Hi, I'm jj

[charlie]

I did not want to hijack jj's thread and this will be
my final post on this subject.

Nords, I scanned all 50 of Hyper's posts again.
He is ok when talking about neutral subjects
and is quite good on financial topics and even
entertaining at times. However, I could not
find even one comment favorable to the US.

I particularly resent his classification of Christian
religious fundamentalism as a "cult". I realize
that many on this board probably agree with him
but it still pisses me off.

If I were computer savvy I would extract all the
negative things he has said about the US and
post them just to let the other readers see for
themselves. Honestly, I could find no positive
comments on the US.

Maybe it is that I live in a passing era. I was
brought up to love God, Family and Country.
When a visitor abuses our hospitality it is my
gut reaction to lash back ..... even if there is a
grain of truth in some of his biased comments.

Simon, my frustration with US haters in general
was triggered by Hyper. I have nothing against
fair criticism if it is balanced occasionally with
positive comments.

My apologies to jj ........ but to Hyper, never!

Cheers,

Charlie

 

[Zipper]

I was the one who mentioned there seemed to be a lot of "religious nutjobs" running amok in America.

 

[wabmester]

You rant about our politics
and morals and demean our values .... go back under
the rock you came from.

Gee, Charlie. Those are some nice values you've got there. Perhaps you'd like to give us a lecture on the values of tolerance, respect, and polite discourse....

 

[haha]

Re: Now waitaminnit...

...., but a review of his last 50 posts doesn't even seem close to rant territory.

Lousy surf today?

Mikey

 

[haha]

OBLAY EMAY!

Converse back at you!

Boys, what's with the homo-erotica?

 

[Jarhead*]

I did not want to hijack jj's thread and this will be
my final post on this subject.  
 

Maybe it is that I live in a passing era.  I was
brought up to love God, Family and Country.
When a visitor abuses our hospitality it is my
gut reaction to lash back ..... even if there is a
grain of truth in some of his biased comments.  


To all the folks that are on Charlys case for his remark, just wanted to make a comment or two.

As Charly indicated, this is a passing era. (I'm just a couple of years from being Charlys age).

Most of the young people on this board have never been in military, and indeed have no desire or need to participate.

Our generation was taught, from an early age, "Your country, right or wrong". Along with the idea that you owed your country a debt by serving in the military or similer conscription.

It is indeed the passing of an era, and your generation , i'm sure will have your own problems to deal with when you find yourself facing the "generation gap

In my opinion, I think Charly was railing against Hyperborea because it would have been almost unthinkable 30 years ago. (A young man coming to this country, and making a fantastic living, and showing his gratitude by having mostly negative things to say about
the U.S.).

According to most of the posters on this subject, most of you think this is perfectly acceptable.

Regards, Jarhead

 

[Peter]

Firstly, the basis upon which the right to access the National Health system is not directly connected to ones residence status in the UK, nor ones actual place of nominal residence or a ''Not-Ordinarily Resident'' status

Simon, I'm not sure that this is correct. See:
http://www.publications.doh.gov.uk/overseasvisitors/rules.htm

This appears to say that you are eligible for NHS services providing you are a resident. It does not depend on National Insurance contributions, payment of UK taxes, or anything else. What's more, even if you *are* a British citizen, if you don't live in the UK, you are not eligible for free NHS treatment. (Although, in practice, I suspect you'd get it anyway.)

At least, that's my understanding of the link ...

Peter

 

[Zipper]

My country, right or wrong?

And if you're wrong?

I'm exactly your age jarhead, but I try to keep an open mind.

Blind faith can get you into a lot of trouble.

 

[wabmester]

According to most of the posters on this subject, most of you think this is perfectly acceptable.

Don't worry, you two have plenty of company. 53% of Americans recently chose your value system. 47% prefer something a little less dogmatic. Can't we all just get along?

 

[bruce1]

Welcome jj

There are a lot of real smart people here who have lived a lot and they have a ton of information and don't mind sharing.

Some can get carried away as you can see.

Keep an open mind in all things

Bruce

 

[Hyperborea]

I did not want to hijack jj's thread

But did so anyways I see.

I particularly resent his classification of Christian
religious fundamentalism as a "cult".   I realize
that many on this board probably agree with him
but it still pisses me off.

I have nothing, absolutely nothing, against those who wish to practice their religion and have religious beliefs.  Some people need or want to believe in something "higher" and that is a personal choice or at least it should be.  Many of the religious fundamentalists (Christian, Muslim, Hindu, and other) don't want it to be.  They want to enforce their religious beliefs on others through force of law.

