Poor America - BBC Panorama Documentary

[joolz]

Indeed:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...px-Gini_Coefficient_World_CIA_Report_2009.png

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_equality

Very interesting, thank you Professor Yaffle, this shows the facts much better than the link I found. I've bookmarked it.

 

[crimresearch]

Totally agree with you on the highlighted bit. I didn't see the relevance when the poster raised it either, but just replied along the same lines.

Don't agree on the 'similar disparity between haves and have nots' though. Some countries have wider gaps than others:



From: http://bottomline.msnbc.msn.com/_ne...-the-widest-gap-between-the-rich-and-the-poor

The discussion and the comment were in the context of Europe and the UK, not about the Sudan.

Could you have moved the goal posts any farther?

 

[joolz]

The discussion and the comment were in the context of Europe and the UK, not about the Sudan.

Could you have moved the goal posts any farther?

Not sure what tangent you went on but Darth Rotor's post that I was replying to mentioned America, as per the OP, Mexico, as a reference, and Europe, per his comments about royalty. My post showed a comparison between America and Mexico. What's shifted there? The section I quoted in my post made no reference to Sudan.

Your post referred to 'any open society' which appeared a general comment about any open society.

Prof Yaffle further enlightened us by posting info for the rest of the world which includes info for every open society for which the stats are available. I found the information enlightening as I didn't realise the UK and USA would have been so different in the gaps between rich and poor.

Not sure why you feel that disagreeing with your comment that 'any open society is going to have [...] a similar disparity between haves and have nots' is moving goalposts when I was giving evidence on that specific point?

 

[triforcharity]

That's like claiming welfare recipients are mostly drug abusers and it turns out when tested only a tiny % were. It's a stereotype. I don't believe it is an accurate one.

My son qualifies for food stamps even though he has a full time job. He rents a very tiny semi studio apartment in an old building in Seattle. He has no car and I pay for his phone. He doesn't spend money wastefully.

Even with the full time job he is dipping into his college savings (he starts grad school in Sept and will finish his education with loans).

The point is people with full time jobs are barely getting by in some cities. The idea people on welfare are all lazy freeloaders is crap. It's a right wing guilt eraser.

But Sabre didn't say that. He did not say that all people that are on welfare are abusing the system.

He said that abuse of the system is rampant, and it is.

Here in Florida, there is actually a law that is in the works that prevents people who test positive for drugs, to get welfare. There is also a law in the works that limits the items that you can buy. Meaning, soda, candy, junk, etc. etc. etc.

This is all the proof that I need to know that fraud of the welfare/food stamps program is rampant.

There are people (like your son) who actually deserve it. And I have no problem with that. Hell, i've personally given food to people who have none and are begging on the street.

But, there are people who do abuse the system.

I've witnessed it.

 

[Nosi]

Which country is currently using this perfect economic system?

I don't know. I'm not sure there IS a perfect economic system. There are some that work better than others and of course the basket cases like North Korea.

 

[Nosi]

Southern California
Orange County

Story's the same here in Prescott Arizona. People will go buy a tent and call that 'housing', then move up to a rat trap trailer with no electric or running water, than save up again for something that has both.

I did that minus the tent when I was on hard times. I bought a trailer for $100. It came undone from under me and I was matched up with a roomate by an organization I won't get into. The roomate I lost track of, she was older so I think she's passed on now.

 

[Nosi]

Really? You're that upset by the term.

Are you aware how utterly petty that sounds? Especially when the user is simply trying to ascede to the wishes of someone who lives on the same continent as you.

How do you propose we diffentiate between 'citizen of the USA' and all those other people who live in America who aren't citizens of the USA?

ETA - When trying to talk about the contient as a whole, rather than the individual countries, which is when it becomes an issue

My two cents: I've always thought of "America" as an abbreviation for "United States of America" or "USA". When I was much younger, I thought the USA was the only country full of states. I then learned that Mexico had states and Canada had them too. For the longest time I scratched my head over that; other countries had states. Time was a massive chill pill. Still, it fascinated me that the USA always made a flap over states and her neighbors didn't.

 

[triforcharity]

Plus I haven't seen any publicity about US charities coming to treat poor people in the UK, whereas the UK has sent medical people to the USA to treat people there who needed help but couldn't afford health care. If I was from the USA that would make me feel ashamed.

Linkey please?

Thanks

 

[triforcharity]

Deleted due to unseen mod box.

 

[triforcharity]

deleted due to Mod box.

 

[joolz]

Linkey please?

Thanks

Errr everything isn't on the net

I found this out in real life - watching a BBC national news programme. It was within the last couple of years.

I'll try and find something on the net, if I do I'll link it. Will also ask my pals if they can remember the name of the charity, I remember we discussed it at the time.

 

[joolz]

I found a UK newspaper article that shows the same thing as on the documentary, but at the bottom there are stats comparing the US with the UK. I think the documentary should have made comparisons between the USA and other western countries to show whether it is out of alignment with other nations. I've put some of the stats and quotes below.

In the week that Britain's National Health Service was held aloft by Republicans as an "evil and Orwellian" example of everything that is wrong with free healthcare, these extraordinary scenes in Inglewood, California yesterday provided a sobering reminder of exactly why President Barack Obama is trying to reform the US system.

Although the Americans spend more on medicine than any nation on earth, there are an estimated 50 million with no health insurance at all.

