EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- Transcript: Today's Live Q&A With NSA Leaker, Edward Snowden
- 'Tip of the Iceberg': Senators Warn Far More Data May Not Be Safe
- Playing the Obama Bumper Sticker Game
- Intentional and Evil: Court Marshall Sexually Assaults Woman, Then Arrests Her When She Protests
- David Brooks, Tom Friedman, Bill Keller Wish Snowden Had Just Followed Orders
- Transcript: Today's Live Q&A With NSA Leaker, Edward Snowden
- Remembering Satyajit Ray’s Hirok Rajar Deshe: On Edward Snowden, Resistance and Inverted Totalitarianism
- Pentagon Bracing for Public Dissent Over Climate and Energy Shocks
- Bank of America Lied to Homeowners and Rewarded Foreclosures, Former Employees Say
- The Terror Con
Popular content
Today's Top News
US Could Learn Plenty from European Energy Policy
With toxic black ooze spreading throughout the Gulf of Mexico, it is time for the Obama administration to think seriously about national energy policy. It could learn plenty by looking across the Atlantic to Europe.
By forging ahead with widespread implementation of innovative conservation practices, renewable energy technologies and fuel efficient transportation, Europe has managed to reduce its 'ecological footprint' to half that of the United States for the same standard of living. The average European emits half the carbon of an average American and uses far less electricity. It takes 40 percent more fuel for an American car to drive a mile than a European car.
How has Europe managed to achieve this? Through smart, strategic government policy, working closely with the private sector, to advance incentives and regulations that encourage the necessary behavior from consumers, households and businesses.
During the past decade, as the US has resorted to increasingly desperate strategies to secure more oil -- whether Middle East wars under Bush-Cheney or more offshore drilling under Obama -- the European landscape has been slowly transformed by new conservation and renewable energy technologies that look like something out of a sci-fi movie. Picture windmills, tidal turbines, and solar panels on rooftops, dotting the European landscape. Imagine large cylindrical 'sea snakes' bobbing in the ocean, transforming wave motion into electric power. Or vast solar arrays with tens of thousands of panels that have tracking technology to follow the sun, and 'smart' energy-efficient buildings that monitor the temperature and sunlight to open and close window panels and blinds automatically. Imagine harnessing the body warmth of 250,000 daily commuters to produce heat for a nearby office block. Or how about high-speed trains circling it all, linking major cities, whisking passengers in carbon-friendly efficiency. All of these inventions and more are becoming reality in Europe.
Windmills,
Tides, and Solar Besides: The European Way of Energy
Europe leads the world in the production of wind power, and Germany leads
Europe. All across rural Germany giant windmills line the landscape like rows
of a new-fangled crop. Nationwide more than twenty thousand windmills generate
8 percent of the country's electricity, some 21,000 megawatts (MW) of power,
enough to power ten million homes and save an estimated forty-two million tons
of carbon dioxide. Germany has plans to build an additional thirty offshore
wind farms in the North and Baltic seas. Britain, Spain, Portugal and Sweden
also are investing heavily in wind power. Denmark already gets 20 percent of
its total power from wind energy. The US has only a third of Europe's wind power.
Solar power also has surged in Europe, with photovoltaic capacity in the European Union growing at an annual rate of 70 percent in recent years. Other energy forms are being developed, including geothermal, biomass, and small-scale hydro. Harnessing the limitless power of the sea has long been the dream of science fiction, and it is becoming reality in Europe. Imagine taking a windmill and sinking it beneath the sea -- that, in effect, is what engineers have done a mile off the British coast. Like a field of windmills, these underwater 'seamills' create the possibility of grids of undersea turbines producing thousands of megawatts of carbon-free power.
Portugal is the first country to pioneer an eye-popping new technology known as a 'sea snake' or 'energy eel'. Sea snakes are 100 meter-long floating cylinders that bob semi-submerged in the waves and convert wave motion to power that is then fed into underwater cables and brought to land. Portugal is planning a grid of 30 sea snake segments producing 20 megawatts of power, saving some 30 million tons of carbon emissions. Twenty-five of these grids could power a city the size of Lisbon.
Each country is deploying different technologies and acting as a laboratory for the others. Some countries have set ambitious goals: Sweden already generates 40 percent of its energy needs from renewables. In 2007, Germany generated 14 percent of its electricity from renewable energy, preventing 114 million tons of carbon emissions. Meanwhile the United States generates a paltry 6 percent of electricity from renewables.
