Money Where Your Mouth Is

Professor Burgess-Jackson highlights yet one more Krugman column (is this #627?) where the economist rails about how awful life is in these United States.

I am used to this.  A number of the liberals I know go on - and on and on - about what a "shit country" (yes, a quote) America is.

Literally all of those who rant and rave happen to be folks of means.  Quite healthy means.

So, I wonder, as did the good professor, why it is that they stay here.  Like Europe, or New Zealand, or Canada much more than Minneapolis, Tampa, or Cleveland?  Then pack up and move there!

If you think I'm saying "love it or leave it" I am not.  Trust me; I've spent a good chunk of my life complaining about any number of items which could be improved in our nation.

Nevertheless, I do have a reality check.  I realize that a) we're all only human, and thus all that we accomplish will be flawed, and b) bad as things sometimes are here, they actually really are worse elsewhere.

But, for those who think that they are not ... for those who suffer incredibly living in the U.S. of A - then get out of dodge!  Take the millions that this nation has allowed you to earn, with its safe and free markets, judicial system, and go to where you think you'll be happier.

I'm sure that those of us who remain will be glad to be rid of these dour individuals!

Comments

[Grag]

I am curious as to your complaint here. Neither you or the Professor offer any factual claim as to where Krugman has made an error. Neither of you point to any error in what he says, or the points he makes. It seems as if the your only complaint you two can come up with is your dislike of Krugman. It is sort of like your constant complaints of Al Gore and global warming. There is never a discussion on the merits of what he says, the only complaint you ever come up with is your dislike of Al Gore, or in this case Paul Krugman. I would think if you have opposition to what he wrote or stated you would provide in some way in which he was incorrect. But that is not the case. No where is there any discussion of any factual matters, it is nothing more than a bias and personal attack. If you have a disagreement with him, please point out where he is incorrect, and discuss that

[Peg]

Greg - you are not following here.

I am not ADDRESSING anything about Krugman's arguments. Let's say he's right about it all!

Why then doesn't he LEAVE the U.S. for one of these far finer nations?

Many of those left would be delighted to not have to read his complaining every week in the NYTimes then.

[JFP]

I once had some friends who did exactly what you said. Being Minnesotans of Scandinavian descent, they moved to Sweden.

After three years, they were quite ready to come back. And someone who met them shortly after this told me she had never heard people vilify a country as much as those two vilified Sweden. They could spend hours complaining about it.

It was pretty funny.

[Grag]

Peg,

Your point and thesis is extremely short sided and somewhat misses a key characteristic which makes America the best country in the world. People here have the right and the freedom to speak up, point something out, and to try and make this country better if they can see a way to do so. I wonder what you would of told Martin Luther King when he spoke out against the problems he saw in this country? Would you had been one of those people yelling "hey Martin, this is the good USA, shut up and if you do no like it here, leave"? In fact many people at that time did just that. They literally took that same position when he spoke out about the problems of civil rights, the plight of the poor, and the Vietnam War. I think that same argument was used against Nelson Mandela and many others who fought against apartheid in South Africa. It is amazing how your approach and feelings are inline with so many in history who ruled with an iron hand throughout the world. While I will concede you are not seeking to have people be arrested or executed, but your position here seems to like a call to cut off any debate or dissent from someone who views an issue different than you. You really drank the George Bush "your either with us, or against us" Kool-Aid here. Perhaps I am being too short sided myself, perhaps this opinion and feeling only applies to Paul Krugman, a man neither you nor the good professor took the time, interests, or effort in factually disputing. You would probably be singing praises if this was a piece written by that bastion of factual truth John Stossel. LOL.

I find this position interesting because it is coming from someone who made the claim that we are in Iraq to bring freedom to the Iraqi's. Yet in the post complaining about that same freedom. I am guessing you are a big fan of Newt Gingrich and his limits of freedom of speech position? I think I will call this the have your cake and eat it too argument. You know freedom of speech in this country is good, as long as it agrees 100% with you , outside of that any dissenter should just shut up and leave. That's a real enlighten position.

The bottom line is this. You could not find anything factually wrong with what he wrote, so your response is simply shut and leave and go somewhere else. Is it not the right and responsibility to every citizen in the United States to speak their mind, and if so work hard to make their country better? Or does this only work on positions and people that you are more inclined to listen too?