[b]Why USA is the first?[/b]

[medo]

Since I know for myself - USA was a myth about good and prospers life in my country (and most other countries).
Movies, songs, technology, Coca cola everything come from the USA and USA is now, without a doubt the first country (at least) from the technological point of view.
I know now that USA has its own dark side, double politics standards, arrogance, etc… but that is not so important when it comes to the USA image abroad.
So here's my question: Why is USA the first and how long it will be?

Medo
http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif

[Banti]

I am not quite sure what you mean, or what you want to hear, but here are some thoughts from a US guy...

The USA has three major competors for being number one. The former USSR (after the cold war... this looks kindof iffy), the east (very possible with new tech), and Europe ( money Euro)

The former USSR is busy taking acre of business at home, similar ro what the US had to after out Civil War... so I will have to say that the former USSR is a contendor, but they need some time.

The east is booming with new tech. In the past the USA guys would create the stuff and someone from overseas would make it more effecient, cheaper, and faster. Now the new tech is coming from overseas. Case in point, I am an avid gamer. The cool stuff is already out overseas, the US has to wait a year or more...

Europe, now that _most_ of the countries have adopted the Euro. It is only a matter of time until they unite (in an econmical and technological way) to compete in the global market place...

These are ramblings born of a sleep deprived soul going through caffine withdrawl. If any diagree with my thoughts or are offended I apoligize... this was not my intention.

Banti

[seti]

Just wait! HA HA HA (evil laugh)

Just "y'all" wait until global warming turns your bread basket into a waste land....and in turn thaws out the vast Canadian tundra! (more of the evil laughing). http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif

Every empire has it's day in the sun. Though my own county has been "americanized" so much that I hope it lasts atleast another decade.

You asked why the US is seen as the number one country in the world....well it really isn't, it's seen as the most powerful, and no one could argue that. It's this way for simple a simple reason.....geography. Atleast that's how it's all started. Ha, if you put your fore fathers in the middle of Africa, it would be a different story.

Better land > more food > spare time > education > effeciency > more spare time > not so basic needs (such as food and shelter) can be met....which is progress.

If you have to toil in the feild all day just to feed your family, there's no way you can better you situation by yourself.

So for a clearer awnser to your question... The Americans have more of the good real estate than the rest of us.

[This message has been edited by seti (edited 12-22-1999).]

[Wiz]

not everything is made in america. I'd have to say technology-wise it is japan all the way. Think about it. sony, samsung, toshiba, zenith, nintendo, sega, hitachi... thats all i can think of off the top of my head. Everything is made somewhere else and shipped here.

i have another question for our british friend: Recently i was talking to a British man visiting the states. He was extremely bitter towards the US history. I'm just wondering if there is still a grudge of sorts.

[Todd Beck]

It's not the geography, it's the capitalism. No other country on the planet does as much to enable free and open trade amongst it's population. (Whether that trade is free and open enough is a topic for debate.)

For those just waiting for the U.S. to be superceded by other countries, take heart: greed and corruption are certainly in adequate supplies here, and remember, Rome deteriorated from the inside. http://www.sysopt.com/forum/frown.gif

[jad1097]

Free trade sucks. It has put many of my union brothers and sisters out of work. Budweiser for example contracted out their bottles to a plant in mexico and put people out of work here.
Do know know why unemployment is at a low. Fast food joints! "The average american only makes $28,000 a year".

[seti]

Todd, you wouldn't have capitalism if you lived in thatched huts.

And the unquenchable thirst for wealth unique to the states is a direct result of really haveing nothing better to do. Hmm, spend a million on helping dieing children, or develope a new wrinkle cream? Colonialism (economic or not), never yeilds positive results forever...ha, and thus the US was born in the first place. The minute China breaks past socialism, I think we'll all be in trouble, be it economic or other. I wouldn't put money on India being the next super power...they can't even kill there rats.


[This message has been edited by seti (edited 12-22-1999).]

[chipbgt]

Jad,

although the "average" american may only make 28,000...I will take that over other countries that I dont even have oppurtunities to make more than that.

