The New Erin Brockovich

[Xmac]

Even though this video is concerning food, the implications involving sustainability and environmental pollution are significant.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rixyrCNVVGA&feature=player_embedded

[Rogar]

Thanks for the interesting video. It is a constant source of amazement to me at how behind the US is in certain areas like health care, when were are supposed to be the global super power.

[ApatheticNoMore]

Thanks for the interesting video. It is a constant source of amazement to me at how behind the US is in certain areas like health care, when were are supposed to be the global super power.

Wow, I really need to parse that sentence to even see how it could be considered a paradox/a contradiction/whatever. I guess the assumption is the U.S. is a global super power so therefore it should be powerful enough to manipulate the global economic system to ensure that all it's citizens are well cared for. But what makes you think those with power give a darn?

If global superpower is defined militarily, then yes we are in a constant state of war (isn't it odd how war has become not just reoccurring like it was all throughout the 20th century with the little wars and the big ones, but in the 21st century has actually become *constant*? We are never not at war. That change is seldom noticed or remarked on.) And I know correlation and causation, but our constant wars correlate with a clear period of increasing economic decline. Anyway just because war is maintained constantly for someone's benefit doesn't meant the citizens are actually cared for, if anything in the actual political system it leads to cuts in social spending.

If it's defined economically this is global per capita GDP (realizing what a flawed measure GDP is):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28PPP%29_per_capita
The U.S. is not #1, but you do have a point that there is paper wealth in this country (of course all those wars do need funding).

[Rogar]

Hmmm. I don't know if my statement was misconstued or not? This is what wiki says a "global super power" is. " A superpower is a state with a dominant position in the international system which has the ability to influence events and its own interests and project power on a worldwide state and to protect those interests..... After the Cold War, only the United States appeared to fulfil the criteria to be considered a world superpower."

I guess that includes military, but also technology, trade, and economy. Beyond military we seem to have a stable economy that attracts large global investors like China, and the US has been a global leader in developing important new technolgies like computers, the internet, and the wireless communications. It has it's dark side, but our huge thirst for material goods has driven global trade and international economies.

My intention was mearly to say that we seem so good in somethings, but lag behind other countries in the world on other important issues like healthcare, education, and some environmental causes. It could probably be a long debate on why this is and if the US remains a "superpower" into the 21st century.

There is little doubt in my mind that our heavy investment in the military has come at the cost of a number of things, but it isn't the only issue.