USA vs UK
Aug 1st 2010, 11:31 pm
#31
Forum Regular
Thread Starter
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 190
Re: USA vs UK
Geordieland is very different from the south-east.[/QUOTE]
Maybe, but at least you'd know you're still in the same country
Maybe, but at least you'd know you're still in the same country
Aug 2nd 2010, 2:17 am
#36
Forum Regular
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 140
Re: USA vs UK
Regarding the varied cultures in the US -
To elaborate, my point bears reference to the differences in cultures between states in the US compared to cities in the UK. For example - the cultural difference between California and Georgia is vast. California being more forward thinking, cosmopolitan and dynamic and Georgia being sort of "stuck in the times". (Again, my opinion only and no offence intended)!
To elaborate, my point bears reference to the differences in cultures between states in the US compared to cities in the UK. For example - the cultural difference between California and Georgia is vast. California being more forward thinking, cosmopolitan and dynamic and Georgia being sort of "stuck in the times". (Again, my opinion only and no offence intended)!
Geographically and politically, an "apples to apples" comparison would be between member states in the EU.
The EU member states correspond to the the States in the US and the European Parliament and Council of Europe would be the Federal Government.
In that case, there is just as big a difference.
If you want to compare to cities in the UK, then you should possibly be looking between different counties within the same State.
The cultural differences would then probably be on a par.
Aug 2nd 2010, 4:01 am
#37
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 7,605
Re: USA vs UK
Actually, I suspect you're thinking of the European Commission, as that's where all the authority lies. But then you'd have to compare the EU with the USSR, as none of the bastards are elected...
Aug 2nd 2010, 10:56 am
#38
BE Enthusiast
Joined: Dec 2009
Location: Gaadnah MA
Posts: 597
Re: USA vs UK
Personally I would never list the BBC as a positive; it would have to be a negative in my book. Outside of Have I Got News for You they don't make any shows I watch. I watch a lot of BBC news which would skew that, but then I don't really have much of a choice. Channel 4 on the other hand has been consistently excellent and I will miss the programming they have.
U.S programming gets a bad rap on here but I usually watch much more TV when I go to the States than I do here. The style is different and there are more commercials but once you get used to that I find it just as entertaining. Naturally if you are raised in British culture, then you grow up with BBC as the auntie who gave us Blackadder and the Office but over the years I've come to regard it as a outdated historical quirk whose time is nearly up. I think once the funding tap is turned off by the coalition it's going to decline pretty rapidly.
U.S programming gets a bad rap on here but I usually watch much more TV when I go to the States than I do here. The style is different and there are more commercials but once you get used to that I find it just as entertaining. Naturally if you are raised in British culture, then you grow up with BBC as the auntie who gave us Blackadder and the Office but over the years I've come to regard it as a outdated historical quirk whose time is nearly up. I think once the funding tap is turned off by the coalition it's going to decline pretty rapidly.
Aug 2nd 2010, 11:08 am
#39
BE Enthusiast
Joined: Dec 2009
Location: Gaadnah MA
Posts: 597
Re: USA vs UK
Ok, having trashed the BBC, let me stick up for the UK for a change.
I don't think this is as much of a big deal as everyone makes out. The population is rising rapidly and is projected to hit 75 million by 2050. However our population structure was skewed by the baby boom and now the elderly are set to put a large strain on the working population through the welfare state. This is a worldwide phenomenon. The UK is a lot better off than other European countries such as Japan and Germany, in large part because immigration has upped our birthrate significantly. Secondly the added population (thanks largely to an under-supply of housing) seems to be keeping the housing market from collapsing. A large part of our boom was due to the cheap labour from Eastern Europe. The negative comes from the fact that immigration pushes low skilled wages lower but it seems overall that the positives are better than the negatives.
True, but the public finances are broke. VAT is a fairer way of shifting the burden around.
Despite the recent high profile cases it's really not that bad. It's nowhere near as high as the States and it pales into insignificance compared to South Africa.
I don't think this is as much of a big deal as everyone makes out. The population is rising rapidly and is projected to hit 75 million by 2050. However our population structure was skewed by the baby boom and now the elderly are set to put a large strain on the working population through the welfare state. This is a worldwide phenomenon. The UK is a lot better off than other European countries such as Japan and Germany, in large part because immigration has upped our birthrate significantly. Secondly the added population (thanks largely to an under-supply of housing) seems to be keeping the housing market from collapsing. A large part of our boom was due to the cheap labour from Eastern Europe. The negative comes from the fact that immigration pushes low skilled wages lower but it seems overall that the positives are better than the negatives.
True, but the public finances are broke. VAT is a fairer way of shifting the burden around.
Despite the recent high profile cases it's really not that bad. It's nowhere near as high as the States and it pales into insignificance compared to South Africa.
Aug 2nd 2010, 11:18 am
#41
BE Enthusiast
Joined: Dec 2009
Location: Gaadnah MA
Posts: 597
Re: USA vs UK
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gemeins...d_Gesellschaft
And after all that people think geography is just 'colouring in'.
I sometimes feel like the only thing we achieve with all our hard work and big spending is to move money from one corporation to another. I bill my clients for my work and move their money to my creditors. Some people describe this as feeling like a hamster running on a wheel. But I think way too many Americans are content with having a job, a big car/truck/SUV, a refrigerator full of crappy processed food and watery beer, and 150 channels of boring, commercial-filled TV. Opiates of the masses, if you will.
Thoughts?
Thoughts?
Last edited by HumphreyC; Aug 2nd 2010 at 11:22 am.
Aug 2nd 2010, 12:21 pm
#42
BE Enthusiast
Joined: Jul 2008
Location: Indiana, USA
Posts: 381
Re: USA vs UK
This should definitely be in the 'negatives'. Having to buy a license to watch your TV sucks. 140 quid a year whether you watch the BBC or not.
Still doesn't stop them having endless plugs between their programs and their website is full of ads.
The 140 quid should be optional. You only pay it if you watch it.
Still doesn't stop them having endless plugs between their programs and their website is full of ads.
The 140 quid should be optional. You only pay it if you watch it.
Aug 2nd 2010, 1:00 pm
#44
BE Enthusiast
Joined: Dec 2009
Location: Gaadnah MA
Posts: 597
Re: USA vs UK
O.k I get Tonrobs comment now. I'm not going to re-edit it; it is going to stay up as a warning to others to read your posts properly.
At least it shows I am assimilating to U.S culture already!
Last edited by HumphreyC; Aug 2nd 2010 at 1:04 pm.