I'll tell you that many outside the US that I know well (family and friends in 3 nations on 3 continents) ask me about the "militant religious fundamentalists" in the US and to them they don't look much different than those in the Middle East.  What makes it even more ironic is that those in the US who are demanding laws to protect them from two men or two women forming a stable family unit are those who are in general constantly screaming about the goverment interferring in people's lives.  I guess it's ok when it's things that you want to do to others.

If I were computer savvy I would extract all the
negative things he has said about the US and
post them just to let the other readers see for
themselves.

Hey, all it takes is a some intelligence and a bit of time.  You're retired now so you've got the time ...

Honestly, I could find no positive
comments on the US.

Hmmm, I'm not sure what you want here - some sort of kowtow to the emperor?  Some statement that the US has overthrown democratically elected governments around the world but that's ok cause it was all done for a better purpose?

Hmm, how about: I'm enjoying the Mediterranean-like climate of the SF Bay Area.  The people I work with (at least some of whom are Americans), my neighbours, the folks that I interact with in-person on a regular basis are in general nice, decent people.

Maybe it is that I live in a passing era.  I was  
brought up to love God, Family and Country.
When a visitor abuses our hospitality it is my
gut reaction to lash back ..... even if there is a
grain of truth in some of his biased comments.

Yes, blind obedience to the leaders of your church and your country.  A mode of thought that has led to many disastrous events in history.  One can only hope that such an "era" is behind us but recent history gives us little evidence of that.

I have nothing against
fair criticism if it is balanced occasionally with
positive comments.

So, freedom of speech is only ok if I say things that you like then, is it?  

........ but to Hyper, never!

Well then.  I guess there's nothing left for it but swords at dawn.  

 

[haha]

I myself would never live in Canada, or any other country, and badmouth it where I could be overheard by the natives. It just isn't polite. And, by my judgment, Hyper isn't polite when he does this. He does have interesting and possibly useful things to say. Things that I would maybe say myself, but then I am American and that gives me the right. I will happily listen to him but know that he is at best rude in this criticism. Most of what he has to say on many topics is helpful and appears well informed.

I am around immigrants all the time. Many of them (try Cubans!) are full of criticism of the US. Yet they know that for all their Cuban patriotism, it's just a rotten little island full of grifters of various sorts. Same with the Russians; just substitute rotten frozen tundra for island.

And as bad as the US may be, I don't think we'll ever be net exporters of people to Canada. Canadians vote with their feet and come here; for the most part Americans don't go there. Personally, I would like to see some of our policies closer to Canada's than what they are currently. Like trade the war in Iraq for more equitable healthcare.

Considering that we are being swamped by illiterates from the South, what does it matter if we are importing upper middle calss rudies from Canada? Canada couldn't hurt us as much in 10 years as Mexico and points south do in a day.

JMHO

Mikey

 

[wabmester]

I myself would never live in Canada, or any other country, and badmouth it where I could be overheard by the natives. It just isn't polite.

Pretty good, Mikey.   I think that's a record for insulting the most nations in a single post, and this is a place where the natives will certainly see it.  

Edited to say: this site is chockful of both satire and irony, and I could bet either way with Mikey's post.

 

[Cut-Throat]

This thread has gotten quite amusing!  I am neither very young or very old. - 53 - I did serve in the Military. Was drafted during Vietnam. Too Chicken to go to Canada, I joined the Navy.

Most of the people that I have heard bash the U.S. Government are the Right Wing like Chuck-Lyn. Heck even their hero Reagan. Said "Government can't solve the problem - They are the problem".

If we all just waved the flag and thought everything was perfectly fine in the 50's and 60's. We would not have had Civil Rights or Women's Rights or any Environmental Protection etc. etc. etc.

Changes do not come cheap and the first step of change is admitting things are F*cked up. The only people that want to go back to the 50's are Old, well off, white males. I'm betting Chuck Lyn is not an African-American.

 

[Bob_Smith]

Our generation was taught, from an early age, "Your country, right or wrong". Along with the idea that you owed your country a debt by serving in the military or similer conscription.

Jarhead, I agree with what you said here, and will expand on it a bit. My Dad is 75 and he has described those times (especially the time around WW2). He says that everything was black and white in those days - people actually trusted their elected leaders. But that was then...