Ironically, given this week's transatlantic spat over the NHS, Remote Area Medical was founded by an Englishman: Stan Brock. The 72-year-old former public schoolboy [...]
Today, Brock has no money, no income, and no bank account. He spends 365 days a year at the charity events, sleeping on a small rolled-up mat on the floor and living on a diet made up entirely of porridge and fresh fruit. In some quarters, he has been described, without too much exaggeration, as a living saint.

Health spending as a share of GDP
US 16% / UK 8.4%

Public spending on healthcare (% of total spending on healthcare)
US 45% / UK 82%

Health spending per head
US $7,290 / UK $2,992

Infant mortality (per 1,000 live births)
US 6.7 / UK 4.8

The UK spends less of it's GDP on health and less than half the amount per head compared with the USA, although most of our spending is on the National Health Service.

I know the stats are a few years old, but if we can afford it then why can't the USA? I'm interested in why so many Americans don't see proper healthcare as achievable. Since reading posts about the cost of healthcare here (Travis & others) I've been very baffled. Can anyone explain the reasons to me?

Thanks.

Info from: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...h-about-americarsquos-healthcare-1772580.html

 

[Smackety]

I prefer USers.

no good - it is the united states of mexico as well...

 

[Bob001]

.... Obama passed a law extending unemployment benefits from 26 to 52 weeks in a year....

Just an observation: The President doesn't pass any laws. He suggests results he would like to see, members of his party -- if they feel like it -- propose appropriate legislation in Congress, and they negotiate with the members of the other party to try to pass a bill that they everybody can live with, which the President can then sign. The oft-criticized deadlock in Congress is the result of Democrats not having enough votes to override Republican opposition, and Republicans not having enough votes to pass whatever they want, which in many cases the President would be likely to veto anyway. The extension of unemployment benefits -- which many Republicans opposed -- ultimately passed because a majority of the Congress realized that voters would be sure to remember who was against it.

 

[Corsair 115]

As noted, the "rich" 25% in the US pay 85% of the total income tax revenue; and the lower 50% only pay 3% of income tax revenue.

And what is the percentage of total income that the top quartile accounted for? What percentage of the total income did the bottom half account for? That the top quartile accounts for the largest share of income tax paid is hardly surprising if they also account for the largest share of total income.

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

But Sabre didn't say that. He did not say that all people that are on welfare are abusing the system.

He said that abuse of the system is rampant, and it is.

Here in Florida, there is actually a law that is in the works that prevents people who test positive for drugs, to get welfare. There is also a law in the works that limits the items that you can buy. Meaning, soda, candy, junk, etc. etc. etc.

This is all the proof that I need to know that fraud of the welfare/food stamps program is rampant.

That's only proof that politicians are pandering jerks.

 

[Captain_Snort]

Just noticed this thread, I did watch the documentary and I was honestly sickened by some of what I saw.

First bit was the total lack of care for fellow humans. Every person from the USA should be ashamed when you have charities that originally started to provide simple healthcare to Amazonian Indians and has found that it has to run what are effectively extra free hospitals and GP consulting in public halls because people, through no fault of there own, cannot afford or are turned down for insurance. The people queuing there all night. Sickening.

That compared with the republican hustings and the question about a poor person, with with no health insurance, in a coma, should just have the life support tuned off. AND people supported that point of view. Sickening, and I bet they call themselves good Christians.

The costs of procedures. In the clinic, a man with a hernia, IIRC a hospital wanted $30,000 to operate, I think in the UK the cost to the NHS would be about $3000.

I remember watching the film 'Sicko' by Micheal Moore and thought he was taking the worst cases to make a point, like people being charged about $125 for an inhaler, in cuba, just a few dollars.

As your JFK said, "Ask not what your country can do for you..." Surely with that, there is an implication that the state and government as a whole should have a responsibility to its population.

Trouble is we have the Tories in Westminster who actually think the US model is a good idea as it means they get money by lobbying companies and donations from US healthcare companies. As I said, Sickening when money and greed comes before cariong for your fellow humans.

 

[crimresearch]

Just noticed this thread, I did watch the documentary and I was honestly sickened by some of what I saw.

First bit was the total lack of care for fellow humans. Every person from the USA should be ashamed when you have charities that originally started to provide simple healthcare to Amazonian Indians and has found that it has to run what are effectively extra free hospitals and GP consulting in public halls because people, through no fault of there own, cannot afford or are turned down for insurance. The people queuing there all night. Sickening.

That compared with the republican hustings and the question about a poor person, with with no health insurance, in a coma, should just have the life support tuned off. AND people supported that point of view. Sickening, and I bet they call themselves good Christians.

The costs of procedures. In the clinic, a man with a hernia, IIRC a hospital wanted $30,000 to operate, I think in the UK the cost to the NHS would be about $3000.

I remember watching the film 'Sicko' by Micheal Moore and thought he was taking the worst cases to make a point, like people being charged about $125 for an inhaler, in cuba, just a few dollars.

As your JFK said, "Ask not what your country can do for you..." Surely with that, there is an implication that the state and government as a whole should have a responsibility to its population.

Trouble is we have the Tories in Westminster who actually think the US model is a good idea as it means they get money by lobbying companies and donations from US healthcare companies. As I said, Sickening when money and greed comes before cariong for your fellow humans.

Yeah, that's right. Every single person in America.. black, hispanic, Native American, prisoners, poor, powerless... use a tragic situation to lump them all together and point fingers.

Xenophobic much?

 

[Bob001]

Here's the link for those that can view it:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01c2y2b/Panorama_Poor_America/

This link is blocked to U.S. viewers. Any other way to see it?

 

[Bad Lieutenant]

It's up on youtube; only 30 mins: