US is almost like 50 different countries in one.

While this is obviously true, it’s important to note that the US certainly isn’t unique in this regard. Non-Americans often underestimate how diverse the US is. Americans often underestimate how diverse other countries are.

This, y’all. One of the things I think a lot of younger travelers fail to realize is that the US is not a meme. It’s huge and full of people with thoughts, hopes, regrets etc. just like everyone else.

Maybe there are better places to live or visit, but the US is pretty easy and most folks I’ve met are genuinely nice when they realize you might need help.

Edit: try to avoid police and if you encounter them play that foreign visitor thing up or make your English really bad. A lot of them are former soldiers that served in the middle east. They default to a pretty aggressive demeanor because that’s what we did to them. Your safety won’t be a concern, but they can waste lot of your time.

I think the main thing is that people often hear bad things about the US because they’re comparing it to other developed countries. Like I wouldn’t want to live there because I live in a different developed country, but I would take living in the US over a good 80% of other countries.

You have more opportunities and there’s better infrastructure, healthcare, etc than in vast majority of the world.

Umm…

I have never seen or heard a gun fired at someone in a public place

Feels weird you have to specify “at someone” and “in a public place”. I’ve never heard a gun fired outside of firing ranges (EU)

a large amount of the bitching about America, and especially in English, is Americans bitching about America(ns).

Absolutely.

I would also add that the capitalist class loves to promote the idea if America as the greatest nation on earth because that storyline benefits them. They’ve already won the game and are benefiting from our current system. They don’t want it to change.

If we admit we have shortcomings–large gap in wealth equality, lack of accessible and affordible health services, piss poor public transportation, unaffordable child care paired with living costs so large 2 incomes are required, poor school funding, pervasive gun violence, and Policing that emphasizes violence, just to name a few-- then we are also acknowedging that we have to change things. Why would those who greatly benefit from our current system want change?

Why are there “removed” words in your comment?

less strict food safety laws

I mean, you can’t even make cheese with raw milk in America, but other than that

As Kochevnik81 wrote 10 months ago:

I just wanted to speak a bit towards that website. I think that specifically what it is trying to argue (with extremely varying degrees of good arguments) is that all these social and economic changes can be traced back to the United States ending gold convertibility in 1971. I say the arguments are of extremely varying degrees because as has been pointed out here, some things like crime are trends that stretched back into the 1960s, some things like deregulation more properly start around the 1980s, and even something like inflation is complicated by the fact that it was already rising in the 1960s, and was drastically impacted by things like the 1973 and 1979 Oil Shocks.

The decision on August 15, 1971 is often referred to in this context as removing the US dollar from the gold standard, and that’s true to a certain extent, but a very specific one. It was the end of the Bretton Woods system, which had been established in 1944, with 44 countries among the Allied powers being the original participants. This system essentially created a network of fixed exchange rates between currencies, with member currencies pegged to the dollar and allowed a 1% variation from those pegs. The US dollar in turn was pegged to $35 per gold ounce. At the time the US owned something like 80% of the world’s gold reserves (today it’s a little over 25%).

The mechanics of this system meant that other countries essentially were tying their monetary policies to US monetary policy (as well as exchange rate policy obviously, which often meant that US exports were privileged over other countries’). The very long and short is that domestic US government spending plus the high costs of the Vietnam War meant that the US massively increased the supply of dollars in this fixed system, which meant that for other countries, the US dollar was overvalued compared to its fixed price in gold. Since US dollars were convertible to gold, these other countries decided to cash out, meaning that the US gold reserves decreased basically by half in the decade leading up to 1971. This just wasn’t sustainable - there were runs on the dollar as foreign exchange markets expected that eventually it would have to be devalued against gold.

