
To Make America Great Again, We Need to Leave the Country - NeilRShah
http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/07/to-make-america-great-again-we-need-to-leave-the-country/259653/
======
greggman
I agree with this. My eyes opened I ways I never expected by living abroad. I
thought America was safe and it is compared to Somalia but not compared to may
other contries. I didn't notice this because I've been trained to ignore it.
I've been trained not to walk down dark alleys. I've been trained not to leave
anything visible in a car when I park it or else it will get broken into. When
it had been broken into Ive been trained to blame myself for leaving something
visible or parking too near the wrong neighborhood. But living abroad I
learned some countries don't have these issues. Then benefit from them too.
There are vending machines outdoors all over Japan for example, in America
they'd have long since been vandalized. In Japan there are amazing double size
car stereos because they don't have to worry about car stereo theft. Sorry I
don't have better examples at the moment.

I also learned many false assumptions. For example even though logically as an
athiest i knew morals don't come from a deity the number of assumptions and
thought paths I had ... Uh.. Thought or read about that clearly came from a
christian influenced society really stuck out.

Cultural differences as well like maybe there's some positive aspects to a
more collectivits society vs an individualist society like America.

It's hard to articulate how much impact living abroad had.

Another is just how much "yay us!!!" there is. I watched a Ken Burns
documentary where it seemed that every other line was "Only in America". We've
heard that so much we take it for granted without actually checking if it's
true. Every country has this issue. It's only living outside that will make it
stick out IMO

In not saying America sucks. Each country and culture has trade offs but until
you truly spend time experiencing those differences you'll likely be unaware
such differences even exist.

Unfortunately I don't expect enough people will ever live abroad

~~~
mike-cardwell
I have never lived abroad, but everything you've said is obvious to me,
because I interact with and learn about the World outside my country and have
a natural tendency to question anything that politicians or people in power
have to say.

People don't need to live abroad to come to these conclusions. I suspect that
you're probably mistaken that living abroad did this to you, and that it would
have happened anyway. It's what happens to (most) intelligent people as they
age and mature.

EDIT: Re vending machines on the street, I visited Connecticut once and where
I stayed, there were boxes on the street that you can put money in and take a
paper out of. I'm from the UK and if you had that here, it would be fine in a
lot of places, but in some places, people would set fire to them for fun. Re
car crime, on the same visit I noticed that people were leaving their car
windows open in a car park (it was very hot). Like hell would I risk that in
this country, but I'm sure there are plenty of places where it would be fine.
Every country has their share of good and bad areas. Anecdotes are fairly
useless here.

~~~
mbesto
> *People don't need to live abroad to come to these conclusions.

Yes, yes they do. Actually you're right, it's not a panacea, and to most
intelligent people they gain this wisdom with age and maturity. However, we
have a serious media problem in the US that doesn't always tell the truth. So,
it's extremely difficult to learn about the world outside the American bubble.

Also, I did notice you are from the UK. It's much more culturally accepted to
learn about the World outside of the UK. America, not so much.

...and how did I come to this conclusion? Because I'm American and live in
your country! This isn't some sweeping generalization I heard on the news, I
concluded it after having lived here. You'd be shocked how little Americans
know and understand about the World.

~~~
jballanc
One thing that occurred to me only after leaving the US: only in America can
you consider yourself "educated" or "well cultured" and yet have never been to
a place where the people did not speak your language!

Isolationism has always been the biggest threat to America's success. I wonder
if it's only coincidence that the height of America's power came after it sent
a large chunk of its young population overseas?

------
sien
As someone who has lived in the US, AU & the EU in a few places I'd have to
say this article is great. It's something you wind up doing if you live in
other places.

America is #1 in quite a few things, such as software, just try naming non-US
software companies that matter, it's an interesting exercise. Also the US
highway system is excellent, the US's culture of entrepreneurship is also
awesome. The best US colleges are the best in the world. US computer games, TV
shows (Breaking Bad/Mad Men/Louie/The Sopranos etc) and other things are great
from the US.

But in many things the rest of the rest world laughs at the US. US High School
education, for instance, is not well regarded. The US health care system is
regarded as scary and pretty poor.

There are even other countries that are really good at seeing things overseas
and copying. Australia, for instance, got a points based immigration system
from Canada, Universal Saving for retirement from Singapore and looked around
the world for ways to reform the Australian Reserve Bank.

~~~
w1ntermute
> US High School education, for instance, is not well regarded.

I think this is a bit disingenuous. I would say that the US high school system
is not _equitable_. It works just fine for the upper middle class on up. It's
the lower class that gets screwed over by the way things are set up.

~~~
chrischen
Yes just try comparing Detroit public schools with that of the suburbs and
you'll realize no one can make general statements about how crappy US schools
are.

~~~
rickmb
You both realize you're only emphasizing one of the main reasons why the US
educations system isn't well regarded?

~~~
ams6110
Everything is local.

------
uvdiv
_Even when it comes to the "pursuit of happiness," enshrined in our
Declaration of Independence as one of the noble goals of government, our
citizens are only the 15th most satisfied with their lives._

The text asserts the right of men [mankind] to pursue happiness, not the goal
of government to provide it!

~~~
firefoxman1
That is such an excellent point. I don't know if this is an issue found in
other countries as much as here, but I find (especially during election times)
people take such pride in what they achieve, but blame the government for what
they don't. It doesn't help when politicians are publicly using this attitude
as a major part of their strategy.

~~~
punee
It is an issue that is found in other countries proportionately to the
prevalence of socialism. The French, for instance, will not only blame
everything on the government (or people who have had success), but _expect_
everything from it (find me a job, keep me healthy, save my company from
bankruptcy, provide me with nice state-sponsored TV fiction championing the
values of "diversity", etc.). You don't want America to go down that road.

~~~
_delirium
Having lived in both the United States and Denmark, I think I _would_ like
America to go at least slightly more down that road. It frees up a lot of
individual decision-making if very basic things are taken care of. Even in the
U.S., nobody expects you to contract for your own police officers to
investigate a crime if you get shot. Denmark just takes it a bit further and
says you shouldn't have to contract for the ambulance and hospital that treat
the gunshot wound, either. That frees you up to work on things that actually
matter. Not having healthcare tied to employment frees up many options as
well.

------
oofabz
One area where we lag behind the rest of the world is our voting system. In
1992 Clinton was elected with 43% of the vote because Perot split the
Republicans. In 2000 Bush was elected with 48% because Nader split the
Democrats.

This kind of voting system has been mathematically proven to create a two-
party system (Duverger's Law). In many other countries they use runoff voting,
so if no one gets 50%, they hold another round of voting with the top two
candidates. This way you can vote for whoever you want without worrying about
letting the wrong guy win. And it works - check out these numbers from
France's 2012 election:

\- 29% Hollande \- 27% Sarkozy \- 18% Le Pen \- 11% Melenchon \- 9% Bayrou

That could never happen in America. Our voting system is rigged to favor the
Republicans and the Democrats. It's like choosing between DSL and cable - one
may be better than the other but they both suck. How much brighter would our
future be if we had more choices?

~~~
ubernostrum
One thing I've never seen answered:

Has anyone actually stopped to figure out how multi-party systems really
scale? India is the largest in the world, but also A) has Euro-style
population density and B) is maybe not such a great example of a functioning
representative government. France and Germany are better examples of
governments that mostly work, but are dealing with a fraction of the US
population and order-of-magnitude differences in density and geographic area
compared to the US.

And, tellingly, what I know of French and German politics is basically that,
while in theory there are a bunch of parties and there are places where they
can pick up a seat or two... they're still two-party in the sense that they
tend to develop stable, long-lived pairs of large dominant parties, who in
turn are the only ones with a shot at forming a government. Every once in a
while a third party gets just big enough to play kingmaker, but that's about
it. And that doesn't sound like enough of a sweeping change to justify
rebooting the entire system.

~~~
oofabz
France and Germany are not so two-party. In the 53 years of France's current
government, they have elected presidents from four parties. In the 22 years
since German reunification, they have had presidents from three parties and
one independent.

Meanwhile, in the last 159 years, the US has only had Democrats and
Republicans.

Also, even if minor parties do not get elected, they offer healthy competition
and keep the main parties on their toes. Candidates in the US hate to present
concrete plans or answer specific questions. They only have one opponent, so
they take the least controversial stance that will differentiate them against
the other guy. Offering more information than this minimum required is bad
strategy.

If other parties were in the running, candidates would be forced to take
positions and offer plans, because they have to differentiate themselves from
several opponents.

I don't think changing how we elect people counts as "rebooting the entire
system". We would have to eliminate the electoral college, but who would be
against that? It is a relic left over from the days when local election
results had to travel on horseback with a trusted messenger.

~~~
randomafrican
>France and Germany are not so two-party. In the 53 years of France's current
government, they have elected presidents from four parties.

It's really two and a half. De Gaulle - Pompidou - Chirac -Sarkozy were part
of the same party that morphed and changed names everytime there was a new
leader. Miterrand - Hollande are the other. Giscard was a one-term president
from a party that has always been a junior partner of Main Right-Center party.
So he's the half.

And German presidents don't count. You have to look at the Chancellor. It has
been CDU or SDP since 1945 except for nine days.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Chancellors_of_Germany>

~~~
oofabz
Does Germany hold runoff elections? It looks like Merkel won in 2009 with only
34% of the vote. If they use the same system that the US does, that is
probably why their elections only choose between the main two parties.

~~~
randomafrican
Actually, the Chancellor is elected by the bundestag and not directly by
voters. And yes, it is required that more than half of the bundestag votes for
the candidate.

------
stinos
Just today I was reading an interview with a Belgian journalist/writer, Bjorn
Soenens, who travelled through America and wrote a boook about it's current
state, on all levels. His conclusions were pretty much the same as in this
article, although I'd also say 'darker'. Some claims he made, which I cannot
verify but would love to hear comments about [I have the impression he's
rather pessimistic and mainly lifts out the bad things; there's only a couple
of good things he has to say about America. But even then, it's not exactly
good news]:

\- lots of people still believing strongly in the American Dream, thinking
'one day I'll be rich'. Resulting in hardly any complaints when the taxes are
lowered for the rich poeple. Resulting in an even bigger gap between poor and
rich, and a middle class that is evaporating

\- it's a miracle there hasn't been a revolution. Occupy Wall Street came
close, but now they went underground

\- people living in their cars

\- 'Reaganomics': low taxes, low influence of the government, maximum freedom
for private initiative. Which basically resulted in the crisis. Another
example: New Orleans during Katrina. Since Reagan the government didn't watch
the dikes anymore nor built new ones, seems there were also holes in them, in
the spirit that everyone would took ther own initiative when things went bad.
Resulting in a disaster.

\- the media only report loudly on being pro or contra something. Not about
the fact that there are always more poor people for instance [this is
definitely differen in Europe]

\- universities like Harvard will remain good because the elite puts money in
them, but the rest of the education system is a mess, resulting in students
that can hardly read and write [really?]

\- a lot of Americans will either not believe claims like these, or be shocked

\- Obama is actually doing very well, but gets the wind ahead from all areas,
esp Tea Party, which is a shame

~~~
smsm42
If you think OWS came close to revolution you should switch the brand that
you're smoking, it's not good for you :)

OWS was completely insignificant movement without goals, purpose, ideology,
leadership, ability or understanding of anything that happens in the society.
It was overhyped, mostly by sensation-seeking reporters that want
clicks/eyeballs to run ads and by leftist press outlets because they wanted
their own Tea Party (which of course no revolution either, but at least had
some successes to boast).

~~~
uvdiv
You've misread -- `stinos' isn't the one saying these things, he's quoting a
Belgian journalist. He disclaimed that he doesn't know if these are accurate
depictions and asked HN for comment.

~~~
stinos
exactly. Though the fact smsm42 claims it was overhyped seems to prove the
point on the way the media reports.

------
fingerprinter
I'm an American living in AU, going to move to Canada.

Couple of thoughts.

1\. Family was discussing where to live. US didn't really come up as an option
because of healthcare and education. Things are generally cheaper in the US,
but standard of living for our kids was considered more important. Canada in
particular is very close, nearly as cheap and has better education and
healthcare. Win-Win.

2\. People in the US generally don't realize A. how cheap things are and B.
how bad things like education and healthcare are.

3\. We are taking a significant tax hit in either AU or CAN...and that is OK
because of what we are getting in return. I'm actually more mad at thinking of
the things we DON'T get in the US for our taxes.

4\. lastly (unrelated to the article), the difference between AU and CAN
consumerism culture is amazing. The change is rather drastic and, I feel
strongly about this, better for overall health to not be so wrapped in the
consumeristic US culture.

~~~
dmpk2k
I'm curious why you're moving from Australia to Canada? Canada has a lot going
for it, and it's _definitely_ cheaper, but in most regards I think Australia
has its act together better.

~~~
fingerprinter
Valid question because I would generally agree that AU has quite a bit going
for it.

The single main reason is location. AU is FAAAAAR from things. I fly for work
to the US and Europe several times a year. This gets very old very quickly in
AU. To get to Singapore, which is the main hub to Europe, is 8hrs. That is
already longer than the longest US flight. To get from Singapore to Europe is
between 12 and 14 hrs. To get from Sydney/Melbourne to LAX is 15hrs. Do this
with two kids and you'll just hate life.

Also, for the kids, the cousins, grandparents and aunts and uncles all live in
the US, which is a quick direct flight away. This is the single biggest
factor.

This is more a huge pet peeve of mine and I wouldn't move because of this, but
I hate the nanny state that is AU. The government here is very restrictive and
tends to take away rights "for the kids". There is constant talk about an
internet firewall and quite a few other little things that add up to "nanny
state". I told my wife that if we stayed in AU it might cause me to get into
politics b/c of how messed up it is. It is that bad.

And, lastly, we've had an adventure. We are looking to settle in to a place
for 10-15 years or so while the kids grow up and go to school. If it wasn't
for the above, AU might have been that place, but the second item makes it
hard for us to be this far away.

I say about AU that if you can leave your former life and live in AU (meaning,
you live, work and pretty much embrace the AU life), AU is AWESOME. They
really do have quite a bit going for it, even with the nanny state item. They
don't call it 'the lucky country' for nothing!

------
smsm42
"Imagine if a politician were to say, "France has a better health care system
than we do." I can almost guarantee that politician would suffer electoral
defeat "

Which America this guy is from? In the United States of America in which I am
residing, lots of politicians talk all day long about pretty much every
developed country in the world having better medical system than US (even
though those systems are radically different and the politicians don't even
bother to prove they are actually better) and they get regularly reelected.
What is this thing with publishing articles in prominent magazines saying
"Nobody in US dares to talk about it but I will! Yes, I'll do it and nobody
can stop me!". Nobody wants a magazine opinion writer to be a hero - just a
competent writer that does not insult the intelligence of their readers.

As somebody who lived in 3 very different countries, I understand learning
from different cultures and countries is very useful. But in order to explain
that, there's no need to exaggerate the faults of the US and present it as if
most Americans are wildly opposed to any foreign ideas or experiences.

~~~
mbesto
> _Which America this guy is from?_

Really? Can you give a little more evidence to support your claim?

I'd love to see a clip of Romney or Obama saying "We're looking to copy the
french healthcare system". They would get murdered for being "Un-American".

~~~
smsm42
Romney and Obama are not the only people in US politics. There are multiple
proponents of single-payer model (which is obviously modelled along the same
lines as in countries where it currently exists), and they keep being elected.
Of course nobody would just say "we are going to copy France" - that'd be
stupid, US and France are different countries with different traditions, legal
systems, economic and political systems, etc. But many politicians I've heard
compared favorably health care systems in Canada, UK, France, Switzerland,
Germany, etc. to American one and I don't see why they would suffer
electorally for it - the idea that American system needs reform is a
commonplace among both left and right (they of course disagree as to _what
kind_ of reform it needs) and comparing favorably to certain aspects of
foreign experience is nothing unexpected - in fact, in this case, there's not
much choice to compare - if you want to argue "we want to change it", you'd
need examples, and since you won't be able to find enough examples in the US
(state experiments don't have enough timespan and may not scale well) you'd
have to go international. If you wanted to show, for example, that single
payer is a workable model, you won't have much choice but to refer to the
experience of the countries where it was introduced.

~~~
mbesto
> _that'd be stupid, US and France are different countries with different
> traditions, legal systems, economic and political systems, etc._

> _(state experiments don't have enough timespan and may not scale well)_

You see, this is problem right here. America was founded on the idea that each
state should govern themselves and that there should be minimal federal
involvement (this is what Libertarians fight for). Furthermore, I'm not sure I
agree with your line of reasoning. Your saying that we can't copy other
countries because they're different, yet we can't copy ourselves because it
doesn't scale well.

> _I don't see why they would suffer electorally for it_

I don't see why either, but that's the reality. Have you ever watched Fox News
for more than 5 minutes? They would slander the hell out of ANY politician who
said "let's be like France" in any capacity. Note - It's important to
understand that neither I nor yourself need to watch Fox News. The point is, a
VERY LARGE portion of America does, and they believe the stuff that spews out
of these people's mouths.

I think the overall point of the article is that we are effectively "trapped"
in the US because we are constantly reminded that "This is the America Way!"
and to think otherwise is blasphemy. We are lucky in American to always have
the ability to create a challenging opinion...always. However it doesn't mean
it's popular. Popular gets you elected. Elected gets you legislation.

~~~
smsm42
>> Your saying that we can't copy other countries because they're different,
yet we can't copy ourselves because it doesn't scale well.

Right. That's why mere _copying_ of anything won't work. One has to actually
put some thought into how to make it work without just copying something. I
know, it's a bummer, but when we spend trillions of dollars on federal
government, we can expect them to have at least couple of people who can think
and do beyond what an average copying machine does.

>> Have you ever watched Fox News for more than 5 minutes? They would slander
the hell out of ANY politician who said "let's be like France"

I'd recommend to leave aside the knee-jerk Fox News bashing, it does not add
anything to the topic. I'd also recommend to actually read my response, where
I specifically say that nobody would say "let's be like France" - but many
politicians can and do say "let's borrow this good idea from France". France
being substitute for many various countries here of course.

>> Note - It's important to understand that neither I nor yourself need to
watch Fox News. The point is, a VERY LARGE portion of America does, and they
believe the stuff that spews out of these people's mouths.

I strongly suspect your information about "stuff that spews out of these
people's mouths" is a a distorted third-party reports and not the result of
actual observation of sufficient footage and comparing it to other comparable
networks and hosts - such as MSNBC, for example. FN is no better and no worse
than any other major news outlet - they all are politicized and all employ
some people which have very strong opinions, earn millions by voicing these
opinions to the public and sometimes do not let the actual facts to stand in
the way of these opinions. This however is not related too much to the topic
in question, as existence of politicians that openly declare views which go
directly opposite to what most of the FN viewers would agree with is the fact,
be these opinions regarding health care, finances, social issues, judiciary
issues or any issues whatsoever. FN or their viewers do not hold any death
grip on America and are only one part of various and pluralistic public scene.
They have their options, other people have theirs, and all of them "spew" them
from their mouths freely. It may cause some people stop voting for some
politicians, and some other people start voting for them - that's how the
elections work. But assuming politicians live in mortal fear of FN and that
prevents them from telling what they want to tell people is pure nonsense.

>> I think the overall point of the article is that we are effectively
"trapped" in the US because we are constantly reminded that "This is the
America Way!" and to think otherwise is blasphemy.

This is baloney. There is no agreement what is "America Way", and right now
there are at least two, if not more, polar opposite approaches as to what is
"America Way" in pretty much every issue are being actively discussed in
public, with roughly equal parts of the population sympathizing to each
approach. In this situation, claiming there's only one "America Way" and
departing from it is seen by the public as blasphemy is to confess your own
ignorance and detachment from most current events easily observable.

------
rdl
I agree in general, but several of the specific policy recommendations he puts
forward are horrible.

States having equal representation in the Senate is one of the few protections
for States' Rights today. Population isn't the only reason for representation.

Direct election of the President by popular vote per state would probably be
functionally the same as the electoral college, modulo faithless electors, but
most proposals are for nationwide popular vote, which also hinders States'
Rights -- and would allow a President to be elected by appealing just to
voters in major cities (a plurality of the population).

~~~
slyall
I'm not sure a system where the president gets elected by ignoring Texas,
California, New York, New England etc is really a better system than a
nationwide popular vote.

------
aj700
I've told people to leave the US before on HN, and got downvoted, so I won't.

America's #1 problem is that solutions that work are often fairly labelled
socialist, because they are, and thus they immediately lose all popular
support, because for some reason, you are all mentally still fighting the cold
war?! (So are the Russians, but that's beside the point.)

"Socialism" needs to stop being pejorative. You're trapped by political
language as much as insularity and self-regard.

------
tsotha
Much of what he lists here as weaknesses I consider strengths, especially the
electoral college. Maybe it's because of length, but he doesn't give more than
casual support to any point.

Weak.

------
shell0x
The USA seems to get a third world country. The step between poor and rich is
huge, there is no health insurance, people can buy weapons and kill each
other, the political system is broken and corruption is everywhwere.

------
jballanc
The article focuses on the same things have been hammered on for a while now
(other countries do health care better, other countries do education better,
other countries do education better...), but I think there's another reason to
get out of America: other countries have different _cultural strengths_.

Antonio Cangiano wrote a post a while back about why Italy doesn't do enough
startups ([http://programmingzen.com/2011/11/10/the-real-reason-
italy-s...](http://programmingzen.com/2011/11/10/the-real-reason-italy-sucks-
at-the-startup-game/)). In that post, he has a chart
([http://programmingzen.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/does-
su...](http://programmingzen.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/does-success-
depend-on-forces-outside-our-control-e1320936286945.png)) that shows that
Americans, more that the citizens of any other country, believe that their
success or failure is a direct result of their own actions. This is a blessing
and a curse, as it means that Americans are willing to work harder to get what
they want, but they are also willing to believe when a politician says that
there's no need for universal health care or help getting people jobs because
"anyone who wants it enough can work harder and get it for themselves".

Regardless, I would argue that this is America's defining cultural strength.

I recently moved to Turkey. Turkey has "hospitality" as its defining cultural
strength. If you go to a little shop and look around for more than 10-15 min,
you can expect to be offered a drink (free of charge, of course). When I go to
the bakery, the woman who works there frequently slips me a cookie or pastry
after I've already paid. Most of the malls in Turkey have systems in place
that tell you exactly where there is an open parking spot so you don't have to
spend 15 min driving back-and-forth.

In America, people celebrate blog posts about pricing tricks that will
convince customers to part with a few extra cents. In Turkey, cab drivers
regularly round fares _down_ to the nearest lira (well, assuming you aren't a
tourist in Istanbul, which is a whole different issue). Now, you could do
extensive studies to show that hospitality leads to customer loyalty over the
long term, and greater profits blah blah blah...but Turks don't need that.
Hospitality is second nature, and my anecdotal experience is that it makes for
a generally happier populace, even when all the _objective_ metrics indicate
that Turks should feel worse-off than Americans.

What really strikes me, though, is that I have experienced Turkish-like
hospitality from one company in the US: Apple. So, now you have every MBA
student in America racking their heads trying to figure out what Apple has
done to become the most valuable company in the world, where if they had only
spent a couple of years living in Turkey they might already have their
answer...

~~~
saraid216
> What really strikes me, though, is that I have experienced Turkish-like
> hospitality from one company in the US: Apple.

Could you explain this? Because I haven't ever gotten a free iPhone for
browsing in the Apple Store for ten minutes.

~~~
hnhg
You wouldn't get a free rug in a Turkish rug store but Apple do go out of
their way to appear inviting and helpful way beyond any of their competition.

~~~
jballanc
This. I've found that business in America have a tendency to try and monetize
the entirety of every business transaction. For example, I used to work at
Circuit City, and if you came in to buy a TV you'd be amazed how quickly the
salesperson would shift the conversation onto cables, power supplies,
protection plans, etc. When the end of the day rolled around, and praise was
divvied out by the store managers, no one ever talked about the size of the TV
so-and-so sold. The praise focused entirely on the "attach".

On the other hand, a Turk will recognize that you are there to carry out a
certain business transaction. Turks can haggle and negotiate with the best of
them (another aspect of their culture). But you'd better believe that, as you
spend half an hour negotiating the price of that rug, the rug seller will have
had his assistant bring you tea and simit, and you'll have the most
comfortable seat in the place (none of this "make the floor as hard and
uncomfortable as possible so that customers complete their transactions
quickly"...yes, that is a well known trick in the American retail industry).

Apple does the same thing, especially with their stores. Their computers are
not cheap. But Apple will hold free workshops telling you how to use them.
Store employees will help you transfer data from your old computer if you need
it, and when you come back in a week, you'll get the same reception as you did
before you made your purchase, even though you're unlikely to be buying
another computer.

Mostly, it's about recognizing your customer as a fellow human being, as
opposed to "the next mark"...

~~~
smsm42
Note that you are comparing a big chain store (Circuit City) with small
business (a Turk). Most businesses in the US are small businesses, which
behave differently than chain stores. And if you think that that the Turk
wouldn't get back the price of his tea hundredfold when you buy that rug, then
you're very naive :) It's just different styles of conducting business - in
some cultures, the negotiations are supposed to be personal and simulate
closeness and friendship (even if parties are hoping to cheat each other as
much as possible), in some it is supposed to be businesslike and impersonal.

As for the Apple store, I had been a number of times in Apple store in San
Jose, that's abut 15 minutes drive from main Apple campus. Almost each time I
had the worst experience. I had to wait for a long time, workers kept
redirecting me from one to another, and since the policy is that there are no
lines in Apple stores, I had no idea when I am going to be served - I just had
to aimlessly wander around the store and wait for the moment where some
"genius" is ready to grace me with his attention. I had to explain what I need
to multiple people, which for some reason didn't talk to each other, and I
observed multiple store workers not busy with anything but somehow still
unavailable to help me. I am totally unconvinced about that being the paragon
of customer service.

~~~
jballanc
Well, you're wrong about one thing: that's not just small businesses in
Turkey. Even very large chain stores have the same level of hospitality. And
it's not just stores. As an example, tomorrow is the start of Şeker Bayramı
(literally translates as "Sugar Holiday" but is just what Turks call Eid al-
Fitr, the end of Ramadan). The holiday lasts for 3 days. I received a text
from Turkcell the other day stating that they were giving everyone unlimited
texting during the holiday.

 _Edit_ : Also, of course the Turkish businessman is making back the cost of
the tea. It would be foolish to think otherwise. The point is that (if you
want to go all Econ 101 on it...) Turks tend to think in terms of straight
profit, whereas Americans are much more obsessed with opportunity cost.

~~~
smsm42
Are you saying short-term discounts and freebies are unheard of in USA?
[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/02/national-donut-
day-...](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/02/national-donut-
day-2011-dunkin-donuts_n_870514.html)
<https://www.facebook.com/events/353010928105586>

There are many more examples of stuff regularly given out by companies for
free, it's just two things I could remember immediately due to you mentioning
"sugar holiday" :)

~~~
jballanc
Heh...you really do need to visit Turkey. Turkcell didn't advertise that they
were giving everyone unlimited texts. There was no article in the national
paper about Turkcell giving unlimited texts. They did it because it was
proper, and hospitable. In short, Turkish hospitality is _very_ different from
the examples you gave.

Trust me, if you ever care to visit Ankara, tell me and I will show you
Turkish hospitality.

(Or, as odd as it sounds, Anthony Bourdain's "No Reservations" episode on
Istanbul does an amazingly good job of capturing the essence of modern Turkish
culture...<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ojatA-Xqhk>)

~~~
smsm42
I have visited Turkey in the past briefly, and it was nice, though I did not
notice any special hospitality not encountered in other places. Maybe I just
wasn't lucky.

Unfortunately, since I'm Jewish I'm not sure it would be wise for me to visit
Turkey again now, due to recent developments... it seems like the hospitality
for me might be a bit limited now.
[http://www.radikal.com.tr/Radikal.aspx?aType=RadikalDetayV3&...](http://www.radikal.com.tr/Radikal.aspx?aType=RadikalDetayV3&Date=7.1.2009&ArticleID=915950)
<http://jcpa.org/article/present-day-anti-semitism-in-turkey/>

Maybe sometime in the future... Sorry for getting a bit off-topic here.

~~~
jballanc
Off topic indeed, but this year's Eurovision singer from Turkey was Jewish
(<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Can_Bonomo>). Not to say there isn't anti-
semitism, but I think it is much less in Turkey than you might think.

------
temphn
The fascinating thing about this article is that it legitimizes the "Atlas
Shrugged" response of many entrepreneurs from a progressive perspective. While
there is much to be quibbled with in his analysis [1], the simple fact that we
now have rationales from both sides for leaving the US and striking out abroad
is extraordinarily important. Look for more people to repeat these arguments,
to flee taxes, crime, and regulations while claiming they are fleeing
inequality, provinciality, and an inadequate level of government control over
the economy.

[1] for example, did the mass immigration of millions of unskilled immigrants
without high school educations contribute to income inequality? And is
bankrupt France really a country to emulate, or should we cast our eyes to the
Pacific Rim?

~~~
lmm
> And is bankrupt France really a country to emulate

Yes, it really is. Its people are happier, healthier, and better educated;
they work less, eat better and have better relationships with their families.
And are substantially less indebted than those of the US.

~~~
ams6110
The French would all be speaking German today if we (USA) had emulated them in
the last century.

~~~
patrickk
If you're talking about the allied victory in WWII, the soviets inflicted the
vast majority of damage against the Germans.

It's also quite disingenuous to bring up lazy stereotypes in a discussion.

<http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4508901.stm>

~~~
smsm42
While it is true that Soviets did a major part of the actual combat work, they
probably could not have done it without economic help from the US. If US were
unable or unwilling to provide such help, it is not at all given that Soviet
economy alone would have survived the onslaught. While the heroism of the Red
Army people is unquestionable, one needs a lot of material resources to wage
war, and without them even most heroic people can not win. Even Joseph Stalin
- a man not known for being overly modest - acknowledged that.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lend-Lease>

------
radicalbyte
I'm probably going to be modded down like crazy for this; just remember it's
not a rant, I'm just sharing my perception of America as a whole. Hopefully
you'll see some value in an outside opinion :)

DISCLAIMER: I'm writing this based in a view of "average" America. HN readers
are most likely far from the average. It's a view shared by many younger (<35)
people I talk to.

TL;DR: European views US as being backwards, socially underdeveloped. Geared
for the rich. But with great TV, films and software companies. And the
"average" American is 55, Obese, and thinks that Paris is a short stroll from
the center of London (that might tainted be because I lived near Stratford-
upon-Avon, which is a honey pot for dumb but wealthy Boomers on their first
trip outside of the US).

I'm British, moved to The Netherlands at 26 (I'm now 32). I've travelled all
over the world, US (see below), Scandinavia, most of Europe, Africa and Asia.

My perception of the US is that it's like a big company: they've been the boss
for so long that they have forgotten to improve. Sure, in the 1960s they were
the best at everything. Only the world has moved on, and in reality they're
quickly turning into a dinosaur.

From what I've seen of Americans, their ideas are stuck very much in the
1900s. They're hierarchical, the system is tailored to the factory owners.

The lower class have been conditioned to think that faux sweat-shop working
conditions (40+ hour working weeks) are a good thing. They don't have
vacations. They can be sacked pretty much at will. Healthcare is fubar.
There's a complete lack of empathy and realism. Which is strange from a land
which claims to be "Christian".

The Americans I speak to seem to fall into two groups: those brainwashed into
believing that if they work themselves to death they'll "get rich", or those
who're just plain religious lunatics who've thus been conditioned to "suffer"
for their "faith".

The only two areas where I see the US leading are in Computing and
Entertainment; and this is more a function of the US speaking one language
than it is anything inherent in the attitude or politics.

Now for something completely anecdotal:

I live in the Netherlands. I have a nice house. It's smaller than the American
norm, but our land is smaller. It's better built (brick instead of wood).

I have a good job, earn a good salary (3x norm). In the US I'd earn three to
five times as much - but that's more a function of the market than society
(higher demand in US). I work a 38 hour week, and have 25 days holiday (+ 6-8
public holidays).

My health insurance costs $150/month, and isn't connected to my employer.

