America has become a HUGE scam

[Emancipator]

What other country can you still live in the ghetto and still have luxuries like an iphone and internet and cable?

 

[KorbenDallas]

I think its funny how during Bush Republicans were more, Murica, Fuck Yea, and now during Obama it seems like Republicans are like, Putin, Fuck yea, and democrats are like, Murica, Fuck yea.

 

[birdie num num]

It's true that one can make something of themselves in America. We've all heard rags to riches stories about the guy that arrives with $2 to his name and later attains the American Dream™. I think of the penniless Vietnamese refugee that created the delicious Sri Racha hot sauce that I eat every day. He's now a millionaire. So there's definitely a culture of hustling and striving to improve one's lot and that's a good thing. The results, things such as technological innovations and labor saving inventions, can benefit the masses. As previously mentioned, it's relatively easy to start a business here compared to other countries.

But there is an ugly flip side. Americans are the most heavily drugged people on the planet. What is the cause? Why are so many people stressed out and taking antidepressants? Perhaps it's pressure to make money to be able to afford the latest trinket? The work-life balance can be skewed. Americans work longer hours and have fewer vacation days than any other industrial nation. Many Americans are rootless and social relations can be shallow. Hyper individualism can lead to alienation and a lack of concern for their fellow citizen. Much has also been written how many Americans barely know their neighbor. Maybe they're too busy pursing the dollar to actually get to know the person next door?

I guess the takeaway is that there is a price to be paid no matter what system you are living in. The intelligent and self aware-person (like the readers of this forum, of course!) can learn to negotiate the pitfalls, count their blessings, and make the most of opportunities.

 

[speakeasy]

The socialist Scandinavian countries are beating the USA on upward mobility:

http://www.verisi.com/resources/prosperity-upward-mobility.htm

The USA beats everyone on concentration of wealth.

 

[nomadicdude]

LOL @ how some Americans root for America like a sports team. It really is the same vibe. They don't really think of the facts, it's just they support it no matter what.

 

[CaliforniaSupreme]

Look at it this way. You basically have no chance of moving up in society unless you are born with a silver spoon. Statistics back this up. The very rich have been allowed to accumulate too much wealth.

Everyone else is a brainwashed peon IMHO, working more hours for less pay than ever before, in order to purchase more material possessions to justify their existence. America has become a braindead consumption society: your existence is tied to eating too much, spending too much, working too much, and obtaining too much in material possessions.

Worse is that people have been brainwashed to believe this is all okay. This is American. What a sad thought process. The idea that you have no security for basic things like healthcare, education, or retirement is insane. Every other rich country on Earth provides these things in a sensible and cost-effective way but in America they throw us all to the corporate dogs so they can make more money.

Anyway, I'll stop. Oh yeah I didn't even get to the obesity issue, third tier women, feminism, or the inane stupidity of the average American about the outside world, including people who have graduate degrees or higher who often think the rest of the world is unsafe and crazy.

So whatever. Anyway...

I call BS.
"You basically have no chance of moving up in society unless you are born with a silver spoon."- You get what you put in, I know people who were in VERY shitty situations and they overcame adversity, etc. It isn't easy but I assure you it can be done. E: My family did this, I serve as a testament to it's existence.

"The very rich have been allowed to accumulate too much wealth."- If you get to that point (hopefully you will,) you'll be all about yourself. There are reasons why many rich people are Republican lol.

"Everyone else is a brainwashed peon"- This may be true, but many people are moving towards the red pill nowadays. This is changing

"America has become a braindead consumption society"- Also partly true, but it's a generalization

"This is American." I call bullshit here, real Americans are the ones who value their countries and themselves, making themselves worthy enough to be called Americans. Not the NASCAR-watching-Walmart-loving-Bud-drinking people.


It's honestly not cool for you to generalize like that. You can easily rip on the US, but I can provide criticism for anywhere else too. Wherever you go will have good aspects and shitty aspects. It's your life, pick your poison.

 

[nomadicdude]

@ CaliforniaSupreme: again, who cares about individual cases. Statistics show economic mobility is a myth.

The rich are too fucking rich and I say this as someone who has made well into six figures before. The tax code is loaded towards the rich.

At least you admit it's a braindead consumption society. I guess no one can dispute that.

