Don't worry, with 8.9% in may, it's also a nice thought for the majority of Americans. - Steph
That's cute and all, but during that rise in unemployment here in the US, do you think we've become more or less like France? In the future, with the new policies implemented by the Obama administration, do you think unemployment will look like it did under Bush I, Clinton, and Bush II, or more like France?
I doubt we'll see chronic 10% unemployment like France unless Obama really, really bungles things up. But I will gaurantee you tha we'll see unemployment remain significantly higher in America until this mess he's created is cleaned up. But that will probably take an entire generation.
Also, it's nice to point out that we're equal
now, but Europe is lagging behind the US. You've got another wave of massive bank failures waiting for you, and you ALWAYS end up having higher unemployment than us during global recessions. Show me the same graph in 24 months, despite our leftward economic turn over the last 12 or so years, and despite our growth in government, I'd be willing to bet that you'll top out higher than we will in terms of unemployment and economic strife.
Also Steph, I believe it is worth noting that some of the drops in unemployment from your chronic 10%ish unemployment to 8% unemployment can be credited to various economic liberalization programs that have been instituted in France over that time period.
Funny, you guys liberalize and unemployment goes down. We grow our government by absurd amounts and our unemployment goes up. Weird.
(But isn't that the entire point of the European welfare state? You tolerate higher unemployment and lower economic growth for more equality.)
1) I'm pretty sure that just by plain logic you could still not buy the car if you odn't want a car. - Earthling
I want a freakin' car. WTF?
2) This is your best point, but it assumes you can afford the healthcare you want in the first place, and that the government-paid services wouldn't be adequate. At the very least, even with a universal healthcare system, you would likely still be able to go out on your own and get new/elective services. - Earthling
In such systems you have to be very wealthy in order to purchase private healthcare while universal healthcare exists. The same can be said for K-12 education. One of the purposes of such programs is to ensure that as few people as possible have access to private education and private healthcare and to co-opt as many people as possible into the system. By taxing people into oblivion, you cripple their ability to afford private health insurance or send their children to a private school. It's unreasonable to suggest that 80% of the population, perhaps even 85% of the population, can afford to pay into social medicine and public schools and still have enough money to afford private coverage or private schools.
3) Since I'm fairly certain you're an American, I hope you KNOW this is NOT how Social Security works, nor it's purpose. - Earthling
Actually, in America, it's probably worse than I described considering that the government has been borrowing money out of them mayonaise jar and putting in IOU's for a decade now in order to pay for today's social programs.