America and Europe

Tom Kando

I have witnessed the growing alienation taking place between Americans and Europeans. But the situation is even more complicated than that: Criticism of trends in the United States is not limited to overseas. By the end of the Bush presidency, a majority of Americans themselves already knew that their country was on the wrong track. You didn’t have to be a European to feel that way. 

I certainly share this view myself. I had opposed the Iraq war and the weapons-of-mass-destruction charade from day one. I had been sending and publishing editorial articles for months, in defense of the French and of their opposition to the Iraq war, or criticizing the moronic jingoism displayed by the likes of Fox News and Rush Limbaugh (whom I had found amusing fifteen years earlier). Renaming “french fries” as “freedom fries.” Give me a break! 

But the ill-conceived Iraq adventure was only one of a much larger number of reasons why I became increasingly despondent about my country of choice, the country which I had grown to love so much. Many other problems were piling up on the country which earlier had seemed to be blessed above all other nations. The administration of George W. Bush was just one of these. 

America’s problems, both at home and overseas, seemed to become increasingly intractable. Or, put it differently, the country’s political leadership seemed to be increasingly inept. To be sure, Obama’s election in 2008 was a bright new light. However, few people could have predicted at that time how the country’s (and the world’s) problems would become even more complex in the coming fifteen years. 

With regard to US foreign policy, it was becoming clear that America’s hegemony was unsustainable, that American exceptionalism was coming to an end. In 1988, the British historian Paul Kennedy published The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers, in which he identified the problem of imperial overstretch. His argument was that the US was already in decline because it was overextending itself in its effort to police the world. It was likely to follow in the footsteps of earlier empires, for example Spain (Kennedy’s example). 

Is Worrying Good for You?

by Madeleine Kando

I worry a lot, especially about worrying so much. I inherited this admirable trait from my mother, who was a super worrier. Everything I read says that worrying is not good for your health, but for some reason, my mother died at 103.

I also read that war babies are prone to worrying and catastrophizing every little fart that gets emitted around them. I am a war baby, so that seems like a good excuse, except that my husband is a war baby too, and he never worries. He misses the worry gene to the point of irritation. ‘Did we turn the stove off?’ I ask him on our way to the airport for another blissful, worry-free vacation in Hawaii. ‘I think so..’ he says without a trace of panic in his voice. He trusts me to do the worrying for him, you see.

Once I catch the worry bug, there is no telling where it takes me. I see my cat curled up on the couch. She is wider than long, which doesn’t seem to be the right proportions for a cat. Do I feed her too much? Oh my God, she will become diabetic, all because of me!

I wonder if women worry more than men. If that’s true, then at least I have an excuse. It’s not me, it’s my gender. I am supposed to worry. If I didn’t, I would go against the laws of Nature.

But who decided that worrying is a bad thing? Maybe it’s the word itself that is the problem. If we called it: ‘caring deeply about something’, everyone would start worrying, trying to out-worry their friends.

The word "worry" comes from the Old English word "wyrgan," which means "to strangle" or "to "choke." It was later used to describe the feeling of being mentally choked by troubled thoughts. It is also related to the word "wurgen," which still means ‘to strangle’ in Dutch. ‘Worrying’ in Dutch is ‘zich zorgen maken’ (to make oneself worries). But the word ‘zorgen’ means ‘to take care of’. So, which is it? Is worrying to take care of, or is it to strangle? 

In French worrying is ‘Se faire des soucis’, ( to make oneself worry). Both the Dutch and the French seem to blame the worrier for worrying. As if worriers invented the concept of worrying and didn’t have anything better to do with their time.

Don’t be so quick to judge worriers. There is scientific proof that worrying has positive sides. The most obvious one is that it helps you lose weight. Toss that gym membership in the trash and start fretting and obsessing about what can go wrong. You will see the pounds fall off your body without having to lift a finger. 

Poverty

by Madeleine Kando

I have been obsessing about poverty for the past week. I hear you say: ‘just for the past week? Poverty did not appear last week. Why weren’t you obsessed with poverty all your life?’

I was. But there is nothing more complicated and mind boggling than diving into the world of poverty and coming out knowing more than you went in.

Poverty is such a convenient concept. ‘Yes, poverty is terrible. I am glad I am not poor. But, hey, we always had poverty, so it’s just one of those things..’   True. But there is poverty and then there is true poverty. Here are some statistics about poverty in America:

• Of 25 countries in the OECD, (the group of affluent Western societies), the US has the highest poverty rate, at 17.8%. This means that 59 million Americans are poor. That’s the entire population of Italy. Compare that to Ireland’s poverty rate at 5.4%, or Holland at 8.3%.

• Not only does America have the highest poverty rate in the OECD, it also has the highest poverty gap ratio, which measures how poor the poor are. In the US the poverty gap ratio is 40%, which means that a poor person would need to earn 60% more just to get to the poverty line of $13,000. We would have to give that person $7,800.

In Ireland, (remember that country where many of our immigrants used to come from because they couldn’t survive?), the poverty gap ratio is 3.3%. If we assume the poverty threshold to be equal in both countries, it would take $390 to bring that person up to the poverty line.

	Us	Ireland
Poverty line	$13,000	$13,000
Poverty gap	40% = $5,200	3%=$12,610
Difference	$7,800	$390

But what does being poor really mean? People in Africa are poor. The poor in America are far better off, right? Does that include the 1.5 million families, most of them with children, who live on less than 2 dollars a day? Not only are they as poor as the African poor, but they are even worse off. In Africa there is a rich barter economy, where you might not need cash to survive. That is why the very poor in the US resort to selling blood plasma to get cash. For health reasons, twice a week is the maximum allowed. They go home with $30, to pay their bills.

Why is America’s Approach to the Poor so Poor?

The US welfare system is relatively recent compared to the ones in Europe. It has its origins in the Great Depression. The Social Security Act of 1935 created a safety net for Americans who could not work due to old age, illness, or disability. In 1964, President Lyndon B. introduced legislation called ‘the war on poverty act’, as a response to a national poverty rate of 19%.

In 1996, President Bill Clinton, signed the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act,. It reduced the number of people receiving government assistance, but it also increased poverty. It required the poor to get a job, which in many cases was not possible. He gave control to the states, who spent the money on all sorts of other things and a small amount flowed to the people who really needed it.

Welfare in this country is like the game of musical chairs. If you don’t run as fast as the other players (handicapped) , or you are just in a bad position, you are out. Nobody thinks of adding more chairs, instead of submitting to the rules of the game. Which is exactly what Europe has done.