 

[worldwidetraveler]

LOL @ how some Americans root for America like a sports team. It really is the same vibe. They don't really think of the facts, it's just they support it no matter what.

Yeah man, it's much better to act like a woman and cry about how life is unfair. You're making the world a better place one whinge at a time.

 

[CaliforniaSupreme]

@ CaliforniaSupreme: again, who cares about individual cases. Statistics show economic mobility is a myth.

The rich are too fucking rich and I say this as someone who has made well into six figures before. The tax code is loaded towards the rich.

At least you admit it's a braindead consumption society. I guess no one can dispute that.

I care about individual cases because they can affect you directly. A statistic is just a number, it's very different when you can put a face on the number.

 

[Feisbook Control]

I agree in many ways with the OP. I also do my fair share of complaining too, and have done more in the past, but here's something I've noticed.

Go on any expat forum -- it doesn't matter which country -- and there will be a huge number of people who simultaneously complain about the country they're from and complain endlessly about the country in which they now live. The funny thing is that none of them actually wants to live in the socialist "paradises" they constantly hold up as the ideal. They want to make Taiwan/Chile/wherever more like Sweden/Canada/the UK, yet they have absolutely no desire to go back to live in Sweden/Canada/the UK because for whatever reason (usually that they're "too stifling" or "the cost of living is too high"), they don't like those places. There's a massive contradiction at the heart of their world view. They're like women who want to change a man, succeed, and then complain that their man is an unexciting beta.

Digging a little deeper, you find that most of them are beta schmucks who work a low skilled job (often English teaching) perhaps earning more than the locals, but still sucking at life. They sucked in Canada, and now they suck in Taiwan. Their whole raison d'etre is watching reruns of Friends or CSI on the foreign cable channels. The more "edgy" of them hang out for the next series of Game of Thrones or go to watch rubgy matches at a sports bar, all with a bunch of other people who are exactly like them. They're like a bunch of crabs in a bucket all dragging one another down.

I knew several people online in Taiwan who admitted to having been here more than a decade and being unable to save all of 3,000 USD in an average year. These are people with white faces who earn more than the average local, and at least one of them is fluent in three languages (Spanish, English and Chinese). At the end of the day, I realised that these people are fucked in the head, and even if only online, I was guilty by association.

Obviously, I wouldn't want to live in the Democratic Republic of the Congo or North Korea, but with these guys, you could put them in Sweden right now and they'd still suck. The only difference is that the social safety net in Sweden would give the illusion that they didn't completely suck.

Ultimately, you don't want to be around guys like that, and you don't want to adopt/maintain their kind of mindset, even if they are correct on every single point they make about why the U.S. sucks. Maybe the U.S. does suck, but Denmark would suck too if they lived there. I'm inclined to believe it's those individuals who suck only because I've seen the same thing (and been that way myself) from so many people who are supposedly from "ideal" countries.

On the other hand, this forum is the only one I have ever been to where such a high majority of its members 1) have energy and enthusiasm that boils over, 2) win at life. Why not take inspiration from such people and leave the losers to suck wherever they want to suck? These days, I couldn't give a rodent's earlobe what happens to mediocre people, though it does trouble me that a once great civilisation is going down the tubes. What can you do though but change your own small slice of the world?

 

[Teutatis]

I care about individual cases because they can affect you directly. A statistic is just a number, it's very different when you can put a face on the number.

Selection bias. You and others on this thread are using a few individuals that you personally know or read about and have succeeded to assert that anyone can succeed while disregarding data that show the massive amount of the population never will due to several reasons.

Not everyone is smart, not everyone has the right opportunities, not everyone will have the same connections and network, etc., etc.

That being said, while unlikely, you should still do everything in your power to become successful, whatever success means to you.

 

[CaliforniaSupreme]

No excuses.

 

[j r]

I care about individual cases because they can affect you directly. A statistic is just a number, it's very different when you can put a face on the number.

Selection bias. You and others on this thread are using a few individuals that you personally know or read about and have succeeded to assert that anyone can succeed while disregarding data that show the massive amount of the population never will due to several reasons.

Not everyone is smart, not everyone has the right opportunities, not everyone will have the same connections and network, etc., etc.

That being said, while unlikely, you should still do everything in your power to become successful, whatever success means to you.

That's not what selection bias means. And what is this "massive amount" of data? How about a citation?

Also, the worst possible way to use statistics is to take a big population and extrapolate your theory from the averages. If you want to learn something from statistics, you have to find instances where you are comparing two similar things to see the effect of one specific difference.

By the way, will one of you guys who are complaining tell me where this magic fantasyland is where someone with below-average intelligence, no start-up capital or connections, and a middling work ethic can step off a plane and be set for life? I'd like to visit this place myself. Even better if it's also one of those places where average dudes have access to an unlimited supply of feminine 8s who have high heels permanently attached to their feet like horseshoes.

 

[Hispanic_Reasoning]

the US has its pitfalls with women (obviously) but with economics, I can't think of any other place where you can make it big if you put your ass to it. Try being a FOB in places like Italy or France and try to achieve what you can in the US. it's virtually impossible. The US, I hate it for being a cultural shithole but it's a blessing in game training and in being a place where you can achieve it.

 

[Travesty]

Easy and accessible girls that will pay for their own shit.

High standard of living.

50 states easily accessible with practically every physical environment known to man.

Diversity of girls.

Diversity of jobs.

If you bust your ass in sales or programming you don't even need a formal education to command a high paying salary with relative ease.

Other than personality of women here I have zero complaints.

 

[Teutatis]

And what is this "massive amount" of data? How about a citation?

I didn't mean massive amount of data, but data that shows a massive amount of the population will not be a success. I'm not complaining, just saying that I don't agree with the guys that say anyone can succeed. Not everyone can or will, but I agree that you should do all you can to be as successful as possible.

 

[lavidaloca]

There is some sheer stupidity being floated around in some cases here. The phrase "you can't get ahead unless you are born with a silver spoon in your mouth."

I grew up in one of those neighborhoods where the 1% live. Of the children in the 2 streets in our "court," not one other than myself graduated university within 6 years. A couple drop outs of university. A couple who are on pace to take 8+ years to make it. Not one of them making a wage above 40k. A couple girls with kids before they were 22. Many of them have this don't give a fuck attitude and put no effort into anything. It astonishes me. I'd say if anything there's going to be a lot of children born into rich families that will fall backwards. While many people born in the middle class will have that extra drive to make it rich.

People will then say but they'll inherit a lot of money. It's a lot easier to blow through money then it is to make money. If you don't develop the skills to make money there's a very good chance you'll blow it. See lottery winners.

The problem people have is self-selection. No one is really rich until 30+ and usually 40+ unless they are a) on TV or b) sold a business or c) inheritance.

This is simply due to the fact it takes time to build wealth. You have perhaps 1 compounding period from 22-30. Then another from 30-38, another 38-45 or so. Money compounds over time. Hence, why moving social classes isn't likely to occur in ones 20s or even their 30s. Look at the Forbes rich list. It reads almost like an obituary. 92,80, 83, 78...ages of the people in it. They've had many compounding cycles to take advantage of by that point.

You can become a millionaire never making more than 30 thousand a year. A lot of it comes down to life choices. The rich don't feel the need to look rich. (Outside the extremely rich, or the get rich quick types (athletes) Whereas nearly everyone who isn't rich has it engraved in their mind that they need to look successful. How do they do this? buy a house they can hardly afford, a car that's well beyond their income level, expensive clothing etc. This leaves them with no real opportunity for climbing the social pyramid as they are leveraged to the gills in depreciating and under-performing assets.

This is even more magnified in places where people are truly poor. My girlfriends in Cuba probably spend 80% of their incomes on clothes...when what they should be doing is saving that money for a few years and starting a private business. I've showed them the math and within 2 years with me they could easily save 3+k (enough for them to start a business there that can make them an income of 300+ a month quickly. keep in mind this can keep on being scaled until they are making thousands) which is more than triple what they make outside of my help. It's beyond them though. They just keep spending the minute they have money in their hands. We exhibit the principles here just we have more access to money.

You don't have to be all that intelligent to make a good living. On 80k you could save 40k a year if you really wanted to. If you did that and invested you should become a millionaire within 10 years or so. After that you may very well make more a year on your investments than your salary.