Since that time a large contingent of your generation (and the previous generation) has moved on with the times. Many have developed a healthy dose of skepticism, and I don't think the comments Charlie posted in this thread capture the spirit of the things I learned from your generation when I was growing up - things like these:

-- That the people running the government are not synonymous with "country". Bad guys can and will be elected, and it's our obligation as citizens to be skeptical, educated, and extremely vigilant in this regard.
-- That "we the people" are the country, and it is our obligation to be "right".
-- That truth and honor are non-negotiable, and that unquestioning compliance is the enemy of truth.
-- That it is our obligation as citizens to oppose actions taken on behalf of our country that we believe to be "wrong".
-- That service is an obligation and can be fulfilled in any number of ways.
-- That others come before self.
-- That it is the obligation of the strong to protect the weak.
-- That accepting personal responsibility for one's actions is required.
-- That your word is your bond.

Your generation is a good one, in my view, and I hate to see the days approaching when your numbers will decrease. I do think that a great many in your generation would be open to some of the very same critical comments that set Charlie off, however. I know that my father, my mother, and all four of my grandparents wouldn't share his impressions about most things. But I do value Charlie's financial acumen and I have learned from him.

 

[SDY888]

Simon, I'm not sure that this is correct. See:
http://www.publications.doh.gov.uk/overseasvisitors/rules.htm

This appears to say that you are eligible for NHS services providing you are a resident. It does not depend on National Insurance contributions, payment of UK taxes, or anything else. What's more, even if you *are* a British citizen, if you don't live in the UK, you are not eligible for free NHS treatment. (Although, in practice, I suspect you'd get it anyway.)

At least, that's my understanding of the link ...

Peter

Peter,

From this publication it appears that you are correct (unfortunately I have not had a response to my direct enquiry to the Dept of Health yet, will post when it arrives). However, this is contradicted partly by the response from the Benefit Agency who said that free NHS care was available in the circumstances I previously outlined - maybe they were only referring to the A&E services? Should note, however, that this entitlement only ceases (according to the document on the link) after a 5 year absence from the UK.

It does seem to me that the different UK agencies involved have slightly different views on the matter, at least after my initial search. But one arm of Government not knowing what the other one is up to does not surprise me in the least. Definitely I agree that if one was to turn up at the local hospital and provided a local address then no further enquiries would be made and free care would be provided (if accompanied by a reasonable British accent!!!) - it may ultimately be a ''dodge'' and thus distasteful, but as an emergency fall back could be used at a push.

JJ, one thing for certain is that this whole issue is less than clear. If your decision is to settle in the US after retirement and as the kids are growing up and being schooled there, maybe it's best to leave the ''old country'' behind completely and focus fully on acquiring the necessary credits/entitlements in the US or insuring the family accordingly??

So, jj, apologies for possibly throwing out a red herring in the first place!

Simon

 

[Nords]

Re: Now waitaminnit...

Lousy surf today?
Mikey

I read fast. But the North Shore's been 10-15 feet or clogged with surfing contests for the last three weeks, and the south shore's been flat.

The only alternative is yardwork...

 

[John Galt]

What about sex? Drinking? Or maybe both?

John Galt

 

[Martha]

... the things I learned from your generation when I was growing up - things like these:

-- That the people running the government are not synonymous with "country". Bad guys can and will be elected, and it's our obligation as citizens to be skeptical, educated, and extremely vigilant in this regard.
-- That "we the people" are the country, and it is our obligation to be "right".
-- That truth and honor are non-negotiable, and that unquestioning compliance is the enemy of truth.
-- That it is our obligation as citizens to oppose actions taken on behalf of our country that we believe to be "wrong".
-- That service is an obligation and can be fulfilled in any number of ways.
-- That others come before self.
-- That it is the obligation of the strong to protect the weak.
-- That accepting personal responsibility for one's actions is required.
-- That your word is your bond.

I am 49 so neither young nor old as is Cut Throat. My father was born in 1910 so could be Chuck's or Jarhead's father. He passed on to me the values that Bob lists above. My father was neither a Republican nor Democrat--he made decisions based on evidence and valued critical thinking. He was religious but did not view doubt as an enemy. This day in 1975 he died. I still miss him.

 

[Jane]

If a non-Canadian comes to Canada for work and then point out to me the holes in our government policy, I don't consider him/her rude at all. My government is made up of a bunch of people and people make mistake, people can be short-sighted. To expect them (just because they lead the country) to be perfect is setting an impossible bar for these people to reach.

My generation is not lack of love for country, God or family. I wouldn't call being proud to be American/Canadian/Cambodian etc no matter how imperfect the government, a "lack of love". It actually shows a great deal of love.

I have never understand people who can't stand other people to criticize their government, country, or looks or proffesion or religion, etc, etc. What are these people afraid of? Are they afraid that if their religion, country etc is less than perfect that they will cease to love it, to be proud of it? If that is the case then maybe they should re-consider their definition of "love"/"devotion".