[AQR8]

I think Todd put it very well. As for technology it's Japan. They develop it, we tweak it and China steals it and it goes from there. The new century will bring with it many changes in the balance of power, economic, military, tech etc. Not all will be good but it will certainly be interesting.
http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif

[cyphen]

personally, i think the answer to your question lies in the past, not the present or even the future. The united states was founded on the principles of freedom - freedom of beliefs, freedom from any kind of tyranny. Now, IMHO we over here in the US still suffer from a certain kind of tyranny, but that's a different subject. But so many fled to the US in the past to escape tyranny that it became the symbol of a kind of utopia, which was passed down through the ages. Even in more recent history it's been a place for refugees. For instance, in the second world war, the US was one of the few places Jews who fled were welcomed. It's true that the incentive to settle (north) america was originally a monetary one - i.e. spain, france and england sought new gold supplies - but when the United States was founded from the 13 original colonies banding together under the union to sign the declaration of independence, it was founded on the virtues of freedom from tyranny, including taxation without representation. (which i feel is a huge problem in the US today - we have to work on that)
Even just after the early settlers came to north america, many fled their home countries (england especially) to escape religious persecution - the beginning of protestants. (thank you Luther)

So i think it's more than just a myth - the US was seen then as a place of freedom and opportunities, a safe harbor for the persecuted. It was true more so then than it is now - but as i said in another post, even if we're the best (which is a moot point) we're not perfect - and we'll never be perfect. No matter how good it is, it can ALWAYS get better... Personally, i think that stands true for everybody in the world - everyone has to take personal responsibility. One of the biggest problems i see in the US and the world today is a lack of responsibility. It's somebody else's fault, or somebody else will take care of it. It's worse that these horrible notions are pushed on us by our legal system and media. Who here remembers the case of the woman who got coffee at a McDonald's drive thru? She spilled it in her lap (her own dumb fault) and got first or maybe minor second degree burns. She sued McD's and won. WTF? Sorry, I'm beginning to rant!, but the sentiment remains true - we are personally responsible both for what happens to us, and how we deal with what happens to us. And we're responsible for what happens around us. So here's advice to all those who complain: Do Something About it! If everybody took that attitude, the US would no longer be the best place to live(debateably) - everywhere would. I'd gladly give up the title for that.

what's this under my feet? a crate marked "Irish Springs"??? How did that get there?

[Apostle 83]

Ok...
HERE IS THE DEAL!

What is this **** about other countries inventing stuff and us tweaking it?

Why glorify china? All stinkin other countries do is copy us, and, in the case of china, old russian space technology. Case in point, china and manned space flight... can you say soyuz?

I get pissed off! The us simply WORKED HARD AND FEARED GOD. We surely will not be at the top forever, but right now, if you mess with us, you get your stinkin head blown off by a cruise missle, and tony blair is over their brown nosing so his doesnt get knocked off.

Anyone could take dominance in the next century... england could establish herself as head on the net, as she once was queen of the seas.

But right now, why question dominance?!!!

[Ygor]

Actually, if you take a long range overview, it's not that hard to understand.

The USA was settled more recently, after all the dark ages in Europe. We don't have that old overhead and the buildings/houses. More real estate was available to build homes/factories/shops. The space was readily available for railroads and roads to be built to transport goods made in the factories.
In essence, this country was in "growth mode" for a long time.
The facts of how that came about is the darker side of the US history. (Native Americans were not exactly consulted about any of this.)
Many things we take for granted now were invented and mass-manufactured here.
Now the US has slipped in a number of areas, but we are catching up and being very competitive.
The technology may be developed in Japan and manufactured in China and the east, but the US is a big market and seems to have the edge in software (excluding Nintendo and the like) and not just because of Microsoft.

I dunno, when I am online I try to think of myself as a citizen of the world or the universe, not just the US.

[medo]

Hello,

Problem was probably in the way I expressed my question (yesterday's English test -72%). The question should be more polemic. I am sorry because I left that stupid [b]. I can't remove that.