Visionary
Leadership and Policy
Renewable energy technologies have proliferated in Europe as a result of
several factors, the most important of which has been government support,
including financial incentives. In Germany, wind and solar power have benefited
from laws and feed-in tariffs that require energy companies to pay wind and
solar producers three to four times more per kilowatt than the amount paid for
power produced from conventional sources. That has created a fertile business
climate and economies of scale for renewable technologies to take off. The
German government also has spurred demand by establishing a '100,000 rooftops
program', which provided low-interest credits for homebuyers of solar systems.
Other countries, such as Britain, Denmark, Portugal, and Spain, have followed
suit.
Europe's economy has received a boost as a result of massive investment in the renewable energy sector. Hundreds of thousands of new jobs have been created, and as Germany and other countries have gained in technological expertise, they have begun exporting to markets all over the world, including to China and the United States. Europe's green industry is realizing enormous gains and showing that sound environmental policy does not have to be pitted against the economy.
Conservation
-- The Best Renewable of All
While Europe's renewable energy sector is leading the world, most European
advances have been more mundane -- just better ways of boosting conservation
through greater energy efficiency, better mass transportation, and the
incorporation of 'green' principles into everything from building design to
urban planning to flushing toilets. Virtually all the experts agree: in the
short term, the cheapest, easiest, and fastest way to reduce carbon emissions
and tackle many of the world's energy shortages is through energy conservation
via widespread use of existing technology.
Europe has become a leader in using green building design and construction practices, including for large commercial buildings as well as residential. Buildings are estimated to account for 50 percent of total energy use in newer cities and more than 70 percent in older urban areas. So widespread use of existing technologies offers the promise of large efficiency gains in heating buildings.
Lighting alone accounts for 10 to 15 percent of domestic, and 25 to 30 percent of commercial, power use, making motion sensors and low wattage bulbs important tools in the battle to reduce energy use. The EU has approved the phasing out of incandescent bulbs by 2012, and estimates say that will reduce the EU's carbon emissions by 25 million tons a year.
Europe also has been pioneering what is known as 'cogeneration,' or 'combined heat and power' (CHP) systems. In conventional electricity generation, only about 35 percent of the fuel is converted into electricity while 65 percent is lost as wasted heat that is belched up the smokestack of the power plant. But cogeneration recaptures the heat and recycles it, achieving an efficiency of up to 90 percent. Denmark is leading the world in warming buildings with cogeneration methods. Hundreds of thousands of Danish homes and other buildings are warmed by surplus heat transported in insulated pipes from power plants. Recycled energy from cogeneration amounts to over 50 percent of all energy used in Denmark today; it makes up nearly 40 percent of all energy used in the Netherlands and Finland, and 20 percent in Germany, Poland, and Portugal, but only 8 percent in the United States. The average Dane now uses half as much electricity per year as the average American.
Since the mid-1990s, all new construction in Europe has had to meet basic requirements for design efficiency, making green architecture an everyday reality. Europe has pioneered the use of natural lighting, cogeneration, solar power, fuel cells, advanced ventilation, motion sensors to switch off lights and control fans, special glass that allows daylight in but keeps heat and ultraviolet rays out and minimizes heat loss in winter, and much more. There's nothing like this effort on the American landscape, where only a handful of buildings voluntarily submit to green-friendly LEED design specs. Consequently, the average US building uses roughly a third more energy than its German counterpart. Improving energy efficiency in buildings would translate to a 25 percent reduction in America's carbon emissions.
Revolution on Wheels In the transportation sector, Europe has gone both high and low tech. It is leading in the development of mass public transit, high-speed trains, and fuel-efficient autos (including the use of non-petroleum powered vehicles such as electric plug-in and hydrogen-fuelled cars); but also in encouraging no-carbon forms of transportation such as bicycling and walking through the creation of thousands of kilometres of bike and pedestrian paths crisscrossing the continent.
Europe's automobiles have engines that are about half the size of America's, requiring a lot less fuel than a gas guzzling American vehicle. The fuel standard of European vehicles is set to rise to fifty miles per gallon by 2012, but the Obama administration's new nationwide standards mandate an average of only 35.5 mpg by 2016. Even China has reached that by now.
And comparing Europe's trains with those in the US is like comparing a professional major league team with one in the minors. Europe has built an impressive network of routes for high-speed trains that crisscross the continent, with even more in the works funded by $27.5 billion earmarked by the EU. But the US really has no high-speed train lines to speak of, and Obama has allocated only $8 billion for construction. That's too bad because trains emit only a third of the carbon per passenger compared to air travel.
For all these reasons, while the United States has seen a 21 percent increase in oil consumption since 1980, most European countries have seen significant drops. Denmark and Sweden's oil consumption declined by a third, Germany's by 20 percent, France's by 14 percent, and Italy's by 13 percent. If the United States were to match the fuel economy achievements of Europe, US demand for oil would be cut by 1.5 billion barrels of oil per year, nearly 20 percent of consumption, a huge amount given that the US consumes about a quarter of the world's total.
Europe's
New Energy (R)evolution
Perhaps no single horizon better illustrates Europe's technological advances
and capacity for innovation, combined with political will and future-thinking,
than its leadership in pushing the world toward a new era of renewable energy,
conservation, and low greenhouse gas economies. Certainly, Europe has its
energy challenges, many of them stemming from the instability of Middle East
oil, Russian sabre-rattling over natural gas, and the lack of a continent-wide
energy grid. But for the most part Europeans have discovered what a previous
generation of American leaders once knew: investment in infrastructure pays
dividends in multiple ways that pave the way for the future.
Every day that the massive black plume off the Louisiana coast sprays into the sea is a reminder of how much the United States has failed to transition to a modern energy regime. Given the stakes over global warming, Europe has emerged as 'the indispensable nation,' while the United States, the largest per capita polluter in the world, continues to fiddle as the earth burns.
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...



135 Comments so far
Show AllI've been on the Eurorail, which flies like a train on land; flown over many of the windmills spoken of here; I've seen their ubiquitous small cars and omnipresent mass transportation; I've used countless of their low flush toilets.
I wouldn't call what I've seen there "perfect," but I do think we should rename ourselves "Americant's" instead of Americans.
I have perfected the low flush toilet. Our toilet 'flap' would sometimes stick in the open position. I added a bronze weight (no rusting) to the flap. Now one simply holds the flush lever for whatever time is required. The infinite variability of the design makes this toilet into a mini-sporting event, by the timing and nimbleness of touch in seeking the perfect amount of flushing power for the job needed.
Yes, the US couldalso "learn" that there are nearly 200 nuclear power plants in Europe now. let's be more like Europe.
I look forward to more people learning about alternatives to the carbon-fuel-based economy. We can do the paradigm shift and have an abundance of low-cost pollution free energy. Solutions have existed (and have been suppressed) for over a hundred years.
As we learn to focus on the possibilities instead of the disasters... the changes that we are all asking for will occur. Perhaps the internet (and our ability to rapidly communicate) is the invention we've all been waiting for!! Surely we can out perform the suppressors.
You can find more info on the following sites. Watch the short Orion Project videos. Dr. Greer talks about collective research efforts and some cloak & dagger suppression efforts. The u-tube presentations are of working models. Internet scuttlebutt suggests that the Australian guys have been paid off to stop working. Their website has been quiet for a couple of years. The following two are from a company in Ireland. they appear to have interesting plans for 2010. The last one is from Japan.
http://www.theorionproject.org/en/index.html
http://changingpower.net/articles/free-energy-documentary-producer-pitches-tv-series/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QgQXYBRYwbg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yh_-DUKQ4Uw&feature=related
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Site:LRP:A_Proposed_Proof_of_an_Overunity_Asymmetric_System_to_be_Tested
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Go-CrM_llE&feature=channel
http://www.masaru-emoto.net/english/dr.emotos_message_2.html
Also, Tom Bearden's website & his "energy from the vacuum" are worth looking into, in a major "manhattan project" kind of way. Dr. Lindeman's website's good too.
Forgot to mention lindemann's acticle "world of free energy", and the four forces opposing the development of this field (quite an eye opener).
Oops. Europe's standard of living is not the same as that of the USA. Europe has a much higher standard of living. As with health care, so with energy. Americans are paying double for half of the benefit.
We could also more widely use waterless urinals.
I was patiently awaiting an affordable fuelcell being developed in Troy NY for home power.
When the fuelcell was ready for market G.E. bought all the franchises and never allowed the fuelcell to go to consumers.
Revoke all Corporate Charters and start over with a discriminate issuing of charters.
There's a single simple reason why European leaders have surpassed the United States in improving the lives of their citizens. They actually CARE about their citizens and are truly interested in bettering their lives.
Contrast that with our form of government which is full of leaders (I use that term loosely) whose main priority is enriching themselves at the cost of their constituents. The "Club" which we call Congress is a joke!!!! They care about one thing: self enrichment! The two-party system is DEAD - because there is NO difference between them - neither party exhibits any genuine interest in bettering the lives of citizens - only in winning over each other because "to the winners belong the spoils." The hell with caring about constituents!
"There's a single simple reason why European leaders have surpassed the United States in improving the lives of their citizens. They actually CARE about their citizens and are truly interested in bettering their lives."
Why do you believe that?
Take a trip to Europe and see for yourself.
How would I see "caring" of political leaders?
Maybe talk to citizens you meet there.
OK, but how would they know that the politicians care about them? I'm not trying to badger the point other than to question whether those politicians are really any different from politicians anywhere. They want power and when they have it they want to keep it.
I agree. The more they want to copy Americans (like Harper in Canada who adored Bush), the worse people will be.
It comes through in the comfortableness working people feel in telling visitors that their government would not tolerate the violation of certain rights they have come to take for granted. Even Sarkosy gets credit for not being stupid enough to reverse all social protections for the people. He's conservative but is careful to not strip everything away as Bush did so brazenly and swiftly in the U.S. What would Americans say to a Euro visitor? We had a German law professor visit here. She was appalled at the nonsensical healthcare "debate" and the lack of legal protections for workers against abuse. All I could say was that the zeitgeist in Washington dictates despair over Congress or Obama "getting it." The lack of care by politicians (legislative results that help people sustain their lives) is voiced through us. Same with Euros.
"It comes through in the comfortableness working people feel in telling visitors that their government would not tolerate the violation of certain rights they have come to take for granted. Even Sarkosy gets credit for not being stupid enough to reverse all social protections for the people. "
I agree that it would be politically untenable to take entitlments back. That doesn't mean they "care". It means they will do what they can to keep power, which isn't at all a manifestation of "caring".
"What would Americans say to a Euro visitor? "
As an American myself, I would say that in exchange for fewer social entitlements we have greater opportunities for economic betterment, and in case they weren't sure I would say that you can't have both, you have to trade one for the other.
Pretty fair analysis.
Nope.
Europe has a much fairer economy and greater opportunity for social and economic advancement than the US.
and they aren't entitlements
they are services and infrastructure paid for by the users
and your assumption that you can't have social entitlements and opportunity at the same is without basis
I'd go find a hea[p of links, but you go first
"Europe has a much fairer economy"
Define "fair economy". Please.
"and greater opportunity for social and economic advancement than the US."
Not true, European countries tend to have much greater restrictions on the operations of small business fr example, including how much you have to pay the help, what hours you can keep, etc. I can't think of a single factor in Europe that supports your claim.
"and they aren't entitlements"
That's exactly what they are because they are prescribed for by the government, and funded by the government through taxes that are forced.
"they are services and infrastructure paid for by the users"
Whether they want the services or wish to pay for them or not. The "paying" part is compulsory, the receiving part is due to *entitlement* as they are provided for by law.
It's not some spontaneous ad hoc program that everyone participates in because they personally wish to do so.
"... funded by the government through taxes that are forced." As to be expected, that is an extremely misleading, if not disingenuous statement, as you make it appear that most Europeans resent the taxes that they pay as well as the services that they receive. But as Steven Hill points out in his book Europe's Promise, those assumptions turn out to be completely bogus. Hill references an American accountant who is based in the Netherlands and writes that Americans often focus on the top tax bracket in the Netherlands which is 52 percent. As the accountant notes:
"But consider that the Dutch rate includes social security, which in the U.S. is an additional 6.2 percent. Then in the U.S. you have state and local taxes, and much real estate taxes. If you were to add all those up, you would get close to the 52 percent."
Hill also adds:
"But that's not all. In addition to what Americans pay in taxes, you would have to pile onto that the tuition, insurance premiums, co-payments, hidden fees and other charges that most Americans pay beyond their taxes to receive various services and benefits. A through analysis would need to create a ledger in which all the workfare supports and services Europeans receive are listed on one side, and the amount of taxes and any additional fees they pay are listed on the other; and then it would do a similar analysis for Americans, listing on one side the same level of benefits and services as those received by Europeans, and on the other side what Americans must pay in the form of taxes as well as out-of-pocket expenses for those same services. This would clarify that for Americans to acquire health care, university education, parental leave, child care, retirement pensions, and so on-the things that Europeans receive for their taxes-we have to pay additional fees, premiums, deductibles, and out-of-pocket charges beyond our taxes."
As Hill makes clear, Europeans do pay more in taxes than the average American. But if one were to organize that ledger it would then become apparent that the Europeans receive far greater services that they take for granted than do the Americans. Perhaps Jake Newton's time would be much better spent lamenting over the fact that the United States is still the only advanced country in the world that does not have universal health care rather than somehow believing that Europeans resent the services that they receive and the taxes that they pay for them.
"you make it appear that most Europeans resent the taxes that they pay as well as the services that they receive."
I have no idea why me saying that the taxes are forced makes it seem to you that I am suggesting resentment about taxes or services. Frankly I have no idea about that.
That you think what I said means anything different from what I actually said is your problem.
If it were me being taxed as such I would then *demand* thst I get every last thing I was entitled too. And therein lies some of the problem, as I am sure most others would too.
...you would "demand"... That greed thing is a problem for a great many people. I feel bad for you and others afflicted with this disease.
"you would "demand" "
Yes I would demand whatever I am entitled to. And I am not the only one, the Europeans take to the streets over the idea of raising the retirement age or that they might lose some vacation time. Pay attention.
"That greed thing"
"Greed" is a loaded term. Just as you use it here, it is almost always attributed to someone other than the one using the term. When is your own reasonable self interest "greed"? Your use of the term always says more about you then it does about the person you try to apply it to.
"I feel bad for you and others afflicted with this disease."
I am sure there is someone who thinks *you* are greedy. Best not to use the term my friend.
We humans are all subject to greed. It is quite true that I find myself greedy for this or that very often, but I think it is incumbent upon anyone who is financially comfortable to understand his greed and make serious attempts to mitigate the worst impulses. Helping one's nation and fellow citizens of the world can be good for the soul (perhaps my soul is greedy).
It's kind of funny how some people call us too materialistic when they're no less materialistic. I don't think you're too bad. Nations can learn from each other believe it or not.
By your last paragraph you just made, I believe, Hill's point when you say if you were being taxed "you would get every last thing I was entitled to." For some reason you seem to be loath to admit, as Hill does, that Europeans get far more than Americans receive for what they pay. It is also unclear, as is usually the case with so many of your comments, what you are attempting to say as when you write, "If it were me being taxed as such I would then *demand* thst [sic] I get every last thing I was entitled too." "Taxed as such". What is that supposed to mean? Do you somehow believe that most Americans are over taxed? That does not make very much sense at all since it is the Europeans who are being taxed more heavily than the Americans and the Europeans, unlike the Americans, are, for the most part, not complaining all that much considering how many more services they receive as compared to Americans in this country.
"For some reason you seem to be loath to admit, as Hill does, that Europeans get far more than Americans receive for what they pay."
The question you must ask is what *percentage* of people get more from the government than what they put in. In economics, there is no free lunch. Those who get more than they pay in get it because others put in more than they get out. It's a zero sum game. Minus, of course, the friction inherent in the government agencies that deliver the services.
"[sic]"
Gesundheit. I don't always use a spell checker. So?
"Do you somehow believe that most Americans are over taxed?"
It may be true that I do beleive that but it wasn't the point. If I were taxed at the *higher* rate that applies in Europe then I would *demand* the additional services. And so would and should you.
"considering how many more services they receive as compared to Americans in this country."
The crux of the issue is here, and I said this already: The "many more services they receive as compared to Americans" has a *cost*. They are not free. The taxes to pay for the services are not voluntary. They are a *cost* of doing business in Europe. This is why the level of GDP growth in Europe has *always* been lower than in the US. And if the Europeans like to trade economic freedom for economic security , fine I don't begrudge them. But let's please admit to what is factual, and realize there are far less people in the US inclined this way.
Another one of your seemingly endlessly bizarre and incoherent comments as exemplified as when you magnanimously state the obvious with this gem: "the 'many more services they receive as compared to Americans" has a *cost*. They are not free." Ah, yes. Here we have the Sherlock Holmes of the Internet realizing that the services and benefits that the Europeans have come at a cost. That is correct, Sherlock, and I wrote, apparently to no avail, those costs manifest themselves by the higher taxes that Europeans pay. You make it appear that this is some kind of deep, dark secret that Steven Hill is keeping from people like you when he and I freely admitted that Europeans do indeed pay higher taxes and by doing that they then receive more benefits than most Americans in this country.
You also state that "taxes to pay for the services are not voluntary." I think that there are very few roads, if any, where roads are not paid for through taxes. Do you propose that people should not pay their taxes and as a consequence not have roads that would wreck their vehicles' suspension? Most Americans pay for Social Security. I do not think that most Americans would take too kindly if that Social Security check that their parents and grandparents receive each month were to be suddenly cut off and which helps many of them to survive.
I also acknowledged, as did Hill, that Europeans do indeed pay more taxes and that Americans pay, on average, less taxes. But paying less taxes for Americans then means, logically, that they receive less benefits than the Europeans. This then goes back to your comment that if you were taxed at the higher rate you would "*demand* the additional services." I do not understand why you believe that you have to demand [I also am at a loss to understand why you insist upon highlighting the word demand] those services since, as I thought that I had made clear in my other comment, those services are already given to Europeans because they have paid into the system with their taxes.
You also claim that "there are far less people in the US inclined this way." I very seriously doubt the accuracy of that statement since most people, as Hill points out, have not actually sat down and put down in their ledger how many benefits they would receive if they did indeed paid more in taxes and how many services the Europeans do in fact receive with the taxes that they do pay. If the mainstream media would bother to do that, then most Americans might finally realize that that dreaded word socialism is, to borrow from your word, less than factual as presented by the corporate media.
Or perhaps you are saying that because the "Europeans are [supposedly] trading economic freedom for economic security" that this will supposedly happen in the United States. That comment also makes very little sense since the U.S. already spends by far more on its military budget than the rest of the world combined in its quest to keep as many Americans as possible in fear and hysteria that they will somehow be killed by one of these dreaded terrorists even though an American has as much of a chance of having that happen as being literally struck by lightening. But as Susan Brewer points out in her very well written book Why America Fights: Patriotism and Propaganda from the Philippines to Iraq, the government has never ceased trying to convince Americans that a commie is hiding under their beds or that a terrorist is lurking around the next corner while doing their best to place attention on national security [despite the fact that the United States has the most nuclear weapons on the planet and has invaded more countries in the Middle East than any other nation] while not mentioning all the benefits and services that so many Europeans receive which most Americans can only dream of receiving.
"Another one of your seemingly endlessly bizarre and incoherent comments"
Every time you precede your commentary with this kind of statement I go ahead and pick that commentary apart. Here we go again:
"You make it appear that this is some kind of deep, dark secret"
Actually, the idea that services from the government are "free" is pretty common, as with the common statement "FREE health care". Especially on these boards. I'm glad that you realize that they aren't, and that *anything* that is provided by the government has a cost. Let's move on then.
"You also state that "taxes to pay for the services are not voluntary.""
Correct, punishable by fines or jail if you don't pay them.
"I think that there are very few roads, if any, where roads are not paid for through taxes."
So what?
"Do you propose that people should not pay their taxes and as a consequence not have roads that would wreck their vehicles' suspension?"
Now why would you say such a thing, when all I said was that taxes aren't voluntary? LOL! Focus grasshopper.
"I do not think that most Americans would take too kindly if that Social Security check that their parents and grandparents receive each month were to be suddenly cut off and which helps many of them to survive."
What the hell are you talking about!?!? Neither would I.
"I do not understand why you believe that you have to demand "
I shouldn't have to. I was simply voicing my expectation that I would have having paid the extra taxes.
"You also claim that "there are far less people in the US inclined this way." I very seriously doubt the accuracy of that statement since most people, as Hill points out, have not actually sat down and put down in their ledger how many benefits etc...."
That doesn't matter. The fact that there is little political support for a move towards socialism is what makes me say that, and I was comparing to Europe.
"that dreaded word socialism is, to borrow from your word, less than factual as presented by the corporate media."