I don't think my government is perfect or their policy is perfect but I am proud to be a Canadian and I can't think of any other country whose citizen I would rather be.

Jane

 

[John Galt]

Hello Jane. I agree with a lot of what you posted.
I can handle criticism very well. Take your best shot
This is where a superego comes in real handy.
But, other folks can be real sensitive about such stuff, my wife for one is easily wounded. It's a joke in our household.
She'll say something like "Boy, they must think you
are an SOB!" Or, "Man, you really got them excited."
Or, "Maybe you shouldn't have said that?" Or,
" I can't believe you had the balls to do that!" I almost
always say, "You know what?" "I don't care."
My main rules are: Don't intentionally hurt anyone's feelings and always be honest. Other than that,
I just mostly let it fly. Some people like it and some
people don't, but I like it and I can take it as well
as dish it out. I have gotten a lot more careful around
my wife though, so that proves old people can still
learn stuff. I have to go mop the kitchen and do the dishes now before my wife comes home

JG

 

[brewer12345]

If a non-Canadian comes to Canada for work and then point out to me the holes in our government policy, I don't consider him/her rude at all. My government is made up of a bunch of people and people make mistake, people can be short-sighted. To expect them (just because they lead the country) to be perfect is setting an impossible bar for these people to reach.

My generation is not lack of love for country, God or family. I wouldn't call being proud to be American/Canadian/Cambodian etc no matter how imperfect the government, a "lack of love". It actually shows a great deal of love.

I have never understand people who can't stand other people to criticize their government, country, or looks or proffesion or religion, etc, etc. What are these people afraid of? Are they afraid that if their religion, country etc is less than perfect that they will cease to love it, to be proud of it? If that is the case then maybe they should re-consider their definition of "love"/"devotion".    

I don't think my government is perfect or their policy is perfect but I am proud to be a Canadian and I can't think of any other country whose citizen I would rather be.

Jane

Jane:

I have absolutely no useful information to contribute on your dilemma on healthcare, although I find the discussion interesting. However, I hope you aren't scared off by the bickering. Its nice to have new blood joining in the discussion, and I have no doubt that you have some interesting contributions to make to the discussions here.

As for Charlie, et al: c'mon guys. If you insist on continuing this discussion, at least have the courtesy to start a new thread.

 

[Jarhead*]

Don't worry, you two have plenty of company.   53% of Americans recently chose your value system.   47% prefer something a little less dogmatic.   Can't we all just get along?

Wab: Careful how you use your brush.
My father was an FDR Democrat. The guy i voted for lost the last election. I do not participate in political discussions on this board.
I was just pointing out from a generational stand-point the dramatic differences in the mind-set of Charly, and most of posters on this board.
My father was a tough guy. (Logger). But I never heard him ever use an ethnic slur about anyone. That's the way I was raised, and the way our children were raised.
Our kids were raised in an area where whites were the minorities, so my experience and theirs are extensive in that area.
I can understand why Charly railed at Hyperboria.
It is Hyperborias right to say whatever he wants about the U.S. I mainly find it damn objectionable, just as it would be if somebody moved into your neighborhood and spent a good deal of his time talking about what a lousy neighborhood it was. (It gets old real fast).
Regards, Jarhead

 

[unclemick]

I will be posting with a split personality for a month - Christmas came early(IBM Thinkpad and AOL) - therefore I can slur/be for and against myself, heh,heh - unclemick vs unclemick2 ala libertarian tendencies vs liberal - never Rep./Dem. - the family tree takes care of that. Come jan. I shall become an AOL dude.

 

[Hyperborea]

I have never understand people who can't stand other people to criticize their government, country, or looks or proffesion or religion, etc, etc. What are these people afraid of? Are they afraid that if their religion, country etc is less than perfect that they will cease to love it, to be proud of it? If that is the case then maybe they should re-consider their definition of "love"/"devotion".

Jane, the longer that I'm in the US the more I realize that California is one of the few places in the US where such an attitude is not only tolerated but encouraged.  This attitude of questioning and looking for a better way is part of what brings about places like Silicon Valley.  For most of the US though such behaviour is "treasonous".  This appears to be a big part of the difference between "blue" states and "red" states.

This whole attitude can be seen at the top - "You're with us or you're against us."; the removal of those not willing to be toadies from the cabinet (i.e. Colin Powell);  etc.  It didn't start there though and you can see it in Chuck-Lyn's "Archie Bunker"-esque proclamations.