I think that part of America's success lay down by luck - to be far away from Europe (troubles), inhabited (in the beginning) by Europeans sick of local limitations, have a good sense and legislation of enterprise and of course by the global civilisation trend.
In this moment America is the first (no doubt) and that position will last for some time and the power will go slowly towards the Far East countries (Pacific circle), if America keeps on arrogant, dominant, double standards and self-sufficient politics.
In this moment America is without a main competitor and that is bad. Without USSR America also losing "spirit of movement", but other Far East countries, especially China has that movement built in itself. Being European, I think that Europe is a nice, charming old lady with a glamorous past but without a significant role in the future. The idea about European union is fine but it has historic limitations.
In the near future, China might prove to be a competitor and yokes about stealing and old technology might be contraproductive because everybody has to start from somewhere and after that all is statistic. That is also part of America history.

In short America has to change itself if she wants to stay one the very top.

Medo

http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif

[Swarozyc]

hey Apostle 83,
if the us would mess with russia, you too would get your "stinkin" head blown up

just think of that--why did the us got involved in kosovo and now sits quietly when russians kick the living **** out of (read: kill) the muslims in their country

US military dominance=FALSE
US economic dominance=TRUE

[chipbgt]

Swarozyc,

No country is immune to Nuclear weapons, so any country that pretends to be a militray dominance is just asking for it. If anything, I think the US has dplomatic dominance. Our president is good for something, and its bending over and kissing the rosy-red cheeks of other countries (especially china).

I hear Tony Blairs wife is pregnant. Way to raise that Union Jack!

[Nathan]

How would you answer this? You have to be an American to understand it. Sure we have our problems. Every country does. But this is the land of opportunity. Nothing is given to you, but a chance (which you don't have most of the time in other countries). As to England, we've bailed them out in 2 world wars. I've worked with some Brits in the past. They secretly admit they like it here better. Now they understand why we broke away from them. Too much of our history goes untaught. When that happens, we lose something special. And our history is unique. That's one good thing about cable TV, The History channel, TLC, and the Discovery channel. They remind us of it.

I'm proud to be an American, where it least I know that I'm free. (remember that song?)

[seti]

HAHA, GO USA, YOU'RE #1. Fatest county in the world ya know http://www.sysopt.com/forum/wink.gif

Sorry, ha, but the "#1's" are always subject to jests.

[reddog4629]

Never mind.

[This message has been edited by reddog4629 (edited 12-24-1999).]

[reddog4629]

http://members.aol.com/reddog4629/jreno.bmp
Ain't she perty?

[codybear]

wonder what she just swallowed?

maybe Bill knows

[seti]

Oh man....I just wouldn't be able to type "EWWWW!!!!!" enough!

http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif

[medo]

Sorry, but who is she? (forgive my ignorance)

Medo

http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif

[Andy_L]

The answer is simple, you can pop out for a new lawn chair at 2 am in the US, you can't pop out for anything but clubs in Europe and Asia, and God help you if you run out of smokes at 6am on Sunday in the Netherlands. Or booze anytime in Saudi Arabia.

[seti]

I'm with you all the way on this one Andy! Indeed, the United States of America was built on the early morning avalibility of booze and smokes. Ha, I think this thread can be wraped up with that one. http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif haha

[BBA]

Here's the real answer:

In America....

1. You are worth what you convince others you are worth. Familiy ties are not that important, just the ability to convince others is. I'm not saying how to do that either.

2. We live in a land rich in minerals and resources. We have the material to play and think with, so we are naturally inventive.

3. We were founded (modern American civilization that is) by people sick of being told how to live when they did not agree with their countries rules. They came over here and made their own rules, and fought to uphold them. They somehow happened to make good rules (for the most part).

4. We are extremely versified in race by the belief that this countries strength is partly from a "melding pot" of cultures. This gives the ability to see points of view from many different backgrounds.

5. We can protect our own country and have proven it in the past! (although Bill Clinton is doing his best to remove that ability from us).

6. The most important reason is: We believe that anything we say...Is the way it should be!

Plus, our ancestors kicked the native indians butts to steal their land. So our lineage is to not really fight fair from the get-go!

