much of the nagativity towards the US on these boards is unwarranted. We have our problems but in general they are no more/less severe than countries that people on these board love to compare us to.

I really wasn't trying to make this a negativity thing. Just comparing the US to other countries.
 
Well, I know Americans donate a lot, as do I, but why not go further and allow the government to help people better as well?

I always hear conservatives say, well churches will step in and take care of the sick. Really? Come on. Why not have universal health care like every other modern country and be done with it?

That is why I asked this question. Really just focusing on healthcare here.

Then just say it. No need to disguise it with "are we worse people than other nations?" Just say: I think we should have government-subsidized healthcare.
 
Doesn't change the fact that much of the nagativity towards the US on these boards is unwarranted. We have our problems but in general they are no more/less severe than countries that people on these board love to compare us to.
Name another first world country without healthcare for everyone. Not all 'nagativity' is unwarranted.
 
The american government spends over 1 billion a year on health care for NON-citizens. And untold billions every year on the poor, sick and elderly. Which of course fails to recognize the many millions more donated every year to private charities that also provide health services to those in need.
 
I feel like Americans are severely lacking in empathy. The unemployed are leeches, immigrants are parasites and Universal Healthcare is still thought of as an abomination even though absolutely NO ONE is happy with their private health insurance.

Mark Twain said it best when he said there were no poor Americans, only temporary disgraced millionaires.

Did you read my mind?
 
Then just say it. No need to disguise it with "are we worse people than other nations?" Just say: I think we should have government-subsidized healthcare.

Who was disguising it? I wanted a reason why there wasn't universal healthcare and stronger social nets in this country compared to others. That led me to ask whether people are less caring here. Don't be so defensive, it is a logical question to ask.
 
I hate Milton Friedman so much. The guy makes these arguments, but the implications are frankly atrocious. The man has called the minimum wage racist against blacks. He clearly has a lack of understanding for modern macroeconomics and behavioral finance.

He actually implies that the public school system should be privatized in that video.

Ah, Milton Friedman. Love him or hate him, one things for sure: He ain't a liar.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom