I've just come back from a trans Atlantic cruise and have spent a lot of time watching Fox News. (Yes, I know I'm a sad person but not much else to do in a force 10 gale).

The other day I was amazed to see that there was a mention, just in the ticker tape across the bottom of the sreen, that CFC's may be dangerous. Is this the first time Americans have been told this? We banned CFC's years ago because we realised they were destroying the ozone layer. It doesn't take too much stretching of the imagination to think that that is causing the Carribean to heat up which may have caused the number of hurricanes to double this year.

Another thing which caught my eye was that the Americans were told that the recent spate of bombings in Iraq was in the 80's - only when I got back here I found out it was 157!

Come on US readers, what do you think?

By the way, thanks for a great holiday but can you train your waitresses not to interupt meals by asking 'is everything OK' at least six times per meal.

I think American TV news is usually more biased and partisan and is more likely to have an agenda than British TV news. But I am sure the truth is around for anyone willing enough to find out. Unfortunately I think some of our news is heading the same way - you only have to see some of the 'campaigns' that ITV News decides to run. They pick up on an issue, sensationalise it, and then put it at the top of their news for a week - regardless of what else is actually happening.

Originally posted by banesmabes
I think American TV news is usually more biased and partisan and is more likely to have an agenda than British TV news. But I am sure the truth is around for anyone willing enough to find out. Unfortunately I think some of our news is heading the same way - you only have to see some of the 'campaigns' that ITV News decides to run. They pick up on an issue, sensationalise it, and then put it at the top of their news for a week - regardless of what else is actually happening.

^ what was said there ^

American TV is very sensational.

You have to remember that when America refused to sign Kyoto the reason was that it would ruin the economy.

But now it's because global warming does not exist. In that sense they certainly are not being told the truth. There is no debate on global warming, it's been manufactured by finding a few fringe scientists that disagree and holding their view over the heads of hundreds of thousands of other, published scientists. They also highlight just the weaknesses, of the global warming evidence. It's exactly the same people who are pushing ID that are doing this, and they are doing it in the same way. They give the perception that their is a real debate in the scientific community, pick on a simple area (that is for the most part irrelevant to the discussion) and confuse people by saying that part doesn't hold up. With global warming that is the "hockey stick" graph, for ID it's how did natural selection developed a complex thing like the eye?

There is very real doubt in the minds of many Americans about global warming. So not only are they not being told the truth, they also believe what they are being told.

The facts is there is no debate. 2000 of the top scientists (Nobel prize winner, people who have actually had results etc) have signed letters denouncing the misinformation that is being given. http://www.ucsusa.org/

Recently after a report that said obesity was causing lots of health problems, a group financed and created by the fast food agency, put out reports and went on a media blitz to say that was not true. The smoking lobby also disputed the effects of passive smoking. Clearly both of these are crazy, but they do instill doubt and make it look like there is a debate when non exists.

As with any media there are many, many inaccuracies in their reporting. I can take any single news cast, on any channel and tell you a number of inaccurate statements. That's just laziness not somebody, not telling the truth.

The U.S has the worst media I have known, but I am not figuring in too many countries there.

I think the problem is that generally, in most countries of the world, people do not really question what they are told on the news. Most people do not even think about whether it might be a biased opinion and that they may not be covering all sides of the story. I personally am very worried that our news coverage is heading in that very direction. The main news programmes are becoming more and more like tabloid newspapers all the time.

Originally posted by extaxman
I've just come back from a trans Atlantic cruise and have spent a lot of time watching Fox News.

That's your problem right there. Fox News isn't real news, it's propaganda by very rich, white, right-wing men. None of the news channels in America really offer an un-biased view.

PBS is pretty good, NPR for radio.

Originally posted by extaxman
I've just come back from a trans Atlantic cruise and have spent a lot of time watching Fox News. (Yes, I know I'm a sad person but not much else to do in a force 10 gale)...........

....Another thing which caught my eye was that the Americans were told that the recent spate of bombings in Iraq was in the 80's - only when I got back here I found out it was 157!

Come on US readers, what do you think?


I worked on cruise ships for 3 years and the only time that we got satelite TV was when we were docked in port. While on the ocean you can't lock into a signal because you are moving around all over the place. Most news and TV programs are taped. So therefore, old news. That was over 10 yeas ago and technology may have changed. Was it live TV?

Funke88,

Yes it was live news. I was on a brand new ship (Norwegian Jewel) which had Fox News all the way from Dover to New York and live CNN up to Iceland but we lost CNN after that.

In my view the posts so far on this thread do not give a fair and balanced picture of TV news in the US. I use the phrase 'fair and balanced' deliberately, because this is a phrase repeated regularly on Fox news, which often causes me to smile in wry amusement.

Being something of a news junkie, I watched a lot of TV news when I lived in the US. The first thing you should know is that Fox news is at the extreme end of the spectrum in terms of bias. NBC and CNN are much more balanced in their coverage than the former. NBC produces some excellent documentaries as well. But in addition to national channels such as these, there are also many many regional and local channels which vary tremendously in quality.

If there is a weakness common to all US news channels, I would say it was in their almost exclusive interest in US affairs. They tend to be only interested in events outside US borders if there is an American angle of some kind. A foreign event devoid of an American angle has to be very special indeed in order to get any coverage at all. Moreover, the frequency of advertising breaks tends to disrupt the continuity and flow of news considerably, leading to the whole proceedings having an air of superficiality.

The other thing common to most of these channels is the appearance of the newscasters. They almost all have perfect teeth and are carefully coiffured, with not a hair out of place.

Fox News is an entertainment channel, not a news channel

Originally posted by Abdul
Fox News is an entertainment channel, not a news channel

From wry comments and jokes made on other American network comedy programmes and the like, I gathered some time ago that the Fox Channel was generally considered to be a bit of a joke.

I certainly wouldn't use it to get the news! :o I've occasionally come across it on Sky tv when I've been flicking through the channels - all I recall from it are several perfect-looking, robotic people sitting at a table, flashing very white, perfect teeth at the cameras.

Very Stepford wives, totally plastic, totally fake. :gag:

StarSparkle

Starsparkle,

If you are channel hopping, you are lucky to find any news on Fox news. Most of the channel seems to be taken up with interminable static and irrelevant weather pages.

The best thing about Fox News is the Bill O'Reilly show. Agree with him or not, he is a very clever and accomplished debater. He usually chooses interesting topics to debate as well. Their legal eagle Greta Van Susteren (who they poached from CNN) is also pretty sharp (I noticed though that she had a makeover when she made the switch to Fox. They must have a company account for capped and crowned teeth at Fox News. I think she looked far better - i.e. much more natural - before the makeover.

Sky has a very low bit rate for Fox News, so the picture usually looks dreadful and the lipsynch is also usually out - making the presenters look even more like waxwork dummies than they would otherwise.

I do think all television news, particularly that bound for satellite channels, suffers enormously from the inability to concentrate on any news item in enough depth, and the overriding necessity to provide pictures of some sort, regardless of whether one is required.

Hey Abdul - The Fox News Channel is a the news media branch of the Fox Multimedia Corporation. Fox News is not Fox Entertainment. Strangely enough it has better ratings than CNN and MSNBC?

Originally posted by LordChaverly

.... Their legal eagle Greta Van Susteren (who they poached from CNN) is also pretty sharp (I noticed though that she had a makeover when she made the switch to Fox. They must have a company account for capped and crowned teeth at Fox News. I think she looked far better - i.e. much more natural - before the makeover...

Makeover? Before the start of her show "On The Record" she had a nose job and surgery to remove the bags under her eyes. I think she looks much better. During the OJ case she looked incredibly frumpy and dowdy.

As for Bill O'Reilly, he's great. Sarcastic, opinionated, bolshy. Must have some English in him!

Anybody like Geraldo Rivera? Now he's a trip!! He gets all emotional. Very good reporter during the Hurricane Katrina coverage. He had me crying.

Originally posted by back2basics
PBS is pretty good, NPR for radio.

I have to agree about PBS and NPR. For the most part, they are very even-handed about their reporting. However, I have noticed a strong pro-Israel bias in NPR’s reporting.

Originally posted by Funke88
Makeover? Before the start of her show "On The Record" she had a nose job and surgery to remove the bags under her eyes. I think she looks much better. During the OJ case she looked incredibly frumpy and dowdy.

As for Bill O'Reilly, he's great. Sarcastic, opinionated, bolshy. Must have some English in him!

Anybody like Geraldo Rivera? Now he's a trip!! He gets all emotional. Very good reporter during the Hurricane Katrina coverage. He had me crying.

But she provided excellent and authoritative legal analysis in a way ordinary viewers could understand. I think that in a way her looks added to her air of authority in that it was obvious that whe was on TV because of what she knew rather than what she looked like. I think its a little sad that she (or her employers) feel the need to remodel her face so that she is more 'presentable'. I doubt whether they would have gone to the same lengths for a male presenter.

I agree with you about O'Reilly. I doubt though whether he would thank you for saying that he must have some English in him. He is an Irish-American.

As for Rivera, what a complete jerk he is. He was the man who held a mock trial of the Benet Ramsay case and pronounced the parents guilty as charged - when it is now widely accepted that they are completely innocent. He is the guy who went to Afghanistan with a loaded gun looking for Bin laden. His antics and publicity stunts make those portrayed in Drop The Dead Donkey positively tame in comparison.

I think this thread has gone a little off course.

I'm not really interested in which is the best American news channel or their presenters. What I would like to know is if the Americans realise that their news programmes may be lying to them.

For a start let's have some replies from people in the US on if they have been told that the CFC's (coolant gases in fridges) are harmful to the ozone layer? Are there any special ways of disposing of old fridges as there are in the UK?

Yes i think Americans are told the truth by Fox news, also by your own Sarah Baxter of the Sunday Times, she says it like it is.

Fox, really!!! I do think the US media has improved recently but Fox!!!

Originally posted by Chicago
However, I have noticed a strong pro-Israel bias in NPR’s reporting.

With the exception of the NY Time I think every media organization in the U.S has a pro-Israel bias. That's part of American life I think.. and Americans would say the European press has a pro-Palestine bias. Neither show the full story. Hate to say it but the only news organization that report the biggest part of any war story are Al Gezera (sp), they actually show the most important part of war, death.

One of the major untruths in the American media is just that. Americans are shielded from death. Be it the Iraq war, New Orleans, American casualties.. it's just not shown as much as other countries I have lived in. And I will hear "nobody wants to see that". But if a war is being fought with your money, and in your name, I think you have a responsibility to at least expose yourself to some of the destruction and death, so you have a perspective to your views.

Originally posted by extaxman
For a start let's have some replies from people in the US on if they have been told that the CFC's (coolant gases in fridges) are harmful to the ozone layer? Are there any special ways of disposing of old fridges as there are in the UK?

er yes....

In Illinois, where I live, the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) requires that old refrigerators have the chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) refrigerant gas (Freon) removed prior to sending them to landfills. This has been in effect since July 1, 1994.
:thumbsup:

Originally posted by Snook
That's your problem right there. Fox News isn't real news, it's propaganda by very rich, white, right-wing men. None of the news channels in America really offer an un-biased view.

There is a compelling documentary called Outfoxed (http://www.thezreview.co.uk/dvdreviews/o/outfoxed.htm)

that ought to be watched by everyone who has the slighest interest in this thread !

Thanks Chicago, at last, an answer straight to the point.

Are Americans told the truth?

What a naive question, of course they aren't!

What government body would be stupid enough to do that?
Governments tell the people what they think they need to know and what they hope they will believe... And that goes for OUR government too!

To demonstrate just the tip of the iceberg... In the early days of satellite broadcasting, I realigned my dish to pick up the signals from a different source. I discovered that I could receive raw news broadcasts from this other satellite and they were most interesting... This was long before they got wise and encrypted the transmissions.

Each separate news item was preceded by an ident, a screen showing a second-hand and the source of the clip. Many a time I saw the unedited version of what was later shown on the evening news. I soon realised that we, the public, were being fed a very watered-down version of actual events.

There was, for example, a report of an attack on our troop vehicles, submitted by a reporter who had been in the same convoy. This showed in great detail, the aftermath of the attack, a badly damaged vehicle with dismembered body-parts scattered around it, injured men screaming, blood staining a wide area of the road and soldiers using the foulest language imaginable, swearing vengeance on the attackers and using most decidedly non-PC terms to do so.

That was the truth of the incident... In the edited version shown on the evening news, the vehicle that had been attacked was shown as viewed from a distance, no recorded audio from the scene and a commentators voice-over stating calmly that three soldiers were killed and two seriously wounded when a bomb exploded under their patrol vehicle. The commentary wasn't that of the reporter at the scene, his voice had been shocked and upset, this was a smooth establishment voice, describing the attack.

Admittedly, in the UK, we expect such news to be sanitised before it's presented for our consumption and I don't disagree with that, having regard to the feelings of the relatives, but it makes me wonder just how much more of 'the truth' is doctored before it reaches us.

To illustrate what I mean, in addition to the second-hand and the location on the ident, shown before each clip was transmitted, occasionally there was the instruction "Not For UK Use" printed across the bottom of it. Some of these clips dealt with events in little-known foreign countries, of little or no topical interest to the UK... Fair enough... But sometimes they dealt with items that wouldn't be helpful to the current establishment, in one instance some of our government dignitaries were attending a foreign reception when banner-waving protestors invaded the building, shouting anti-british slogans and hurling missiles at the dignitaries... all good, exciting stuff... but did it ever appear on the news?... What do YOU think?

Another clip that, had it been shown in full, would have almost certainly increased the viewing figures greatly, was when some high-up from a foreign land was visiting the UK and was being given the full red-carpet treatment, regimental band and all...

I saw him exit the aircraft, raise a hand in greeting to the assembly, walk down a couple of steps, topple ar$e over apex and land at the foot of the stairs in a heap.

That evening, the viewers of the news saw him exit, greet the crowd and a split second later he was shaking the hands of those stood in line to welcome him... Not a hint he'd nearly broken his neck walking down the stairs...

So are the Americans, or anyone else for that matter, told the truth? Well, the truthful answer has to be NO!

Belirve it or not, we do know about CFCs. We have known about them for a very long time. It is a federal offence to release freon into the air, subject to 25 years in jail if caught and convicted. I object to people saying we are dumb and stupid and uninformed. We are nothing of the kind. If we choose not to get all steamed up about it that's our business. Yes, we are more interested in what is going on inside our border than outside it. I think I can trust the New York Times better than the Daily Mirror or the Sun. Maybe our waitresses do ask you five times if your meal is OK, but at least they act like they care about you. Have you noticed your wait staff lately.
I cannot understand why this forum has to attack America every second week or so. Have you nothing better to do with your time. I'm sorry if we have a better life than you making you jealous. Maybe we should send you some CARE packages like we used to.

If the Brits want it explained to them why they are so jealous of the Americans they can just e mail their own Sarah Baxter of their Sunday times.....

sabaxter@davidson.edu.

Originally posted by poppins
If the Brits want it explained to them why they are so jealous of the Americans they can just e mail their own Sarah Baxter of their Sunday times.....

sabaxter@davidson.edu.

Thanks! I sent her this. I will post any responce i get.

I know 50 million Americans would love free healthcare. I am sure every elderly person in the U.S would love to pay $10 for their prescriptions. Diabetics also. All the people who put off getting healthcare because they cannot afford $1000 for an x-ray, I am sure they are jealous of people in England. Or the ones with no teeth, because they didn't have the $250 for a filling. Or the people who live off burgers and corn because they cannot afford fresh fruit and veg.

American wages are pretty much around the same level as England now. For years the real world wages in America have been in decline. Less people unemployed in the UK, I am sure the unemployed and people in poverty in the U.S are jealous of people in England. I am sure the kids un the U.S today are not looking forward to paying China back the largest amount of debt a country has ever accrued. When services like Medicaid and Social Security are due to be bankrupt in 20-30 years time. While schools go bankrupt and year on year the education standards drop, less people get good educations and compared to the other western countries the quality of graduates keeps on slipping.

I know MANY Americans who are jealous of the cost of education in England. People who come to England to study and have to pay tens of thousands more for some of the best education in the World.

Yeah if you have a household income of $100,000 you have a good life in the U.S. But that's only about 5% of households.

But the pure arrogance of people who assume that the World is just jealous of them is not only misguided, it's pure fantasy. What is the process at work here? Why would somebody make a statement like "the reason you critasize is either because you hate America or you are jealous." Well firstly, which is it? Are we anti-American or do we love America so much we are jealous? Why would anybody be jealous of something they hate? But the people saying that are saying it from a very limited view of the World, and are saying it because they are angry, not logical. I don't know why somebody would be angry because others are jealous of them. Or is it because they are saying people are jealous because they are angry? Quiet a difference in motivation there.

Today it is a fallacy that Americans have the best lifestyle in the World. It hasn't been true for a number of years now and it's never been true for the vast majority of Americans who are not so well off.

So a journalist, living in America getting paid a good wage by a British company is having a good life in NY. Good for her! The weakness of the dollar must be supplementing her wage a little. Does she take any of this in to account? Of course not. Because she is not one of the 50 Million uninsured (a group of people almost as large as the population of the U.K) . Or the 14% of the population below the poverty line, she does not have to use food stamps to buy food. She doesn't meet many of the illiterate in America. She, like most middle class Americans, are shielded from that poverty. They do not have to see it.

I know many Gay people in America who are very jealous of the liberties given to gay people in other countries. Who are not told they are perverts by the angry men on the radio.

I know American scientists are jealous of others. So jealous in some cases that are moving to countries that do not limit their work. Are not told by politicians who know nothing about science that they cannot study life saving treatments.

What about those people who lost babies? In a country with the best doctors and facilities in the World, but has a infant mortality rate worse than Cuba. I bet they are jealous of of the people of Singapore, with a rate almost a third lower.

I am sure there are not many people in Soho in NY who are jealous of those living in Scunthorpe. But I am sure some who live in Harlem are. But that does not make if ok for some totally out of touch journalist to make a vast generalization and get paid for it.

The point is jealousy runs both ways. You see? I am sure the bottom 40% of the UK, could be jealous of the top 10% of America. But are the bottom 40% of America jealous of the bottom 40% of England? But when we have a small group of American (and now even ex-pats) who assume the world is jealous, that's how they justify the criticism, they really are pretty blinkered to the big picture in America. When a country has to resort to "anti-Americanism" you know the intellectual high ground has been lost, and the points no longer ring true, they have run out of debate and out of credibility.

From where you are sitting Sarah Baxter, ignorance must be bliss. Must be time for some more generalization and a mimosa Sarah. Have a nice day, maybe Prada has a sale at the moment.

Now you've got that off your chest, back2, I hope you feel a little better. It's funny, with all the ills you claim for a country you know damn all about, that people around the world still seek to enter and live here. I know you could never get a green card with your attitude, but that's no reason to spew bile.
Are there no homeless in London? What is so perfect about your National Health that permitted my cousin to die of colon cancer because he couldn't get a biopsy in time. I survived throat cancer here because I could get one in time.
I do not nor have I ever earned $100,000 a year. As a retiree I currently make about a quarter of that. Yet I have excellent health coverage, and own my own home. Do you know what it is. It is called thrift. We do not rely on a beneficent government, with all its rules and regulations to cover our every problem.
Don't believe every thing the Mirror or Guardian tell you. They have to sell newspapers along with all the T and A that you all seem to need every day.
Yes, I'm an ex-pat, but my children and grandchildren all speak with American accents, and I will defend their homeland agaainst the bias that exists in this forum to the letter.
So put that in your pipe and smoke it, or go and eat your quiche.

Originally posted by buck
Now you've got that off your chest, back2, I hope you feel a little better. It's funny, with all the ills you claim for a country you know damn all about, that people around the world still seek to enter and live here. I know you could never get a green card with your attitude, but that's no reason to spew bile.
Are there no homeless in London? What is so perfect about your National Health that permitted my cousin to die of colon cancer because he couldn't get a biopsy in time. I survived throat cancer here because I could get one in time.
I do not nor have I ever earned $100,000 a year. As a retiree I currently make about a quarter of that. Yet I have excellent health coverage, and own my own home. Do you know what it is. It is called thrift. We do not rely on a beneficent government, with all its rules and regulations to cover our every problem.
Don't believe every thing the Mirror or Guardian tell you. They have to sell newspapers along with all the T and A that you all seem to need every day.
Yes, I'm an ex-pat, but my children and grandchildren all speak with American accents, and I will defend their homeland agaainst the bias that exists in this forum to the letter.
So put that in your pipe and smoke it, or go and eat your quiche.

I posses a green card thank you. In fact I worked over here for the government on a work visa for 4 years. I worked for the VA and I saw how vet's are treated after they defended their country. I have seen how they had to fight for care. How the vets who were mentally ill were drugged and forgotten. Who now stand on street corners with signs begging for food. I see this every day. How will the guys in Iraq be treated? With all that depleted uranium? They just cut the budget again for vets, at a time of war.

I didn't say there were not homeless in London. I was responding to ignorance.

I didn't say the national health service was perfect.

I am glad you have good health coverage. Millions have non at all. I am glad you are happy with the amount of poverty in America. I am not and the good Americans i know are not either. And those millions do not have health insurance so that the top people in the country can have a better life. If you think that is fair, if you think Social Dawinism is just fine and dandy then i feel quiet sorry for you. The whole world saw how this system of government with no "rules and regulations" worked in New Orleans. How red tape and fear of legal procedings stopped people from getting treatement. We saw how poverty can kill, and you attack me for being wrong?

I don't read the Mirror or Guardian. I live in Chicago, all the details are details from U.S government or world bank studies.

I love quiche.

So you were wrong.. erm.. yes with everything (apart from the Quiche comment). Congratulations for genralizing, assuming and generally "spewing bile". If you can point to one thing in my post that is incorrect i would be very impressed, if you cannot then maybe you should reavaluate? Or you will just defend America no matter what the facts are?

This is not about being anti-American, it's about wanting better for America. Get America back to what it used to be. I am invested in this country. I am sorry sir, but if you do not expect better for America and Americans it is YOU that are anti-American.

first off your health care is NOT free, you're all paying for it with your high taxes and high cost of living...... think about it though, have you ever known an American emigrate to England to live ?

Originally posted by poppins
first off your health care is NOT free, you're all paying for it with your high taxes and high cost of living...... think about it though, have you ever known an American emigrate to England to live ?

Actually, I've come across quite a few....

StarSparkle

living in America has certain benefits as does living here. I personally prefer to live here but that is my own opinion. I see nothing to be gained with this US bs UK slanging match tbh.

Originally posted by StarSparkle
Actually, I've come across quite a few....

StarSparkle

A few, thats about it, did they emigrate for a better life style ?

Originally posted by poppins
first off your health care is NOT free, you're all paying for it with your high taxes and high cost of living...... think about it though, have you ever known an American emigrate to England to live ?

I have yes. Lots. My wife included. And our Children will be educated in England.

I know people who have been to Oxford, Cambridge and LSE and stayed. I know a scientist who recently moved to the U.K to study stem cells. I have met Americans all over the country, not just in London.

It's not free no. It costs less in taxation to keep people in healthcare in the U.K than America spends on it's military. So all those 50 Million uninsured, could be given healthcare, poverty could be wiped out if only America cut it's military budget.

Taxation in the UK is not all that much higher. Income tax is 33% in the U.S. The basic rate in the UK is 22% and goes up to 40% for the higher tax band (anything over $50,000). So for your regular people, people who ear about $20,000 to $40,000 a year the tax is LESS in the U.K. And you get so much more for that taxation (better social saftey net, lower prescription costs, free healthcare).

Cost of living when all is said and done it about the same. London is expensive. NY, LA and Chicago are expensive. Kansas is cheap, Bradford is cheap. Cars are expensive in the U.K, basic food stuffs like eggs, bread, chicken, fish and veg are expensive in the U.S.

So knowing that the U.K's tax is less (for the majority of people), and more is given, has that changed your mind?

Originally posted by robbie
living in America has certain benefits as does living here.

EXACTLY! But you ever heard an English man say you are critical of England because you are jealous? Could you ever imagine that?

Originally posted by poppins
first off your health care is NOT free, you're all paying for it with your high taxes and high cost of living...... think about it though, have you ever known an American emigrate to England to live ?

Sorry poppins, but yes.

Apart from people like Madonna and Gwyneth Paltrow (although she may be heading back to the US now), I've worked with a number of IT professionals who've come to live here from the mid 1980s onwards.

On a wider basis, figures from the 2001 census indicated over 155,000 people in the UK were born in the United States and have come here to live.

The USA is the fifth most common coutry of birth outside the UK of immigrants to the UK, after India, Pakistan, Germany and the Carribean.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/uk/05/born_abroad/countries/html/overview.stm

Joe

Originally posted by poppins
A few, thats about it, did they emigrate for a better life style ?