[DavidX]

Wiz~
i have another question for our british friend: Recently i was talking to a British man visiting the states. He was extremely bitter towards the US history. I'm just wondering if there is still a grudge of sorts.

I'm glad to say that that "British man" is part of a fast disappearing minority. The older generation still remembered when Britain was "great" and I think many (not all) resented the fact that the USA was now richer, far more advanced economically and, of course, more powerful. Like most people eaten up by jealousy, they simply directed their bitterness at the country that had now taken over their former number one position. It's not easy to admit you're no longer "top dog".

The newer generation has a much fresher view. They grew up when Britain no longer even pretended to be a superpower. The majority are therefore quite reconciled to the fact that Britain, while still wishing to be an important country, has no claim (nor particular desire) to be the richest or most powerful. The vast majority therefore have no resentment or bitterness towards the USA. In fact, usually it is quite the opposite: due to the dominance of American media, anything American is considered "cool". (Even American linedancing is big over here [yugh! http://www.sysopt.com/forum/wink.gif ].)

Of course, the British are still patriotic and proud of their country - but that rather silly old-fashioned bitterness towards the USA for "stealing" their number one position is fast disappearing and, with the new generation, has virtually gone. The British may no longer be number one in wealth and power but they are rather good at other things . . . music, pageantry, comedy, technology, etc . . .

Nathan~
As to England, we've bailed them out in 2 world wars. I've worked with some Brits in the past. They secretly admit they like it here better. Now they understand why we broke away from them.

Would it be too bold to suggest that rather than simply "bailing out" England, the USA just might have had something to lose too if Germany and Japan had won? I tend to think the American motive was not quite as altruistic as you suggest.

I should also point out that the Britain the Americans "broke away" from was 18th-century Britain. It's changed a bit since then. http://www.sysopt.com/forum/wink.gif

For that period in history, Britain was one of the most liberated countries in the world. Not by today's standards perhaps but for the 18th century, yes. Most of those Americans who fought for independance were themselves of British origins and the very idea of liberty in the way they thought of it was itself perhaps borne of the longstanding British desire for equality and justice back in the home country (witness Magna Carta, the founding of a people's Parliament, the Bill of Rights, etc). It was just a lot easier to implement in the faraway "colonies" and the very fact that the British people who had had the nerve to set out for a strange country in the first place were likely to be just the kind of strong-willed people necessary.

Incidentally, it is not a very well known fact that the Americans had very wide popular support for Independance among the ordinary people back in England. The American eagle with the word "Success" underneath was a popular motif on many English products of the late 18th century. It was the British government (particularly the not-very-bright George III) who mostly opposed them.

Since those days, the British back in the homeland have also achieved every bit as much liberty as the USA. In some respects, it's probably even freer; in other respects (pub licensing hours for instance! http://www.sysopt.com/forum/frown.gif ), it's definitely not. The reason some British prefer the USA nowadays is for other reasons: greater standard of living, lack of class boundaries (they exist in the USA too but they're different), etc.

The reason the USA is one of the best countries in the world? I think BBA did a perfect job of summing it up. In particular, the Americans do have a very positive attitude to life: "if it can't be done, we'll just keep working at it until it can"! May that attitude long continue!

[This message has been edited by DavidX (edited 12-24-1999).]

[Todd Beck]

Seti--Sure we'd have capitalism if we lived in thatched huts. I could grow corn next to mine, and you could grow potatoes next to yours. Then we'd trade. Unless, of course, you wanted to trade with someone who would give you more corn for your potatoes. There you go--capitalism.

Forget this military dominance ****. With the availability of nuclear weapons, all bets are off. It only takes one psycho with a "misplaced" nuclear device to wipe out a large city. Yes, the THREAT of military retaliation is effective, but when push comes to shove, we all better learn how to get along.

As for "bailing out" England in WWII, consider instead how many more people died because Roosevelt took so long to commit to the war. I might add, he did so on the advice of Joseph Kennedy (yes, THOSE Kennedys) who was the U.S. Ambassador to England at the time, and who was convinced that England would be conquered by the Nazis and that the U.S. shouldn't take England's side and risk (guarantee) pissing off Hitler.

