Dan,

>There you go again, Walter. Not only with the we-are-so-much-better routine, but also with the insults and half-baked ideology.

Nope, wrong. Just saying You're-not-as-superiour-as-you-think-you-are. Not saying at all that we are better. My message is a reply to johns indicating that america is the most innovative country in the world and america is the best. It simply does not match reality.

>Yes, the US has a higher infant mortality rate than a lot of Western Europe. We also have a very high immigrant population. Gee - perhaps there's a correlation?

So what? So does for example Canada. And so did a lot of european countries. The real reason behind this fact is your healthcare system.

>We're still stuck on the imperial measurement system. So what. Have you ever given any thought on how complicated - and costly - the switchover might be? Not just in the retail area, but manufacturing, medical, computer technology...the US is huge, and perhaps our government decided that the cost wasn't worth it.

Are you aware that a lot of accidents did happend and probably still do happen because of making errors in conversions from one measurement into another. Are you aware about the cost it takes to do these conversions for export products (In a lot of european countries the measurements MUST be provided in the metric system by law). FYI, at the end of the 70's the metric system was teached at most universities. In the 80's Ronald Reagan himself reverted the introduction of the metric system and threw the US back in time, just for the sake of improving the self respect of the americans. Other nations have succeeded to introduce the metric system. Even brittain (where the imperial system comes from) has. So, if the US is so innovative, why does it have so much problems in adapting the metric system?? If you read between the lines here, you're basically saying that we can't make the switch because it is too difficult. How does that compare to the claim the US beeing an innovative country ???

>Or that we needed to go much slower than the original plan is. Or that perhaps we don't care to take on something just because you happen to find our measurement system cumbersome. Last I looked on a box of cornflakes, both English and metric measurements were listed.

Exactly, Manufactures do pay the price of taking care of two measurement systems. However, if I hear some american talk about foots, yards, gallons, pounds, stones, I really to take a caluclator to have an impression of what he is talking about. For example how many inch is a foot. How many foots make up a yard. How many yards make a mile? It is total madness to keep such system longer as neccesary. The metric system is way and way easier and will save a lot of companies a lot of costs in the end.

>Comparing our TV system to yours? Gimme a break. So what. In a few years we're going to HDTV anyway.

That would take a lot of time. Even in holland, where all infrastructure is already there, the integration and acceptation of digital TV is taking a lot of time. How about moving a dinosaur?

>Congrats to the Netherlands having the highest high-speed internet connection count in the world. (Rate, not count)

>Whoopee. We have counties bigger than your country in Texas. You pay for the cost, we'll be happy to hook every last Joe and José up that wants a connection.

So you're saing that the infrastructure is not there yet??? We had cable and phonelines laying in the ground for decades. Sure, I'm not talking about remote sites, but certainly the cities and villages are provided with both. To get connected to high speed internet, you call a serviceman at no or minimal cost (40 euro, for doing the work and handy man could do themselves) or alternatively do it yourself to get connect and for a monthly fee variying from 10 euro to as expensive you like you'll get high speed internet optionally with a phone connection as well.

>And I have to laugh at your comment regarding unemployment. Statistics don't lie. They are numbers, pure and simple, but they can be used for any purpose whatsoever.

The american numbers for unemployment are excluding certain groups. The definition of unemployment and how its measured is different than other countries and therefore are difficult to compare though everyone tends to do so. http://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm http://www.tutor2u.net/economics/content/topics/europe/unemployment_introduction.htm

OTOH, I'll agree that the US unemployment rate is low, just because people have to search for a job or else they barely can stay alive. This is something that is less so in great parts of europe. However as seen in the netherlands, much of the unemployed are unskilled uneducated workers that are more difficult to find a job for anyways. This trend applies to the US as well, esspecially as more and more simple work is outsourced (e.g. call centers, manufacturing, even ICT).

>Weren't we having an arguement not too long ago about the believablitiy of statistics? If I remember you were ranting about wanting numbers, yet when your own were proved false, you were strangely quiet.

What Are you talking about? I've not seen any convincing numbers from you at all.

>Go troll somewhere else, unless you have something constructive to add to a discussion.

Hmmmm, now I'm the troll?, interesting. Constructive realism I would say.

Walter,