"I am for the Declaration of Independence; he is for the writing of Saul
Alinsky. I am for the Constitution; he is for European socialism" is the current rallying cry of would be Republican Presidential candidate Newt Gingrich. Its a call that's apparently fallen on deaf ears, as he has seemingly just lost Nevada's Republican caucuses, and following the loss of Florida, will surely cause him to stand aside from the race soon. He has to win Texas, or he's finished.
However his claim that 'arch right winger' Mitt Romney is a secret 'European Socialist', whilst risible by any European politicians definition of 'Socialist' (Even Pres. Obama would be at best 'centre right' and mostly 'right-wing' by European standards'), is worthy of a small examination.
If 'Europe' is now the dirty word in American politics, then lets look a some of the principle policies that separate us from each other ....
I guess it depends on which 'Europe' the US commentators are looking at .... Oddly, the US system of restricted health provision is far more expensive than the near 'universal' European models. The US pays 17.4% of GDP for a health system that leaves millions with minimal health coverage, while the near universal European health care model costs an average of about 10 - 11% of GDP.
You would think that the Republicans would welcome adopting a health system that covered everyone, and was vastly cheaper to pay for, a 'win win option' for them in the elections, but then who ever said that logic has anything to do with politics?
However his claim that 'arch right winger' Mitt Romney is a secret 'European Socialist', whilst risible by any European politicians definition of 'Socialist' (Even Pres. Obama would be at best 'centre right' and mostly 'right-wing' by European standards'), is worthy of a small examination.
If 'Europe' is now the dirty word in American politics, then lets look a some of the principle policies that separate us from each other ....
 |
| The Things That Divide Them From U.S. |
I guess it depends on which 'Europe' the US commentators are looking at .... Oddly, the US system of restricted health provision is far more expensive than the near 'universal' European models. The US pays 17.4% of GDP for a health system that leaves millions with minimal health coverage, while the near universal European health care model costs an average of about 10 - 11% of GDP.
You would think that the Republicans would welcome adopting a health system that covered everyone, and was vastly cheaper to pay for, a 'win win option' for them in the elections, but then who ever said that logic has anything to do with politics?
No comments:
Post a Comment
All comments are welcomed, or even just thanks if you enjoyed the post. But please make any comment relevant to the post it appears under. Off topic comments will be blocked or removed.
Moderation is on for older posts to stop spamming and comments that are off topic or inappropriate from being posted .... comments are reviewed within 48 hours. I don't block normal comments that are on topic and not inappropriate. Vexatious comments that may cause upset to other commentators, or that are attempting to espouse a particular wider political view, are reviewed before acceptance. But a certain amount of debate around a post topic is accepted, as long as it remains generally on topic and is not an attempt to become sounding board for some other cause.
Final decision on all comments is held by the blog author and is final.
Comments are always monitored for bad or abusive language, and or illegal statements i.e. overtly racist or sexist content. Spam is not tolerated and is removed.
Commentaires ne sont surveillés que pour le mauvais ou abusif langue ou déclarations illégales ie contenu ouvertement raciste ou sexiste. Spam ne est pas toléré et est éliminé.