Metropol

Alexia wrote:The King was head of state in the Thirteen Colonies

Mis-read that as Thirteen Counties initially, then realised that you and I had better not go in that direction again!

barcode wrote:because you wrote "Canadians are Americans too"

I give up.

Nick Harvey wrote:

Alexia wrote:The King was head of state in the Thirteen Colonies

Mis-read that as Thirteen Counties initially, then realised that you and I had better not go in that direction again!

Yes, well..... Erin go bragh and all that.

Who knew so much could happen in the few hours I didn't have Internet access!

I don't feel I should bother responding to Chie's remarks, but I should put it out there that I'm not the entitled, wealthy person he decided I should be. My family is working class, and we struggle like many other families to make ends meet. I find it astounding that he'd create such an absurd argument based upon a wild assumption.

With regards to foreign policy, many people, including me, completely disapprove of the interventionist policies that the US has put forth. These policies do not represent our viewpoints, and it is wrong to assume that we agree with everything our government does.

But enough about all that, I'll try to answer some questions later.

cdd wrote:

jsm wrote:they fail to see the major problems within our society (huge income inequalities,

Is income inequality really a huge problem in America?

Different parts of America have dramatically different costs of living. In fact different parts of America almost feel like different countries. The cost of living in New York, LA or San Francisco is an order of magnitude higher than that of living in (throwing a pin in a map here) Barnsdall, oklahoma. The latter type of community accounts for the vast majority of the country (and also explains why America is so hugely religious given its supposedly first world status).

Of course that's true in England too to an extent, but nowhere near as dramatic.

(I also have my doubts about how useful ranting about American foreign policy to someone who happens to live in America really is, as has been going on this thread, but......)

It is a huge problem, but an issue that hasn't been addressed due to the inability of Congress to accomplish anything. I recently heard quite a shocking statistic that stated that the top 400 richest Americans hold 90% of all the wealth, in a country of 300 million people. The gap is continually growing, and the middle class is dying. One would think that the government would try to redistribute this wealth somehow, when in fact they're cutting taxes for the rich and ultrarich, while cutting vital services (education, health, etc.) to enable this. One would think raising taxes on the rich would help fix deficit issues, in addition to help restore some balance to the wealth in this nation, but the mantra of cutting taxes and deregulation still reigns supreme.

The work of UMass Amherst economist Richard D. Wolff is really interesting, and he can explain the reality of the American economy far better than I can. He explains how these inequalities have been created, as well as the unsustainable nature of our credit-dependent economy. Interesting stuff.

With regards to cost of living, there is a huge difference, but it tends to even out as wages are higher in the cities. It's by no means perfect though, and I wish there was less of a wage gap between urban and rural areas, let alone the fact that there are significant pay disparities between men and women, something which is just unconscionable.

Q: Why Cant most people in the USA understand what Socialism really means? Obama and demarcates are no way Socialist, in the true since.

It's definitely a legacy of Joseph McCarthy's crusade against Communism in the 1950s, which has sadly lasted through the cold war and into the present day. Due to this, there has never been a viable left in the US, the Democrats are quite centrist in their policies, but to the far-right, they're crazy revolutionaries. I don't get it, and I don't think I ever will.

Q: what is the proper feeling of Obama care, why are people so disliking the fact of providing health care to all?

People don't like it, and I don't know why. It attempts to rectify the awful system we have now (private insurance, or no medical coverage whatsoever), and although it is by no means perfect, at least it attempts to give medical coverage to every citizen. People hate when "the government" mandates what they should do, even when it is something than would benefit everybody. It essentially comes down to selfishness. Many people only want their money to go to their health coverage, not to help some poor mother who can't afford to bring her child to the doctors. The right has spun "Obamacare" as being socialist in nature, when it is anything but. I would love to see a single-payer system here, but I know it's never going to happen.


Q: Do people really not walk? I heard stories of people being told not to walk, its better to drive?
As with many things, it's regional. New York is lucky to have a good subway and bus system, and the streets are laid out in a pedestrian friendly grid. I think only 47% of New Yorkers own cars, and many of those that do only use them occasionally, whereas cars are ubiquitous in other places. Overall, it's definitely a walking city, and I usually do a good 2-3 miles total a day.This is the exception, rather than the rule though. Most cities, for example, Los Angeles, are very car-dependent, and have poor public transportation. People don't walk, and this probably has contributed towards the obesity issue.

Alexia wrote:Yes, well..... Erin go bragh and all that.

