hey! express your nation here!

<p>Never been to Canada? You are kidding right?
I have always been a patriotic Canadian, defending Canada's voice on perilous foreign soil (that is, getting into fist fights with a few American friends because they made fun of Canada), that I am so proud to say that Canada's okay. Go figure.</p>

<p>it's not just OKay...it rocks!</p>

<p>LOL its funny how we're all Canadian yet we all wanna go to American schools.</p>

<p>lol. yes. my parents had to drag me down here just to make that clear.</p>

<p>Thats because the US is THE land of opportunity.</p>

<p>Perhaps in education, but I would rather go work in Germany, England, Switzerland, Lichtenstein..the list goes on, before working in the US.</p>

<p>Ya lets go work in Europe which is full of inflation and unemployment.</p>

<p>Germany rates of inflation:
1996 1.4
1997 1.9
1998 1.0
1999 0.6
2000 1.3
2001 2.0
2002 1.4
2002 1.1
etc
2006 estimated-1.5%</p>

<p>Switzerland
2006 inflation- estimated 1.1%</p>

<p>UNITED STATES-
2006 INFLATION ESTIMATED 2.5%</p>

<p>source. EIU
huh...funny how you're comments seem to be flawed over and over again. Might want to do some research my friend.</p>

<p>Ya thats some good thorough research of Europe. Oh wait thats just TWO countries, and u forgot about all the unemployment.</p>

<p>Well yes there you have a point, according to the phillips curve there is an inverse relationship between inflation and unemployment, but anyways the USA has stated in past years, at least their monetary policy has shown, that the ideal rate of inflation lies between 1 and 2 percent.</p>

<p>I'm from India...
wteef (damn this stupid censoring, there's a time for everything...granted; but, we're already in college) ? I'm giving no intro...u'll know enough when we run the internet in 2 years time :p...j/k</p>

<p>I am from Germany, but I was born in Ukraine and my mom is from Russia. :!</p>

<p>Yeah, if you want a real taste of America, go to Flint. It's the birth place of the 5th largest multinational corporation in the world- General Motors. Sadly, Flint has been experiencing an unemployment rate of 50%+ in the last decade. Flint now has the highest crime rate in North America and no one really cares about it, even though it's the home town of former GM CEO Roger Smith (by the way he's a billionaire). There's even a woman, who used to be an engineer at GM 10 years ago, and now she pets a bunch of rabbits and sells raw rabbit meat at the end of every week just to make a living, that's Flint, the real, down-to-earth American experience.</p>

<p>Flint isn't representatitive of America and Michael Moore films are extremely biased and not at all representative of America. If I were living in an area where I no longer had adequate opportunities, I'd move.</p>

<p>I know, but you actually could see the distinct wealth gap between the ultra-upper class, the bourgeousie, and the working class with your naked eyes. The current situation is just completely contradictory to the American ideals of liberty, "representative" democracy (although I'm not sure whether those folks in Flint are properly represented), and most importantly, equality (not just being an abstract concept, but in more materialistic fashion, like standard wages, standard living conditions, equal opportunities to education, healthcare, and employment...). It's depressing when the richest superpower in the world can't even afford adequate public health care for its citizens...</p>

<p>yowza. i'll visit flint fo sho.</p>

<p>the only cities i've been to in US is boulder, denver, and nyc (when we were passing by it...if that counts)</p>

<p>people call boulder quite out of place though.... here they even sell a t-shirt saying "keep boulder weird"...=/ weird.</p>

<p>Every time I see the word 'bourgeousie' I think of Marx and Lenin and we all know how well their philosphies have worked out. Forget 'classes', the concept doesn't really exist in the USA. Some people are rich, some are poor, and most are in between but it's not due to being placed in an inescapable 'class'. I'll take America's health care over any in the world, especially any country with a population approaching that of the USA. </p>

<p>But, we digress.</p>

<p>^On that I disagree. I really don't like America's health care, personally I prefer something a bit mroe socialized. Both my parents are doctors, and both have had work experience in the US ( in miami, chicago and new york) and they have told me many things about the system in general, things which I really think might be solved with a more social approach.</p>