My employer can't just sack me. If I were to become unemployed, I'd get enough
in welfare to live comfortably. If I'm injured, and unable to work, then I
receive 70% of my salary plus the state benefits (which include the
healthcare).

I pay lots of tax: 40% of my salary, 21% on anything I buy (except for cars,
they have a 40% tax-rate, and food which is 6%), 70% of the cost of my fuel,
and $100/month car tax. $100/month in local government fees. I can claw back
$300 of tax a month on mortgage interest - it'd be much more if I'd have
bought a bigger place (didn't seem wise at the time, we bought in 2007, at the
peak).

I had a decent education in the UK, but I'm an outlier: because I got
severally bullied (my parents were religious, evangelical Christians, and the
UK's main religion is a Atheism) I missed my last year of Highschool (still
score in the top 10% of the exams, top 5% in the STEM) and have educated
myself to University-level via the Open University (and it helps having a
decent IQ ~146 in the Mensa test, for what it's worth). I speak fluent Dutch
(one of the harder languages to learn. Oh, and I still have an inferiority
complex because I can't help but compare myself to the brilliant people here,
and I aspire to top my field :)

My wife had a fantastic education in the Netherlands, and - together with all
other people in her field - is better qualified than any American (she's a
Pharmacist, in the Netherlands they're as well educated as medical doctors;
pharmaceutical decisions are made by the specialists here, not just by the
doctors).

I can go into town, to a coffee shop, and smoke a joint. I won't be arrested.
I won't do it. But if I drive 50 miles to the East I would be (European
insanity).

I have choice of cable/ASDL providers. Almost everyone here has >10mb/s
internet. I have choice out of lots of mobile providers. Only if I travel 50
miles to the East, 100 miles to the South or 200 miles to the West it gets
expensive (because the idea of the United States of Europe has failed in the
face of capitalism).

I can cycle to work. Or to town. Without going on the roads, because there are
cycle tracks everywhere. Lots of people do. But I'm too out of shape to do it.
I probably should, because I'm overweight.

* I've been to Florida & NYC; they were like two different countries.

* Florida (1995) was a shit hole full of rude and ignorant people with plastic smiles. The officials at the airport were assholes, they treated the black and Asian foreigners like dirt. The people who weren't being assholes were all astonished to hear my British accent, they loved how quaint and foreign it sounded, "just like Monty Python" and "just like the Beatles" apparently (I sound nothing like either).

* NYC (2008) is fantasic. The people were friendly, they didn't patronise you. The police were friendly and helpful. The people at the Airport were great - nicer than they are in London Heathrow. That was the biggest surprise of all, and says the most about New York.

~~~
mbesto
Yankee living in the UK here...

I totally agree with your sentiment and let me play something out on the flip-
side that I noticed about British life...

British people are brought up in a society that teaches them average is always
OK and that life has dealt it's cards, so just deal with it. I know this is a
sweeping generalization, and isn't how _everyone_ in Great Britain operates,
but this has been my general understanding of the motivation culture in this
fine country. I've had this discussion with many people, either foreign or
not, and they tend to believe this is a result of being in a class-system for
hundreds of years.

You see, America was built and is comprised largely of the most motivated
people on the planet. They (we) came to find the country because they wanted
something better. Does the American Dream still exist? Of course it does,
because it's an idea and will only die if we tell the idea to die. America is
NOT for everyone. As you've outlined, not EVERYONE wants to live like that. I
enjoy the same comforts as you, but I believe if I have the same superior
means and the intelligence a you, I can earn vastly more money in the US and
live vastly more comfortable. Does that mean I necessarily want that life? Not
really, it's just that America provides and culturally accepts that
plausibility of it, regardless of whether it's truly a reality.

This is probably going to be a radical statement - but I really wish the poor
people of America had the ability to leave the country. They are really the
only ones who complain about America not being suitable and backwards. If
you're rich in America, there's little to complain about and life is good.
What this would do is force the rich to provide better support to the poor,
because without the poor the rich won't exist and we'd have a much bigger
middle class (which is something that has made America so strong).

~~~
radicalbyte
Ahh, another outlier :)

That's a good observation about the British. They're also really pessimistic
(Americans are broadly positive). And, unfortunately, they're very small
minded (polar opposite of Americans). That's the result of being a fallen
Empire, I guess.

I like the Dutch: they're stubborn and everyone has an opinion on everything
BUT they respect that. Heck, it's expected. That's something they have in
common with Americans (very direct and opinionated). They have a similar
background (America was colonized by various Christian sects, The Netherlands
was the central hub of lots of sects because it was the only place they
managed to live together without killing each other). Yet they're pragmatic,
and largely class-less. Same as the Scandinavians. They also share the same
19th century ideas over work as the Yanks (>40h weeks, retire at 67), only
they have holidays. Protestant work ethic at work.

BTW, I would recommend spending some time living in a foreign country - as a
native (INTEGRATING, not moving to Spain to live with a load of rich British
ex-pats) to anyone reading. It really opens your mind, and changes the way you
think about yourself (and the world as a whole). Even better if you can
combine it with learning another language.

~~~
_delirium
On work hours, the Scandinavians do still have the Protestant work ethic
culturally, but have been trying to cut back on number of hours, out of a
theory (probably correct imo) that in a modern information economy it's more
about quality of work than quantity of hours in chair. The current Danish
workweek is 37 hours, and followed quite religiously. Everyone is on time and
works efficiently during the day (no 2-hour lunches), but few people can be
found in the office past 3pm on a Friday.

Scandinavia is also an interesting option on the last point if you aren't up
to the language-learning, though there are pros/cons. It's actually harder to
integrate language-wise than most other places, because the languages are
phonologically difficult for Americans (especially Danish), and people all
speak good English so their patience for your broken language is low as they
can just switch. So you'll probably learn more Spanish in Spain or Italian in
Italy than Danish in Denmark. But because of the good English, it's quite
possible to at least partly integrate culturally if you find the right social
circles. (It also makes it easy to deal with formalities, since much
government and bank correspondence can be done in English if you request it.)