Several of the people I've met actually came here for a better standard of living - that may be subtly different.

In the last few years I've encountered one person here who came because they didn't like the current incumbent in the White House, just as some people quit the UK over the years because of tax regimes, etc.

There are advantages to living in the US, and advantages to living in the UK. Why can't people just accept that each country has pros and cons and live with it?

Joe

Originally posted by poppins
A few, thats about it, did they emigrate for a better life style ?

"Have you ever known an American emigrate to England to live?" was what you originally said, I believe. My answer to that questions was "Yes".

When called on your claim, you promptly change it to only "a few, that's about it". Why don't you just admit that some people obviously prefer living in the UK to the USA?

I've lived in several different places in Britain over the years and have come across Americans living in nearly all of them. They have all been successful professional people, mostly in academia or IT. They seemed to like living here just fine.

And I've never lived in London, where I expect most ex-patriate Americans are to be found..... like Madonna or Gwyneth Paltrow, who you'd think would have the best of everything the USA has to offer.

StarSparkle

Originally posted by JoeP
There are advantages to living in the US, and advantages to living in the UK. Why can't people just accept that each country has pros and cons and live with it?


It even goes further than that Joe IMHO.

It's not just that there are good points and bad points to each. Which clearly there are. And IMHO if the best were taken from both we would have a great country indeed... but it's subjective. It's up the the individual. The anti-American/your all jealous crowd, or the "reporter" i wrote to cannot understand why somebody would like to live in France, or Spain for the culture.. even though the GDP is lower or rate of tax is higher. Some people just cannot see why on earth everybody in the World doesn't want to up and come and live in America. Some people really believe that your stupid for not wanting to, or that deep down everybody does want to.

That mind set has been well illustrated in this and the other threads. And the people trying to make the case as to why America is not perfect, or point out where England is better are anti-American or biased, without even knowing anything about that person, their motivation or what they want from life.

My motivation is two fold. I really don't like it when English people who do not see what a wonderfull place they live. And how good they have it. And the people i outlined who feel that because their personal feelings are that America is perfect (but clearly are missing some very big points) project that on others and expect them to also feel the same.

Can I get a word in edgeways here please?

I asked a simple question which has been answered in full and I now want to apologise for this thread turning anti American. I did not intend that and hope that this will be an end to it.

I have no argument with Americans in fact I get on well with them - lets all try to live together peacefully please despite what our respective leaders may be doing.

Who is being anti-american?

You tell us everything that is wrong with us with the simple arrogance of presumption that everything is OK with the UK, one of god's englishmen, and yet you have no answers on how to cure what's wrong with us.
If you are a green card holder and I don't doubt it for a minute, you might be able to help by becoming a citizen and helping elect the right people for the job. If not then you're only here to make a few bucks out of us and contribute nothing but scorn. We would be better off if you gave up your space to someone who likes being here.

Does this mean we can get rid of Madge and her awful husband?

Originally posted by buck
You tell us everything that is wrong with us with the simple arrogance of presumption that everything is OK with the UK, one of god's englishmen, and yet you have no answers on how to cure what's wrong with us.
If you are a green card holder and I don't doubt it for a minute, you might be able to help by becoming a citizen and helping elect the right people for the job. If not then you're only here to make a few bucks out of us and contribute nothing but scorn. We would be better off if you gave up your space to someone who likes being here.

look what really annoys me about this debate is the lack of substance. I have said before that I hate "America" but I'm fed up with people taking a cheap pop without anything to back it up. I feel tjhat for some reason there has suddenly aoppeared to be several anti US topics sprung up for no reason.

what is the point of just having a go?

I'm not one who ever said Americans don't settle in UK.I met many when I lived there, some who served with the USAF and never went back. They pay Britain a great compliment by enjoying life there. People back home like that. So what is so different for us ex pats liking the US, and yet we're sometimes called traitors. Many of us bring our skills and likeable traits to this country, and are well liked. We don't post anti british threads at every opportunity. What's the point of doing that except to show everybody what a big shot you are, when all you are is a big mouth.

I am sure that most people who read this forum, with the exception of a small minority, agree that neither the US nor the UK is perfect. Arguing who has a better country is like arguing "which is better, apples or oranges?"