<p>After just finishing up a thesis on the relation between neo-conservatism and marxism for our Political Philosophy 240 course yesterday, and a month's research on both theories, my political science professors and I could all agree that many people have a very very negative and one-sided perspective of marx and the theories he devised. I do agree that some of Marx's "visionary utopian" politics have never worked out and will never work out in a realistic situation. It is too abstract, and you are right, the former soviet union is the perfect example of the failure of Marxism and Communism. </p>

<p>However, Marx did also say some really useful things (that's why every major institution around the world is still trying to study and dicipher his philosophy. His Economic Theories on capitalism are excellent to analyse mordern economic patterns) that could reflect and act as a critique of modern capitalism and the capital globalization pattern. According to Marx, in a captalist liberal/conservative society, not only does the elite upper class have a dominant influence and control on the economy, the upper class of any capitalist society, through this economic advantage, also has widening political dominance. Eventhough we live in a democratic, representative, free society, the elite bourgeousie is still the dominant force that will always influence government decisions. That's what the many lobbyists do in Washington- pursuading, and in a way, bribing the government to make policies that will benefit their multi-national corporations, even though these policies may not always make a beneficial impact on the 290 million citizens of this nation. </p>

<p>Many informed citizens would also agree that this situation could somewhat fit the American context. Have you read the most recent article on TIME, about how Hillary Clinton and other Senators are busy seeking "corporate contributions" to their election campaigns? Corporate contributions, in my opinion, are nothing more than financial bribes, but rephrased in a nicer way. Why do you think these corporations are so willing to "donate" big bucks to government officials? Simple, they are expecting people like Hillary Clinton to represent THEIR INDIVIDUAL interests, in a general term, the interests of the Bourgeousie, once they are elected. You really believe that elected officials are really going to represent YOUR common interests of normal citizens? I wouldn't bet too much on that, since there's always the hidden agenda: One "official" agenda to show the people, and another "hidden" agenda for the bourgeousie and corporations. By the way, Hillary Clinton and has just received another 20 million from big brand companies for her next election.</p>

<p>Whoa! That was a long essay. But anyway, sorry for taking anyone's time so long. Just to respond to ucsd<em>ucla</em>dad, do you really think America's health care system is the "best"? It's really kind of naive and surprising to hear such a remark, when over 40 million of your fellow citizens are still uninsured for their health, when the Number-One cause of bankruptcy in the United States of America is a surfeit amount of personal medical bills. Perhaps you should put yourself in a situation of a nearly bankrupt family because they had to find $20,000 a week in order to treat their father's cancer illness. Great healthcare. </p>

<p>By the way, the national debt of the United States of America has hit a new historical record- $8,380,693,980,000 USD (took me a while to type in all those digits...) $8.3 Trillion. Maybe a bit less spending on building missiles and spending on multi-million election campaigns would help curtail that mammoth debt, so America could spend more on giving a good healthcare for our citizens.</p>

<p>I've had lots of experience with the USA health care system and have traveled to and worked in many countries around the world and conversed with the people who have had to put up with some of those public health care systems (UK for example). Many of them aren't happy with it at all due to the escalating costs to the government with subsequent service cutbacks and increased taxes to pay for it. As the medical field advances and expensive technology comes more into play in the field, and malpractice insurance continues to escalate, costs will continue to climb. </p>

<p>Keep in mind that many of the people without health insurance are simply choosing not to have it and are basically gambling they won't need it. I've known people like this who will pay for a new car, big TV, vacations, etc. but don't pay for health insurance. For those who truly have no assets and can't afford it, there are welfare programs to pay for it. I'm not saying it's perfect, but if I were seriously ill, the USA is where I'd rather be to take advantage of the extensive capabilities of the system. I don't mean for this to be a USA vs other country statement, just a personal preference and a realistic observation of different systems in practice.</p>

<p>I guess we've hijacked this thread so I'll quit pontificating and turn it back over to the subject.</p>