happynz

You're right. It is early Monday morning here.

ladyofthelake

No, because then that would become silly. Hawaii and Alaska are full bonafied states within the United States of America, not just territories.
If you wanted to include territories into the whole climate debate, then for the US there's also American Samoa, Guam, the United States Virgin Islands, etc, etc, blah blah blah.

marcelle38

[thats what i've been reading too. I would think the people are different though and the culture. I'd love to go to oz bot its so far from the uk.QUOTE=another bloody yank;6158281]Just because Brit Expats bitch about the same things no matter where they are doesn't mean the countries are similar!


Seriously, I've read Comments in the Canada and OZ forums that sound exactly like some of the things I read here, driving, fashion, food... Makes me feel better really, it's not just the US![/QUOTE]

marcelle38

well I was always interested in living in oz, I feel that I could probably relate to the people more there than here in florida. [/QUOTE]

looselips

I have lived in both countries and I hated living in Oz but love living in the US. Horses for courses.

Budawang

Some of what you said has elements of truth. However, I do not agree that Australia is more racist than the US as you imply. Although the plight of aboriginal Australians in some parts of the country is a disgrace, an enormous amount of thought and money is currently being expended to help them. Unfortunately, this is a very difficult issue, there is no silver bullet and it will take more than one generation to fix two centuries of disadvantage. African Americans face similar levels of disadvantage. In the US a staggering 1 in 9 African American males are incarcerated at any given time. However, I'm not so sure the US is as focused on fixing this terrible situation. If Americans were serious about fixing the yawning chasm between the haves (mostly white) and have nots (mostly black), why are minimum wages so pitifully low, why isn't there universal health care and why is the US justice system so biased against the poor and uneducated? There is no question that Australia is a fairer society where the concept of "a fair go for all" still has some meaning. Perhaps Americans are more hypocritical when it comes to racism?

On a more superficial level, during my recent trip to the US I was struck by how pressured and stressed people seem over there. More people walking around talking on their cell phones trying to look assertive. The US economy is obviously larger, margins are lower and competition is greater. Throw in a good dose of "trickle down" economics and you have a pressure cooker environment. Good for consumers but not so good for workers and producers. Australia is lucky in the sense that we can maintain a high material standard of living because China and other Asian economies are able to pay increasingly high prices for our commodity exports.

US power and influence in the world is in steep decline and nowhere is this more apparent than in our part of the world. The US dollar decline is merely a symptom of the disastrous path the Bush Administration has taken in domestic and international affairs. They seriously overestimated the usefulness of US military power as witnessed in Iraq. Meanwhile, trillions are spent on an increasingly irrelevant military machine while the US domestic economy is heading for the rocks. These days real power is economic, not military. In the long run, soft power beats hard power every time and, tragically, the neocons did not understand this. What has Australia got to do with this? Australians are much more comfortable with a dominant America than the emerging world order where China is destined to displace the US (if it hasn't already done so) as the dominant power in Australasia and the South West Pacific. Australians generally like and think they understand Americans and secretly admire some aspects of American culture, despite any chauvanistic banter you might hear in the Walkabout Pub. Who knows what a Chinese hyperpower will be like? Judging by what goes on inside China, it might make Bush's America seem like a place of great enlightenment.

marcelle38

yeh, i've been contemplating moving for 20yrs.. but here i am still. I would like to go to oz but i'm not sure if i'm qualified and probably too old..I just feel from meeting australians here that I could relate better to the humor etc... and i hate that there is no healthcare here I feel its so corrupt.

md95065

Trying to compare "the US" to Australia (or anywhere else, for that matter) is a pretty futile exercise.

The US is a very large and diverse place and, while there are many things that all parts of the US have in common (a falling dollar, a deeply flawed healthcare system, and Federal taxes), in my opinion the differences far outnumber and in most cases outweigh the similarities.

Budawang

You are right. The US is, without a doubt, one of the most diverse countries on earth. Although Australia is geographical similar in size, it only has 6 states and 2 territories. Even so, it's extremely difficult getting the states to coordinate their policies, break down the artificial barriers to trade and emloyment, set nationwide education standards. This list goes on. It must be so much harder in the US where a weak federal government has only limited influence over what goes on in the real world. It must be difficult for one state to legislate a decent minimum wage when the state next door has Dickensian employment standards.

The most successful countries these days tend to be small ones like Ireland, Iceland, Norway, Denmark, Singapore and Hong Kong. Central governments there have a more local focus and have more direct power. They are more responsive to change and outwardly focused. They tend not to spend much on defense and more on education, healthcare and public infrastructure.

ugacrew

I'm going to disagree with you there.


Actually our Federal Government is not as weak as you state. Think IRS. Our minimum wage is dictated by the Feds but each state can raise the minimum wage as it sees fit. There isn't a big hassle with that. It's easier to make legislation when it is at the local-state level. That's how we want it. However when you look at each of the state laws here, they must pass a test against the Federal laws on the books. There are cases where state law faces a test at the Supreme Court level. It's challenged there and depending on the circumstance the state may loose it's case and the law be seen as un-lawful. That's where the Federal Government gets it's power. Also, employment standards are Federal law and must be adhered to by each state. There might be additions to the Federal Employment law but there is a standard written by Washington that must be followed. Law such as overtime, Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA), Equal Employment Opportunity Reg's, minimum wage, Occupational Safety Hazard laws, and worker's compensation. All of these are mandated by the Federal Government. The state may add laws but not subtract from them as long as they aren't contradictory.

As for education. We do have nationwide standards that must be met. The Federal set's a minimum standard. The states follow through with additional standards. However it's the local government that has the most say about what is being taught in schools. It may not be effectively followed from one school to another but there are standards nationwide that are set.

The most difficult part of our government is getting legislators out of bed with the lobbyist. Once that happens will most likely get underway with a better health care system.

leviramsey

I'd say that both Canada and Australia are more federal (i.e. the individual states/provinces having more power) than the USA, to be honest.

ugacrew

I disagree. Do your research please before stating something that's not accurate. Unlike Canada and Australia, we are a complete autonomous Federal System. I say complete because as far as I know Australia, and perhaps Canada, have a government position that reports to the Queen. We do not. Our Federation consists of 50 states that self govern each other and are held together by a common national constitution. However the Federal, or National government, has the final say in all things legislative under the sun. States have been sued by the Federal government for unlawful, or unconstitutional, acts passed by state legislative bodies. It is up to the federal government to make final decisions and to guide the legislation of states.

Go back and do your homework.

leviramsey

Thank you for making my argument for me.

The situation you describe (despite being more than a little unconstitutional) is more or less accurate and cannot be said in any way shape or form to be a federal system.

As I've understood it Canada and Australia both leave more power to the respective states and provinces than the US federal government does (which means more than nothing) to the states.

RoadWarriorFromLP

Decentralization and greater allocation of authority to states, provinces, etc. would be hallmarks of confederation. Ugacrew has the right definition; what you describe as "federalism" would be described here as "confederation."

Federalism, in the context of US political history, suggests power being stripped away from the states and allocated to the federal level. The US began as a confederation, but scrapped it for a stricter form of federalism because the decentralization model was unsuccessful. The move to federalism delegated more power to the top tier, taking some of it away from the states.

Canada is a confederation, as is Switzerland. Both of these systems are considered to be variants of federalism, but in terms of describing a system in which districts cede sovereignty to a national government, the US system is more federalist than are the others.

BritGuyTN

I think the key thing that you are seemingly unaware of is that the Queen has no bearing on anything, and is 100% irrelevant in both Canada and Australia, and indeed the UK.