~~~
smsm42
It is true that quality is more important than quantity. But somehow in many
cases people do use that as an excuse to slack off, and on the contrary,
people delivering the best quality also those that do not skimp on quantity.
If somebody knows how to do his thing in an excellent way, he'd probably also
stay after 3pm on Friday to finish his thing. If his mind turns off at 3pm,
then maybe he wasn't turned on too much even at 2pm. At least where it
concerns professions which require personal engagement, if you just dig holes
9 to 5 (to 3 on Friday) then it's different of course.

~~~
_delirium
I guess I don't think that's true. Imo, the best quality comes from companies
with happy employees who have good work/life balances, not from the kind of
places that expect employees to be chained to the boss.

------
gyardley
Absolutely not. Solutions implemented by people from other countries work
because they've been implemented by people from different _cultures_ ,
cultures which are compatible with those solutions. Attempting to implement a
culturally-alien solution within America would likely fail, but not before
wasting a lot of everyone's time and money and not before fouling up what's
already working.

To 'make America great' would require a deep cultural understanding of
Americans and how American culture both helps and hinders them. It would then
require solutions tailored to American culture - or if no culturally-
compatible solution could be found, a plan to alter the culture before
implementing the solution, fully appreciating that by altering the culture we
may weaken some of America's real strengths.

This isn't easy at all to do and get right - which is why our default stance
should be 'unless there's a really, really compelling reason to change things,
don't tinker with it.' The Constitution's checks and balances are in place to
enforce this stance, so people like the author can't rashly tinker with things
on the strength of a single election, and cause more problems than they fix.

------
biesnecker
This.

I've spent most of my adult life outside of the US, after having spent my
childhood and university in Florida. Now, when I travel in the States, I see a
_lot_ of good everywhere I go, but it's undeniable that other countries are
doing certain things better (I'd argue that nobody has it all together, though
Singapore comes mighty close in my book).

This is actually a great thing for the US in many ways -- we've spent almost a
century in the lead, having to figure out what works through trial and error.
Now the entire world is participating in this trial and error, and we are (in
theory, if we're willing to be a bit humble and admit we don't know it all)
able to benefit from the discoveries made without paying for the trials.

There will probably never be a repeat of the 1950s, where the United States
dominated the world in almost every category, but ... who cares? The 1950s
sucked in a lot of ways for a lot of people, most Americans included. That
doesn't mean we can't maintain parity, and exceed in certain areas in which
we've made priorities.

~~~
rickmb
> Now the entire world is participating

The entire world has been "participating" for centuries, long before the US
even existed.

You may have picked up on that in your life outside the US.

~~~
mseebach
Now the entire world is participating _in the way of doing things that the US
pioneered in the 19th and 20th centuries_.

The US was indeed exceptional for most of this time. It's not anymore, but
it's more because the rest of the world caught up, not so much because the US
stopped (although resting on laurels has certainly slowed it down).

------
climbingaddict
The word "freedom" appeared in this piece exactly 0 times. Ditto for
"liberty." A society cannot be both free and equal. Amidst America's large
geographic size, high population, and many different cultures, there are two
warring factions that will ultimately split the country in two.

There are those that espouse the views of the author, where privileges are
derived from a central government composed of only the most intelligent and
gifted members of society. The means of production are centrally controlled
and wealth is distributed by whatever means dictated by the core elite.

And then there are those that want to live free. Those that believe that
rights come from nature and from god, and that government cannot create
rights, only take them away.

These two ideas cannot coexist in one nation. America has survived with both
so far because of our size. But soon the division will be too great and we
will hopefully go our separate ways. We tried once before.

------
ExpiredLink
He hasn't been mentioned yet: Rocky Anderson
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocky_Anderson>

------
agpen
It's pretty telling that even an article trying to question the culture of
unquestionable-exceptionalism is still chock-full of jingoistic language that
says "if we just fix a few things we'll be the best country on earth again",
as if such a thing was or is factual or even possible.

Not "exceptionalism is a myth" but "exceptionalism needs a new paint job".
This is what passes for dissent in mainstream American discourse.

~~~
corporalagumbo
awesome point. you hit the nail on the head i think - this is an article
soaked with deep cultural ego. unfortunately, these sorts of self-centered
attitudes are probably necessary to rouse the interest of the average american
reader. after all, america as a country is divorced from reality. kind of
makes you wonder if there's any hope for the place in the long-term.

------
tkahn6
Maybe there should be a moratorium on non-technical stories.

There are many more socio-political interest stories on HN than there used to
and the rhetoric in the comments sections tends to be poor.

~~~
corporalagumbo
surely articles such as this are of value in challenging and expanding the
perspective of the average american HN reader? after all, good entrepreneurs
are well-rounded. and as this article (and the comments) makes it clear, the
software industry in the US is something of a bubble, insulated from the
troubling problems of contemporary american society. problems american
entrepreneurs ignore at their own long-term risk.

as for the level of rhetoric in this comment section, I think it is high, and
contains many interesting points to consider.

------
wseymour
"We are on strike, we, the men of the mind."

------
suyash
It is already great, there is no need!