This all meant that after two days of meeting with Treasury Secretary John Connally and Budget Director George Schultz (but noticeably not Secretary of State William Rogers nor Presidential Advisor Henry Kissinger), President Richard Nixon ordered a sweeping “New Economic Policy” on August 15, 1971, stating:

““We must create more and better jobs; we must stop the rise in the cost of living [note: the domestic annual inflation rate had already risen from under 2% in the early 1960s to almost 6% in the late 1960s]; we must protect the dollar from the attacks of international money speculators.””

To this effect, Nixon requested tax cuts, ordered a 90-day price and wage freeze, a 10% tariff on imports (which was to encourage US trading partners to revalue their own currencies to the favor of US exports), and a suspension on the convertibility of US dollars to gold. The impact was an international shock, but a group of G-10 countries agreed to new fixed exchange rates against a devalued dollar ($38 to the gold ounce) in the December 1971 Smithsonian Agreement. Speculators in forex markets however kept trying to push foreign currencies up to their upper limits against the dollar, and the US unilaterally devalued the dollar in February 1973 to $42 to the gold ounce. By later in the year, the major world currencies had moved to floating exchange rates, ie rates set by forex markets and not by pegs, and in October the (unrelated, but massively important) oil shock hit.

So what 1971 meant: it was the end of US dollar convertability to gold, ie the US “temporarily” suspended payments of gold to other countries that wanted to exchange their dollars for it. What it didn’t mean: it wasn’t the end of the gold standard for private US citizens, which had effectively ended in 1933 (and for good measure, the exchange of silver for US silver certificates had ended in the 1960s). It also wasn’t really the end of the pegged rates of the Bretton Woods system, which hobbled on for almost two more years. It also wasn’t the cause of inflation, which had been rising in the 1960s, and would be massively influenced by the 1970s energy crisis, which sadly needs less explaining in 2022 than it would have just a few years ago.

It also really doesn’t have much to do with social factors like rising crime rates, or female participation in the workforce. And it deceptively doesn’t really have anything to do with trends like the US trade deficit or increases in income disparity, where the changes more obviously happen around 1980.

Also, just to draw out the 1973 Oil Shock a little more - a lot of the trends around economic stagnation, price inflation, and falls in productivity really are from this, not the 1971-1973 forex devaluations, although as mentioned the strain and collapse of Bretton Woods meant that US exports were less competitive than they had been previously. But the post 1945 world economy had been predicated on being fueled by cheap oil, and this pretty much ended overnight in October 1973: even when adjusted for inflation, the price essentially immediately tripled that month, and then doubled again in 1979. The fact that the economies of the postwar industrial world had been built around this cheap oil essentially meant that without major changes, industrial economies were vastly more expensive in their output (ie, productivity massively suffered), and many of the changes to make industries competitive meant long term moves towards things like automation or relocating to countries with cheaper input costs, which hurt industrial areas in North America and Western Europe (the Eastern Bloc, with its fossil fuel subsidies to its heavy industries, avoided this until the 1990s, when it hit even faster and harder).

" I know the gold standard is not generally regarded as a good thing among mainstream economists,"

I just want to be clear here that no serious economist considers a gold standard a good thing. This is one of the few areas where there is near universal agreement among economists. The opinion of economists on the gold standard is effectively the equivalent of biologists’ opinions on intelligent design.

I have never had just pure data make me sad so quickly.

Jeez… What did happen? The Nixon Shock / Bretton Woods?

The history of the Electoral College is a lot more complex than just slavery. Slavery became involved later during the 3/5th compromise which was used to determine census counts of the slave states (which determined the numbers the of representatives they were appointed).

The electors were supposed to be elected by the people and serve as an independent committee whose sole purpose was to choose the President/VP. They were to make an independent decision using the best information possible to vote for the candidate that would most faithfully be able to carry out the administration of the laws passed by Congress. The Presidency was supposed to be a boring, somewhat administrative role.

What the Founders failed to account for is the rise of political parties. The Presidency was never meant to be an office you ran for. It was supposed to be an appointment. That concept basically fell apart after Washington when the role political parties began to rise and coordinated campaigning truly started.