Once again, wow.

Here's one sorta-on topic:

Why is it fashionable for so many Americans (Barry O'Bama included) to claim Irish ancestry, and not Welsh or Scottish ancestry? There is one theory that describes the continent of America as being named after a Welshman (Richard Ap Meurig / anglicised as Richard Americ), and the mining and steel industries around Pittsburgh and throughout Pennsylvania were predominantly the efforts of Welsh settlers. Hillary Clinton is a Welsh American; as was Thomas (or should that be Tomos) Jefferson.

Why is being Irish cool, and Welsh not?

Alexia wrote:

Here's one sorta-on topic:

Why is it fashionable for so many Americans (Barry O'Bama included) to claim Irish ancestry, and not Welsh or Scottish ancestry? There is one theory that describes the continent of America as being named after a Welshman (Richard Ap Meurig / anglicised as Richard Americ), and the mining and steel industries around Pittsburgh and throughout Pennsylvania were predominantly the efforts of Welsh settlers. Hillary Clinton is a Welsh American; as was Thomas (or should that be Tomos) Jefferson.

Why is being Irish cool, and Welsh not?

Claiming Irish lineage gains you votes, claiming others not so much.

And in the case of Donald Trump - his Scottish ancestry prompts him to come along and do his own "Highland clearances" to make way for a billion dollar golf resort in Aberdeenshire.

Alexia wrote:

Here's one sorta-on topic:

Why is it fashionable for so many Americans (Barry O'Bama included) to claim Irish ancestry, and not Welsh or Scottish ancestry? There is one theory that describes the continent of America as being named after a Welshman (Richard Ap Meurig / anglicised as Richard Americ), and the mining and steel industries around Pittsburgh and throughout Pennsylvania were predominantly the efforts of Welsh settlers. Hillary Clinton is a Welsh American; as was Thomas (or should that be Tomos) Jefferson.

Why is being Irish cool, and Welsh not?

I really have no idea. The American perception of Irish culture is filled with green shamrocks, green beer, and leprechauns, while completely ignoring the major artistic and literary contributions of the nation. People identify themselves as Irish even if there family has been in America since the 19th century, I don't quite get it. I identify myself as Irish, but that's because my family all came to America in the late 1930s, so the link is less tenuous.

I think with regards to Welsh/Scottish ancestry, it's probably related to the fact that these nationalities, for some reason, are associated with the English (who are colloquially known as WASPs, (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Angl ... Protestant) .The English were the majority for quite some time, so I suppose if the Welsh and Scottish were lumped in with them, it never became fashionable to celebrate the culture of the majority as a mark of individuality.

There are a few Welsh-named towns near Philadelphia (Bala Cynwyd and Bryn Mawr come to mind), but I've never heard the story about Richard Ap Meurig. I've been taught that America was named after Italian explorer Amerigo Vespucci.

A country / location is never named after a person's first name unless they're royalty (Victoria, Prince Edward Island, Jamestown etc) -- Columbia was named after Christopher Columbus; Cook Islands after Lietenant James Cook, Magellan Straits after Ferdinand Magellan, Hudson Bay after Henry Hudson etc. This makes the Amerigo Verspucci argument suspect, along with the discreditation of the sources used by mapmaker Martin Waldseemuller who first used "America" on a map.

Richard ap Meryk (I apologise for my spelling error earlier) - anglicised as Amerike - was "Sheriff of Bristol and also...King's Customs Officer for the port. When John Cabot's voyage of discovery was proposed, Amerike donated more money than anyone else to funding the construction of his ship. Also, as no wood was readily available nearby, oaks from Amerike's family estate were cut down and floated down the Wye from Ross to Chepstow, over the Severn and then up the Avon to the Bristol dockyard....as the chief sponsor of the Matthew's voyage, and with Cabot's wife and children then living, at his instigation, in a house belonging to a close friend, Amerike sought reward for his patronage by asking that any new-found lands should be named after him."

Source : http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/tu ... html#three. The source for the statement regarding naming of countries is an episode of QI where Amerigo Verspucci was given as a -10point howler answer.

That's an interesting theory. I wasn't discounting it, I was just saying that I had never been taught that theory, and I had been taught something else. Early American history is quite revisionist, so it doesn't really surprise me that there are other valid theories that have never been incorporated into the history curriculum.

Alexia wrote: Why is being Irish cool, and Welsh not?

Wales and Scotland just don't seem to have the same charm as Ireland.