Now *this* is incoherent. Care to restate please?
""Europeans are [supposedly] trading economic freedom for economic security" "
They are. The two are incompatible except by how you trade one against the other.
"that this will supposedly happen in the United States."
They will, in the case that the US might move towards socialism.
"That comment also makes very little sense since the U.S. already spends by far more on its military budget"
That's irrelevant. Should the US move towards socialism while *any* budget item, whether military or space exploration or dam breaching or any other is held constant, the "trading economic freedom for economic security" trend would hold true in proportion to the amount of increased taxing required. Big stinky Red Herring.
You are all mixed up Erroll. And you ignored my point on the percentage of people being net contributors vs. net takers. Typical.
I am mixed up? I suggest that you take a look in the mirror in order to see who the confused person actually is. You dread that the U.S. might move toward socialism while refusing to acknowledge that there already is socialism in this country with the examples of Social Security and roads being payed for by taxes which you then attempted to claim as not knowing what I was saying. One can also throw in services such as Medicare and Medicaid and the Veterans' Administration as more examples of socialism being present in this country while you continue to fan the flames of hysteria by trying to claim that socialism is such a bad thing. As I have attempted to point out over and over, the Europeans certainly do not believe that the benefits that they receive from their governments after they have paid their taxes are so terrible and I seriously believe that most Americans would soon realize, unlike you, that receiving all those services that Europeans take for granted is not a bad thing either. But that would require that an honest discussion of what socialism actually is could take place in this country by our political leaders and those in the mainstream media. But that, of course, to borrow from one of your words, is so typical of what fear mongers like you so dread and that is that an honest dialogue should ever take place concerning comparisons between true socialism and the failed system of capitalism that has taken root in this country.
"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act"-George Orwell
"I am mixed up?"
Yes. Most definitely.
"You dread that the U.S. might move toward socialism while refusing to acknowledge that there already is socialism in this country with the examples of Social Security and roads being payed for by taxes "
Um Erroll? I've acknowledged this in previous discussions with you. The US has a mixture of socialism and capitalism. Everyone here knows that, OK? Can we move on. say to the points I made that you still ignore? Like what percentage of a population are net contributors as opposed to net takers vis a vis Europe and the US?
"which you then attempted to claim as not knowing what I was saying."
Sorry Erroll, you just aren't very good at this, that may be why I don't know what you are saying. Sorry, with practice you will get better.
"the Europeans certainly do not believe that the benefits that they receive from their governments after they have paid their taxes are so terrible"
That all depends on which European you are talking to.
"But that would require that an honest discussion of what socialism actually is"
Yes, it would require acknowledging that it involves "trading economic freedom for economic security".
Have a nice evening.
As to be expected by your supercilious rant, you still refuse to acknowledge that Americans are still being misinformed by what socialism truly is since the last thing what the politicians and the corporate media ever desire is for the American people, as I mentioned, to be given an unbiased look at what socialism actually is.
Also, if one speaks to the average working class European five will get you ten that that person will want to keep their system of benefits compared to the system in the United States that cares very little for the welfare of its citizens and especially for the poor and working class in this country.
But for nationalists like you, the welfare of those people is of very little concern to you.
See new post.
...just adding a comment to see how narrow things get
Y
e
a
h
l
e
t
'
s
s
e
e
h
o
w
n
a
r
r
o
w
i
t
c
a
n
g
e
t
"We humans are all subject to greed."
I'll grant that but it's a matter of degree and judging that degree is completely subjective. And greed must be distinguished from reasonable self interest, also subjective.
"Helping one's nation and fellow citizens of the world can be good for the soul (perhaps my soul is greedy)."
Correct but this isn't done just through paying your tax bill. :-)
Small businesses in Europe are different from small businesses or what is left of them in the US. Say what you want about governments in Europe restricting what small businesses can and cannot do but they also don't allow big corporations "easy" opportunities at crushing small businesses and Walmartizing everything unlike the US. I find it very upsetting that even regulated capitalism in Europe is trashed by most Americans as "communism". It also infuriates me that most small business owners in the US are conditioned into caving in to corporate hostile takeovers unlike most small business people in Europe who wouldn't dream of selling their company's soul to such corporate takeovers.
"Whether they want the services or wish to pay for them or not. The "paying" part is compulsory, the receiving part is due to *entitlement* as they are provided for by law."