Everyone has an opportunity to be successful. Sure it's easier for some. Who cares. Make the most of what you have cause 99% of people aren't. They are contempt with mediocrity and blame stuff like taxes for there lack of success / achieving their dreams. Mediocrity is a mind set.

It's all a mindset.

 

[Suits]

^Brilliant.

 

[Tail Gunner]

Look at it this way. You basically have no chance of moving up in society unless you are born with a silver spoon. Statistics back this up. The very rich have been allowed to accumulate too much wealth.

Complete utter BS. I love when people post such nonsense without any evidence or support. Thomas Sowell has written about a dozen articles on the topic, complete with scholarly studies and statistics. Not to mention many others.

Such a conclusion, however, would be utterly false. The fact is that America, to an extent that may be unprecedented in its or any other country's history, is a land of opportunity and upward mobility. When we follow individuals through time, as opposed to following statistically defined income groups, we find a picture of growth and opportunity.

Several recent studies have shed light on this critical issue. In 1992, the Treasury Department analyzed tax returns filed by 14,000 taxpayers for all of the years from 1979 to 1988. For each year, they determined the distribution of income among all 14,000 filers and assigned each tax filer to an income quintile for that year. They then compared the economic status of each tax filer in 1979 with the status achieved by 1988.

The results were startling. The Treasury Department study found that very few of those who started out poor (i.e., in the bottom 20 percent of income) in 1979 remained poor. On the contrary, 86 percent of those who were in the bottom quintile in that year had moved to a higher quintile by 1988. And the Treasury Department found that a person who was "poor" in 1979 was more likely to have become "rich" by 1988 than to have remained "poor." Only 14.2 percent of those in the bottom 20 percent in 1979 were still in that category in 1988, while 14.7 percent had not only improved their lot, but had moved all the way to the top income category.8

This study tells us something critically important about America's "rich" and "poor." They are, in large part, the same people at different times in their lives. "Poor" people certainly include some who are demoralized, disabled or dissolute. But to a greater extent, "poor" family units consist of students, young people who are just starting out in life, recent immigrants, and retired people. The authors of this article, and many of those who will read it, were once classified as "poor" in government statistics. This year's bottom 20 percent are not the same as last year's, or those of the year before. Over time, the vast majority of low-income people find jobs, work their way up, and spend their peak earning years in far more prosperous circumstances. They are replaced at the bottom by young people, immigrants and others who then proceed to work themselves into a higher category.

Income mobility, of course, is a two-way street. The "rich," like the "poor," are an ever-changing group. Contrary to popular conviction that the rich only get richer, the Treasury Department study found that of those taxpayers who had ranked in the top 1 percent in income in 1979, 58 percent had dropped out of that category by 1988.

Further confirmation of the remarkable degree of mobility in the American economy comes from a second study, conducted for the Urban Institute by Isabell Sawhill and Mark Condon. Sawhill and Condon followed a procedure somewhat like the Treasury Department study. They identified a group of families and recorded their incomes in 1977, arranging them into quintiles of family income for that year. Then, in 1986, they recorded the family incomes for the same people. Rather than arranging the 1986 incomes into quintiles, they calculated the average family income, as of 1986, for each of the five groups that had been identified in 1977. The results of the study are shown below.

Sawhill and Condon found that the group that experienced the largest percentage increase in income, on average, were those who started out in the bottom quintile. Those families saw their real incomes increase a remarkable 77 percent, on average, by 1986. The second-poorest group experienced the second-largest increase -- an average of 37 percent. The smallest average increase between 1977 and 1986 was that of the highest income group. Families in the top 20 percent in family income saw their average real incomes increase by only 5 percent in nine years. On the basis of these data, Sawhill and Condon characterize the period from 1977 to 1986 as an era when the poor were getting wealthier fast, and the rich were getting wealthier slowly.9

These income mobility data are of tremendous significance to the income inequality debate. They show that much of what passes for inequality between rich and poor is really inequality between generations.10 America is not a country in the process of stratifying into permanently separate and unequal camps, one rich and one poor. Rather, it is a country that offers its young people and immigrants unprecedented opportunity to achieve financial success.

http://www.americanexperiment.org/publications/reports/the-truth-about-income-inequality

 

[WanderingSoul]

I was in Burma yesterday.