As I said previously, there are what I consider to be serious problems in the U.S., specifically government and corporate manipulation of the country (for example, I give you Bill Clinton and Microsoft). If not addressed, these problems will only get worse.

Thanks for the sociological insight DavidX. I had no idea how the attitude is changing.

[seti]

Ha, Todd, I'll try to make my point, but be warned, it's boreing. http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif

If you do case study's on undeveloped (uneducated) society's, you'll notice the foucus is on family. Even in frontier america in the early 1800's most families were isolated and self sufficent. But as more moved west, the surplus of food (good land) ment that not everyone had supply they're own food. People could provide other goods and services unburdend by haveing to provide the essentials of life. The end of self-sufficency creats supply and demand which fosters trade, the catalist of a private enterprise economy (capitalism). Now this all starts from being able to provide a surplus per producer of life's essentials. In country's with land that produces low yeilds families can not provide enough for themselfs much less enough to trade. This land, and lack of water can only produce a very limited varity of crops...and they do trade, but this has yet to produce a GNP any greater than what americans spend on toliet paper/year. Simply because tradeing essentials does not produce a surplus per producer, of essentials....so everyone is stuck at square one. Now there are obviously more problems with these areas than low crop yeilds. Over population has the obvious connection. There are other factors to concider as well....as one might bring up the counter point that the Native Americans were not capatialistic societies. There lives were so totally intergrated with nature, it amazes me. They used their surplace to better the community...socialism without greed, which causes corruption, is the pinical of human acheivement IMHO. yeah yeah, star trek, blah blah blah... http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif Wow, I just realized the tangent I got on...sorry http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif

Yeah, but back to my original point....greed can only be propelled when you're able to expand divercity.(yes, I'm spell check dependent)....and you arn't able to do such when you have starveing children.

[socalgal]

Janet Reno - first woman Attorney General of the United States of America. Nominated by President Bill Clinton on February 11, 1993. She was again appointed in 1997 by President Clinton and remains Attorney General of the United States.

Here's a bio if you're interested http://www.wic.org/bio/jreno.htm

[narayan]

Right now the USA is an embarassment to me. our president lies to us on a daily basis, thinks he has to interfere in other country's problems by forcing peace, (NOT the job of the US military) speaking of the military, is is at less than half its strength when our "president" took office, he has funded the soviet nuclear arsenal, it is rumored that he has a drug problem, he cheats on his wife (none of my business personally, but not a good role-model), he knew about the chinese spy thing and he and Janet Reno ignored the FBI to investigate, He accepted campaign money from Chinese Intelligence, I could go on for hours. Remember how proud we were in the '80's? I do not dislike Bill because of anything but his politics and his constant need to have "Big Brother" interfere in everyone's lives. Now every little country that he forces peace in is mad at us, we fear terrorism this holiday year to accompany the millenium celebration in part to the terrible foreign policy decisions of this "man" And our taxes went up. But I will stay positive! HAPPY NEW YEAR!!!! http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif

[This message has been edited by narayan (edited 12-27-1999).]

[Todd Beck]

Red-faced it is. You're right seti, my entire opinion, and my example, were based on the assumption that the land was farmable. Oops.

I'm going to have to think some more about your perspective (thanks for providing it, by the way), but two exceptions to your cause/effect relationship have occurred to me so far:

1) The initial English settlers to arrive in North America originally decided on a socialistic community model. Each person would work for the good of the community, providing whatever they could produce to the community pot, as it were. Of course, this was a disaster. A few did all the work while the lazy people just goofed around. Only after they decided it was going to be each one for themselves (capitalism) did they begin to prosper.

