manchild wrote:Fresh news...
FEMA funds spent on divorce, sex change
I have been silent during this thread, but I would like to contribute a little (or a lot, after seeing the length of my post):
I took a time to grasp (and that if I have done it), USA and Americans. Yes, they call themselves that, sorry for us, rest of the "Americas" folks. I guess is short for "United-States-of-Americans", or worse, "United-Statians". I don't dare to call them "North-Americans", mainly because of DaveKillens and his fellow citizens, nor, God forbids, the most familiar derogatory (and some times, friendly) term "gringos"...
Yes, the gringos. If I were one, I would be proud of this term or whatever it is associated with it. Some of them are really unique, from Jefferson to Thoreau, from Washington to Rooselvet. But I am not here to praise their virtues, but to try to explain what I did not got from them at the beginning and that maybe explains a little the whole "Katrina affair".
I agree with Dave and dare to expand his definition: I would claim that every form of government can be called a social experiment. Its outcomes determine its future shape, and I think this is the short answer to the question raised.
In this view, America is a novel experiment of 200 years. China, a newer one with let's say 50 years or 2000, it depends on how you look at it.
I approached USA with the confidence of an adolescent that was raised by a 2000 years old culture, in Spain, and that judged everything "through the mind of the greeks" and the "taste of Paris", which are still good for me, I have to say. I used to walk throug a roman road when I was five or six and since then I have judged every one of them (roads) through the eyes of this child, if I am allowed to add, in a latin rapture.
But after a while livin' in USA, I would say you cannot judge on the strength or weakness of a system only by its results, even if sure they got some. They have some smart rules, too. I know the world is slowly moving toward the Central Government, but it can be convenient a dispersed authority as us, anarchists
would like to test to the extreme.
I worked as a federal employee for the FHWA, the road administration for a couple of years. I have worked as a national government employee for the Colombian one. Differences (at least for roads, that is what I really know):
- Federal money for roads is split between states using a formula. No congressman lobbies the FHWA as decissions on projects are made at state level, once every state knows the amount it has been approved. Colombian money was lobbied road by road by the congressmen to the central bureaucracy (ring a bell?).
- Federal agency cannot spend more of 3% of the money on itself (God bless the inventor of this simple but effective restraint). There were no limits, nor accountability for Ministers in Colombia, where elections were paid with government positions in the huge central authority.
- Money is available for 5 years (!) and there are no tied-up funds: federal government refunds only constructions delivered, on a monthly basis (they pay you for the work you got approved last month). You had to lobby on a yearly basis for "your project" in Colombia and pray for your payments, made through heavy bureaucracy.
- Responsability for maintenance of the network resides totally on the states. A state that does not maintain properly its roads loses the Federal help (it has happened twice since 1919).
- The political plan (the actual layout of the main network) has not changed in an important way since the 1950's, when it was agreed upon. There was no explicit government plan in Colombia.
Yes, the Federal agency was much more weaker than the Colombian one for a response to an emergency. They were not centralized. But they had built 6 million kilometers of highway this way. Colombia had less than 100.000, with a fifth of the populaton, and in much, much worst conditions. Colombia has changed the ways I described (I have done what I have could) learning from them a little.
Yes, their employees were lazier than the colombian ones (to my surprise!) and as Manchild points out, equally corruptible or "cheatable", or more, as it seems FEMA was simply too lax spreading the money.
This is another funny characteristic of these guys. For example, last time I checked, a sizable part of their population opposed a national identity card and you could flash happily strange things like your phone receipt to prove you were yourself. This does not happen in Colombia (or Spain!), where the national identity number accompanies you "from crib to tomb". You would not believe what I could do with a federal employee ID: everybody trusted me. I was used to the "certificate of the certificate" culture.
I really find admirable (like the Roman Empire, that tried to do the same, at least during the Republic) that you can manage such a world power state without worse abuse of power. They may not be perfect as they frequently claim, but they have a good system, I would say, mainly because their central agencies are weak on purpose. This used to give you a freedom that is hard to explain to anybody that has not lived in Nederland, Sweden or California. Times are a'changing, I know, and every system passes its prime.
I also know they have a sorry story outside their borders, they like it or not, specially here in Latin America, and that they were founded before socialism, so I am not claiming they have the best system. It seems to me they do not understand socialism, as they lack essential things like universal health coverage, and that maybe their institutions confuse it with communism and lack of truly "puritan" spirit of work.
The racism of some rules and customs is astonishing for a latin. Here we all, like me, have a black grandma, an indian grandpa, some arab ancestor, an asian girlfriend and a jew relative. But, well, Latin America is not exactly the social-equalitarian heaven, if for motives of money instead of race, so who am I to criticize? Besides african americans and latins get along really easy and my moderately pale skin and good accent made it easy for me to blend with the WASPs, so I went untouched through this ugly side of the nation. Being colombian helps, if only because the bad press helps you to "scare away" major troubles...
But look what other countries send abroad: their sailors and warriors and keener traders. Erasmus did not colonize the "West Indies" nor Spain sent Fray Luis de León to America. Maybe it would be better (I do not know) if Sweden were the only world superpower, but given the choice, we are not that bad right now. I bet some of them are doing what they can. Imagine what a more centralized state would do: for example, and I am not trying to offend anybody, imagine China as sole world superpower. USA still might be able to correct itself.
Tomba, Principessa, I would not blame you if you edit this less than useful post on an F1 technical site. Actually, some editing could help, as it is simply too long. I just wanted to say something positive and got carried away. Besides, I believe the road commentaries could be useful to other people in the world.