In his Farewell Address, George Washington warned that the rise of political parties would lead to absolute chaos as the elected officials would be less focused on their jobs and become more interested in gaining power over their rivals or enacting revenge. He was right.

I disagree that it was just “slave holding states”. This is obvious to us, maybe, but when presenting the issue to non Americans I think it’s important to be accurate on this. It was meant to give states (slave holding or not) with lower populations a larger voice. It still does that. Our system of government was never meant to be a pure democracy. The president wouldn’t have to care about the priorities of smaller population states at all without the electoral college. They would just have to trust that he’ll keep them in mind.

With all that said though, with how homogenous the county is culturally and with communication and travel barriers between states and between the state and federal governments pretty much non existent, at this point I think it has outlived its usefulness and should be abolished. Also the difference between the most and least populated states are, percentage wise way bigger than they were when the county was founded. Also, if my voice as a populated state dweller is smaller because of this system, it feels less like the president is “my” president because I had less of a say in picking him. At the end of the day the president is everyone’s president equally so the election of the president should be a purely democratic process.

A lot of the ones that make it out to be greater than it is are just wishfully thinking. They imagine a place where they don’t need to make any changes while everything else must conform to their ideals and bend for them. They imagine trump is the answer to this. They typically have the simplest of beliefs and solutions that would fail even the slightest scrutiny.

The US is also extremely huge geographically. Towns are different from each other, and states and just general locations can be different from each other. There is no one place you can say “is America”. Hell, you can have a peaceful family friendly neighborhood, and the next street over could be a drugs and violence.

I agree the media absolutely makes it seem worse than it is. Especially with all the 24/7 news and fear mongering to grab attention.

You got me at first!! Hovering over that down arrow hahaha

I have very mixed feelings about Trump. Obviously, he really isn’t good for any country, so I hope he doesn’t get re-elected. Just throw him in the jail already. Unfortunately, I can’t deny the fact that on some sick and twisted schadenfreude way I also enjoyed watching the first four seasons of the Shitshow. Oh, what a rollercoaster that was.

That’s because American health insurance is not really insurance it’s a discount plan. Any of you remember being forced to sell those overpriced coupon books as fundraisers in school? That’s what American health insurance is. It’s a shitty discount plan/coupon book that you are forced into buying from your employer and the plan itself makes sure you pay as much out of pocket as they can legally get away with.

deleted by creator

Our tap water is in crisis. What hasn’t been privatized is either being operated with outdated technology, or being polluted, and EPA protections are being weakened by the Supreme Court.

And, in most of America there aren’t freely available public restrooms. They are all located in businesses that will outright deny you access, or force you to make a purchase. Their policies allow them to discriminate against the unhoused, and the disabled.

I am an American, but I’m not going into I get into the broader discussion here, just had to respond to your two points, as they don’t seem grounded in reality.

A good way to get an impression about real america as an outsider is to follow smaller hobbyist YouTubers from middle sized towns. One guy from Michigan I follow has a remarkable boring life that’s completely different from every American stereotype.

As an European, I was tempted to downvote you. But not because your very valid points but because you started your whole speech by stating defensively that only people who never been to the US tell bad stuff about America, that’s unfair.

I have relatives in the US and I’ve been there for several occasions. Except the midwest and Texas, I’ve been in most of the States and, it’s true, America is like 50 different countries.

But on average, what I can say is that I love interacting with Americans, speaking with them it’s like talking with some old friends, even in NYC (known by other Americans for being very un-american) I found friendlier people than in my home country. Kind of ironic that the only bad chats with Americans happened online.

I’ll skip about the tap water, it’s probably excellent, but to me born and raised in Switzerland, it always tasted like bleach, probably because of the added fluorine, I don’t know. It’s still better than tap water in UK, Turkey and half Europe and by far safer than most of Asia and Africa.

Finally, visiting America as a tourist is great, and I dreamed of living there as a child, but as an adult, I feel safer and more taken care in Europe, both from a healthcare point and from labour safety. But I live in a privileged country, if I lived anywhere else in the world, I would still chase the “American dream”.