2) China. China has existed as a country far longer than the U.S., and I believe has soil fertility at least equal to, if not better than, that in North America. Yet China has remained a poor, underdeveloped nation until the last few decades. If agricultural ability is the primary factor determining societal evolution, then why has China continued to be so backwards? Ha! Answer that one for me. http://www.sysopt.com/forum/wink.gif

socalgal, I'm stunned. Surely you're not suggesting that all of Billary's peccadilloes (somehow that word seems SO appropriate when discussing this guy) be wiped away by a single political appointment. If you take that perspective, then Ronald Reagan goes one better for appointing Sandra Day O'Connor to be the first woman on the U.S. Supreme Court, a position of far greater power and influence than that had by the Attorney General. Besides, O'Connor is from Arizona, so you know she just HAS to be a great, wise and noble person! http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif

[This message has been edited by Todd Beck (edited 12-27-1999).]

[seti]

Ha, if you proved me dead wrong it wouldn't hurt my feelings...it's only a theory. http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif

53.2% of China can not be farmed (Mountains and Desert. This equates to 1,963,889 square miles....2,425,329 includeing forest land. Crops and pasture consitute 1,266,192 square miles of land in China. The United States on the otherhand has 24.0% that can not be farmed, plus 29% forest. The US uses 1,729,220 square miles for crops and pasture. Now I don't have current population figures for either country (sorry) but it's obvious that the US would have a far greater surplus....alowing more people to go work for micro$oft and such. http://www.sysopt.com/forum/smile.gif I don't know what land has better yeilds. However the very wet climate of China's farming regions do not promote the growth of the same crops you see in the bread basket of North America. Ha, but once again...it's just a theory.

[This message has been edited by seti (edited 12-27-1999).]

[Axel]

One thing about our great nation - you are free to fail all by yourself...... you just don't have the right to die in peace because a few doctors and religious leaders have convinced the legislative branch it isn't "right" - might eliminate profits and voters.


Far as the "Union brothers" thing goes - they allowed the "union organizers" to negotiate them right out of a job. - I have no pitty for most unions who watch their jobs get moved off-shore. I've seen Union Wages jack up the prices more than most businesses did. The laws are in place, the Unions are an anachronism we should best do without. Germany is in the same pinch where they can't afford to have their people work because the goods would cost too much.

I think the U.S. is great, in part, because of the wonderful communications network and that we share ideas. The media has HUGE flaws in their agenda, but then they're just a business like the rest of them.

Next, I'd have to say anyone who comes here has opportunity. It's just sad to see so many people who don't take advantage of it, and then complain they are a victim of society. Another group I have no pitty or time for.

[welsh wizard]

Axel,
like the USA the unions were born out of exploitation of the masses, the non English speaking King of England wanted more and more taxes from the colinies, the the British subjects IE George Washington and others, including other Europians sead enough, enough and formed a Union now known as the USA, the same happened with workers being exploited by the Bosses, after all the first real cheap labour in the USA only got a flogging if they protested or ran away, when the workers union became to powerfull they cut their own legs off, what you have to ask yourself is this what will happen to the USA?.
AS for Brits not liking Yanks, well being of an older generation the only time I can rememeber the USA getting slagged was over the so called rich GI Joes that were in Briton during the war (WWll that is)
If you had had Clinton in power when Hitler started up with the Chec's and Poland you would probable not have had 5 million Jew's and countless other people dead due to a second world war, but history can't be changed only learnt from.
As for the USA it's still up the top of the league, for how long depends on it's people you only stay at the top if you don't relaxe and keep pushing forward, this the USA is still doing, as for Japan who do you really think own's the money strings behind the scenes,
China is a threat becuase they buy one item, go away and pirate it, then you are flooded with cheap look alikes,
the biggest threat to the USA standing is not the EEC as it is now but what it might become, then God help the world, project the possiblities through, what happens in 10 or 20 years if Russia applies to join the EEC, a lot of the ex USSR countries are already.
the mind boggles.
As for peoples views of the USA,
the USA is still seen as the Land of the free, and though its only part of a poem on a statue, the words "give me your poor, your starveing masses etc" still ring in countries through out the world.
Don't get me wrong in any way I am not knocking the USA, if you want knocking the only comment I'll make on the subject is " is that true about another Blair on the way, it's bad enough with one, without haveing to put up with another in power in 30 years time"
WW

[This message has been edited by welsh wizard (edited 12-28-1999).]