Pointing out flaws in either country does not make you anti-American or anti-British. However, complaining and not acting is hypocritical. There is an old saying: “put your money where your mouth is.” Donate money or time to a good cause. Seek out lobbyist groups in either country who can make a difference or social groups whose main objective is to improve the lives of those who are less fortunate.

Anyone do anything constructive lately?

:)

Originally posted by Chicago
I am sure that most people who read this forum, with the exception of a small minority, agree that neither the US nor the UK is perfect. Arguing who has a better country is like arguing "which is better, apples or oranges?"
You got that right, Chicago... at least as far as i'm concerned and I'm sure, many others... Peace, brother...

Originally posted by Chicago
I am sure that most people who read this forum, with the exception of a small minority, agree that neither the US nor the UK is perfect. Arguing who has a better country is like arguing "which is better, apples or oranges?"

Pointing out flaws in either country does not make you anti-American or anti-British. However, complaining and not acting is hypocritical. There is an old saying: “put your money where your mouth is.” Donate money or time to a good cause. Seek out lobbyist groups in either country who can make a difference or social groups whose main objective is to improve the lives of those who are less fortunate.

Anyone do anything constructive lately?

:) The last thing to do with US polictics I did was send an email to some hapless US voter, urging them to vote democrat. I bet it actually convinced them to vote for the GOP. Back to the drawing board (I have just invented 'hypno-gas' in time for the next US election....but may end up using it here instead)

There is to be today, a massive gathering in DC of anti Iraq war people, part of which includes a group of people dedicated to the unlikely impeachment of the worst president in US history. After all to do so would only put Uncle Dick Cheney in charge.That would be a shift from moron to despot.
The Rush Limbaughs, Bill O'Rileys, Ann Coulters, and Sean Hannitys will scream invective and lies for the next 3 years at anything considered liberal, like care for the elderly, environment, women, or children. They will ensure that the next liberal candidate, if he happens to be a war hero, is smeared as a coward, quite forgetting that one already is living in the White House, or if its a she like Hillary, she's had eight secret abortions or walks the streets of Manhattan late at night looking for a trick.
Anyway, his approval ratings are somewhere in the lower thirties, so let's keep them that way, so we can return to a gallon of gas at $1.49.
If you don't hear from me for a while it may be that I have been
visited by the FBI and my address is now Fort Leavenworth.

To be 'fair and balanced' towards Fox News, we should recognise that they do sometimes have good debates on controversial issues. For example, Bill O'Reilly allowed Phil Donaghue, a fierce and articulate critic of the Iraq war, onto his show the other day. In my opinion O'Reilly got more than he bargained for. Although O'Reilly is a skilled and persuasive debater, I think he met his match in Donaghue. It was the first time i have seen O'Reilly rattled and struggling for words. What i think this goes to show is that even a formidable debater such as O'Reilly has difficulty in defending the invasion and occupation of Iraq. The news channels are also giving a lot of coverage to Cindy Sheehan's protest campaign also, which also tends to belie the popular stereotype about blinkered news coverage in the US.

Originally posted by LordChaverly
ToAlthough O'Reilly is a skilled and persuasive debater
Huh? He just shouts loudly over the top of whomever he's debating with and makes stuff up. I'll never forget what he did to that kid whose dad had died in the WTC.

Originally posted by headup
Huh? He just shouts loudly over the top of whomever he's debating with and makes stuff up. I'll never forget what he did to that kid whose dad had died in the WTC.

Well, that's the Fox news style. Verbal punchups attract viewers. But underneath the bluster and hectoring manner, O'Reilly is I would wager quite bright (I hasten to add I disagree with his views on many subjects, including the Iraq war). He is paid to attract and keep viewers and this he does.

He met his match with Al Franken, and finished up screaming " Shut up " at the top of his voice. Fair and balanced indeed!

Originally posted by buck
He met his match with Al Franken, and finished up screaming " Shut up " at the top of his voice. Fair and balanced indeed!

being a card carrying, cardigan and sandal wearing liberal, I enjoyed franken's book, "Lies, and the Lying Liars that tell them, a fair and balanced look at the right".

A good read, if you like to see the myth of liberal left bias in US media exploded in front of you and have revealed the less salubrious linguistic mangling that goes in US political commentary. Harps on a bit at the end though...