What really saddens me about America, while the people are great, the nature is amazing and the spaces are immense, is that is governed by corporations and bribes and make shows like House of Cards a documentary.

Thank you for the actual sane take. I swear people on Lemmy are actually worse than Redditors when it comes to shitting on America. It is extremely obnoxious.

Furthermore, what part of the country are you living in that leads you to believe we are less racist than other countries!? Our racism has defined our country ever since it was created.

Seriously, I am curious what part of the country you live in? It is sheltered from most American realities

There’s a lot of Americans who aren’t having a great time here. I don’t think negative commentary about the US is one hundred percent Europeans’ fault. Nor is it just that we’re “vocal” about things, which is really a positive since it’s the only way to create change anyway.

For example. I just saw a local news story that cops in a major SoCal city are arresting/citing/fining people for just…being homeless. They want them to go to shelters, but they admittedly don’t create enough shelter space. So it just becomes illegal for certain people to exist. The city gets pissy and aggressive about homelessness being a problem, when they’re the ones who created it and are the ones who refuse to fix it. Sure, give a homeless person a record so that it’s even harder for them to get jobs and approved for an apartment, and then fine them knowing they can’t pay it, resulting in doubling late fees that put them in debt. Sounds they really care about fixing the issue, great fucking job. But think about that - it’s against the law, it’s a crime, to not have a mortgage or rent payment. I’ve been hassled by cops for sitting in my own car in a grocery store parking lot. There is no public space. You have to buy something to be allowed to exist outside of a park, and in coastal places like SoCal, you have to pay to be in those too. And yes this was in one city, but it’s applicable to almost every major city in the US, even if there’s some variations in local laws. It’s just an example of how disposable human beings are here. The minute we don’t have labor to sell, the minute we stop consuming, we’re thrown the fuck away. And that’s not just an economic issue, it’s a cultural issue as well.

Was there, several times, all corners. Sorry to tell you, but your tap water smells like chlorine.

Tell me you’ve never been outside your city without telling me you’ve never been outside your city.

A lot of US cities have really suspect lead pipes (Chicago, for one) and in general the water quality is highly dependent on the age of your building.

A shocking number of US cities also run their pipes through chemical spills (like Pasadena) and dilute the pollutants to below the legal limit.

A large number of “public washrooms” are tucked behind “please purchase to use” signs, even if they are de facto public washrooms.

The US has been shockingly and incredibly open with it’s racism in a way that other countries lack. Being from East or Southeast Asia is just begging to get screamed at in some neighborhoods. My fault for not being one of the “right” minorities, I guess.

Canadian living in America, and I hate it here. It’s not pretentious to say that America fucking sucks, because living in American cities objectively fucking sucks.

I’m sure small-town America is nice, though.

I’ll jump in and clarify a point as an American, the states vary greatly and the healthcare issue, while undeniably more expensive, general doesn’t leave you destitute if you’re in a blue state. California pushes for universal coverage and if you’re poor enough (which isn’t actual that poor) you can get insurance pretty cheaply, covering those crazy bills. Plus emergency rooms here can be paid by state under some circumstances.

For instance, my wife’s labor and subsequent baby hospitalization for jaundice cost us 200 for two trips and several nights stay, but the bill was 30k. Emplorers of a certain size (iirc 15 full time) are also compelled by law to cover insurance.

There’s also some safety net for free food, unemployment payments, welfare, and even transportation subsidies, although even good government here is like playing hard mode in a sim, so it’s not always as effective as a country like Finland. Some people simply don’t get aid and end up homeless, etc. Still miles above an underdeveloped country though.

Your comment lacks a bit of experience/awareness about what’s out there. The US is huge, you’re going to find different experiences in different places. Your statement about New York being the only mass transit city in all of US is not true. My vacations to Seattle and Washington DC I had no car, went all over the city by bus and train, easily.