Troy Bunch said:
As of 2005, according to the “Economist Intelligence Unit”, the US ranked 13th in the quality of life index. Many of those countries that ranked higher are social democracies.
We need change… that’s why we voted in a liberal Democrat. Love it, change it, or leave.
Hi Troy:
You're relying on old numbers. In the most recent ranking (2008 ranking based upon 2006 data) we have moved up. The "quality of life index" is a second name for what is more formally known as the HDI; the human development index. Here is the top part of the most current ranking:
2006 HDI Ranking:
1. Norway
2. Iceland
3. Australia
4. Ireland
5. Sweden
6. Canada
7. Japan
8. United States
9. Switzerland
10. Netherlands
11. Finland
12. Luxembourg
13. Belgium
14. Austria
15. Denmark
16. France
17. Italy
18. United Kingdom
19. Spain
20. New Zealand
21. Germany
On the merits, I would say that the US is doing spectacularly. We are the only super-large-population and super-diversely-populated nation in the top 10. The five most populous countries on earth, in order, are China, India, the USA, Indonesia and Brazil. Where are China, India, Indonesia and Brazil on these lists?
That being said, we are not comparing apples to oranges here. A social democracy might work quite well for Norway or Iceland etc. These are small, homogeneous societies. They have virtually no immigration, legal or otherwise. They have cultural traditions that work well for them, but which are vastly different from ours. I am glad that these countries have their act together, but there is absolutely no reason to think that the social democracy model is readily transported to a larger more socially complex nation. You will see that France and Germany are well below us. I think this is telling.
Back to your main point, I respectfully disagree. We voted in a liberal democrat because he had the very good fortune to be running against a republican. Sure the nation wanted change. The majority wanted change from Bush though, not a fundamental change in governance.
Left over public opinion against the war assured that whoever ran for the GOP would lose. The economic collapse in September nailed the coffin lid shut. Many pundits, including myself, predicted a huge democratic sweep a year before the election. the polls were not ambiguous. The pendulum will swing back of course. Whether it swings slowly (8-12 years) or fast (4 years) depends upon how well things work out with the economy.
You will recall that Reagan almost swept the Electoral College only 4 years after Gerald Ford lost because of the Nixon pardon. Public sentiment can change on a dime if the economy stays bad or gets worse. Jim Babcock was right about one thing. We are a fairly conservative society. I would expand this and say that a slim majority is fiscally conservative society and a slim majority is socially liberal. this assures that the pendulum will swing.
More importantly, Americans like political balance. Unless Obama achieves spectacular success with the economy, I predict that the democrats will lose quite a few congressional seats over the next 4 years. Reelection for Obama is not a given if the economy remains in the doldrums for too long.
Jim