People there are happy to use what is given to them rather than lose and bargain for another "big" thing they couldn't realistically get. All this "ownership society" and "too big to fail" that is mainstream here doesn't sit well abroad. No wonder the US is a LAUGHING STOCK ! :(
"Small businesses in Europe are different from small businesses or what is left of them in the US."
Hi. Small business is 2/3 of the private sector or so in the US. Yes I am sure they are different than in Europe. There are advantages and disadvantages each with small business vs. big.
"People there are happy to use what is given to them rather than lose and bargain for another "big" thing they couldn't realistically get."
I am certain this is generally true, and much less true in the US. We are different after all. If that's what they want in Europe and they can make it work I don't begrudge them one bit. Watch what is happening though.
"and your assumption that you can't have social entitlements and opportunity at the same is without basis"
The basis is simple: Increased entitlement relies on increased need for funds to pay for them. These funds come from increased taxes. Increased taxes are an increased expense which means a decrease in potential opportunity for economic gain.
Do you have any idea where wealth comes from? Besides where it was taken from one and given to another that is?
I've paid many hundreds of thousands of dollars in taxes in my life, and while I sometimes wince when writing the checks, I am glad to help out my nation. Perhaps I'm too patriotic.
"Perhaps I'm too patriotic."
LOL! There is *nothing* "patriotic" about paying taxes *in accordance with the law*. If you don't pay your taxes, you will be fined or thrown in jail. I think you need to find out what "patriotism" *really* means. You are *greedy* in applying the term to yourself for merely:
*ahem*
*paying your taxes*. LOL!
There seems to be a bit more turmoil in Europe these days with a little less satisfaction with governments "caring" I thought. The high levels of unemployment and social protections are becoming unsustainable obviously.
By looking at electoral systems.
Yes, like the almost 200 nuclear plants. Good point.
"How would I see "caring" of political leaders [in Europe]?"
Prolly by the apparent general health and welfare of the people and the functional quality of infrastructure, services, and supplies (roads, internet access, safe food, access to medical care, parks, etc.). Satisfaction and efficiency are easy to spot, I should think.
I don't buy the idea that these things, if true, indicate that any politician over there cares more than a politician anywhere else.
"Satisfaction and efficiency are easy to spot, I should think."
Possibly, but neither do these indicate caring by politicians.
actually, jakenewton, the way one can judge why/how the political system cares for its people is...get ready...how much each country spends on its military. the u.s. gives untold and unaccounted-for trillions to the pentagon and hence MIC/corporate contractors...this of course, leaves MUCH less for infrastruction, public transportation, health care, etc. and that is who is in control of the u.s. govt...not the politicians but the MIC that Eisenhower warned us about so many years ago. and the bottom line is that the u.s. govt only considers policies that benefit said MIC/corporations...and yes, i do include the President in that equation.
having spent a nice long time in europe, i can tell you first hand the differences in what the govt provides for its/their people...there are too many to list here, but it's truly mind boggling to me how much of a social safety net there is for european citizens - regardless of whether they live "perfect" lives or not.
finally, there is actual and substantive policy discussion by the politicians here...it is not a perfect situation, but the overall point is that policy decisions are NOT made by an overly powerful MIC/corporate structure and the lobbyists it employs to keep things exactly as f!*&#d up (for the "common people") as they are in the u.s.
"actually, jakenewton, the way one can judge why/how the political system cares for its people is...get ready...how much each country spends on its military."
This is completely arbitrary and without support. Besides, Europe spends less on military because they have often been able to rely on the US.
"Caring" is an attribute of an individual person. Political systems, corporations, governments are organazations, not persons, and as as such do not "care". Politicians, howerver, are individuals and might care. That's what I am looking for, that they care any different in Europe.
"Besides, Europe spends less on military because they have often been able to rely on the US."
I have heard some Americans say this. However, even if the US does withdraw their bases from Europe and the nations have to up their military spending, trust me, it will be a negligible increase. In most of those nations, the meaning of the word "defense" is different from the US's meaning. To them, collective thinking and actions, universal health care for all and not just the upper class, proper education, public transportation to reduce the pollution and stresses of driving, treating the unemployed with respect and healing them before they feel left out like stray animals, etc... is defense at heart that they share. The US version of "defense" seems to be all about building weapons and brainwashing the young into invading other nations for resources.