Slashdot Mirror

"Americans are actually considerably less materialistic than other nations: http://www.ipsos-na.com/news-p... [ipsos-na.com]"

Americans SAY they are considerably less materialistic than other nations. FTFY.

Have you noticed that people from the wealthier nations tend to say they are less materialistic? Funny that. Moreover, I didn't say that Americans were unduly concerned about material possessions. I said that the American culture is obsessed my money - quite a different statement. In fact, money is often prized as a measure of status rather than for what it can buy. The poorer the nation, the more value is attached to possessions - again, hardly surprising.

The result, which became obvious very early on, was a society in which the only value was money.

Americans are actually considerably less materialistic than other nations: http://www.ipsos-na.com/news-p...

Money to most Americans is a means to an end, a way to pursue the values and ideals they actually care about.

"As the sociologist Georg Simmel wrote over a century ago, if you make money the center of your value system, then finally you have no value system, because money is not a value".

Well, Georg Simmel certainly got his wish, because about a decade after his death, his country made community, fairness, and equality the center of its value system, under the NSDAP party program. And it did it again two decades later in the GDR. And it was a resounding success: people indeed stopped caring about money, because they ended up caring mostly about not starving, not getting shot, and not getting gassed. Germany's tradition of academic philosophy that Simmal was part of bears a great deal of the blame.

And, of course, Simmel himself came from a well-off family and never had to worry about a lack of money limiting what he could do. His teachings are the philosophical equivalent of "let them eat cake".

Like most Americans you seem to focus only on wealth as a measure of success

You're just repeating uninformed anti-American beliefs common in Europe. In actual fact, Americans rank fairly low in terms of materialism:

http://www.ipsos-na.com/news-p...

Whenever there's those OECD comparisons about things that I value: happiness, standard of living, access to health and education, low violent crime etc then North Western Europe along with Australia and New Zealand blitz those things every time.

You mean the OECD Better Life index?

http://www.oecdbetterlifeindex...

The US generally comes out near the top. But those numbers are dubious to begin with: high happiness numbers don't actually mean that people are happy, high voter turnout is not a good measure of civic engagement, staying longest in school is not necessarily a good thing, and high life expectancy and government-paid health care are not necessarily good measures of a good medical system. And comparing the US as a whole against individual EU member nations makes little sense either.

Where's the data from?

      Since my wife is the market research manager for Latin America for a 'Fortune 500' company, I am quite familiar with Ipsos. They do all sorts of market research, and are among the best in their field. Of course without seeing the actual design of the study neither she nor I can comment on how accurate the information is, but knowing how this company works I assume they are not pulling numbers out of their backsides. They usually don't, unlike other market research firms I could mention.

Why is parent flamebait? He/she's right. Didn't we all just spend the last half decade trying to get rid of Flash, preaching standards support, accessibility, CSS, etc, lambasting MS for shitty standards support in IE?

Anyways,

"Internet browsing via a wireless device is showing robust growth in many global markets. France and the U.K are exhibiting the strongest growth in this trend"

"four in 10 adults browse the Internet on their wireless handset in Japan"

http://www.ipsos-na.com/news/pressrelease.cfm?id=3 049

With those kinds of numbers, anyone developing applications that don't work anywhere (especially mobile phones) should be fired.

"Hehe .. the French weren't hot about it because it wasn't in their fucking interest."

Maybe the french weren't hot about it because:

1. ... it was contrary to international law ...

2. ... it was stupid even then (but stupid is as stupid does) ...

3. ... not all alternatives had been exhausted (many countries were ready to back the Canadian initiative)

4. ... it was seen as blatantly war-for-oil and a porkbarrel war (Blackwater, etc)

5. ... there was (and still is) no exit strategy ...

6. ... the public pronouncements were already known to be lies (Colin Powell's UN presentation, for example)

7. ... "a quick war" my arse ... only an ID-10-T would say or believe that ...

Or you could look at the latest polls http://www.ipsos-na.com/news/client/act_dsp_pdf.cf m?name=mr070122-2topline.pdf&id=3334

1. 2/3 of those polled said the country was on the wrong track
2. 65% disapprove of Bush's handling of iraq. Only 17% "strongly approve", compared to 42% who "strongly disapprove"
3. his party is behind the dems on every topic polled as to "who would do a better job"
4. 83% perceive George Bush as stubborn, the majority (54%) also said he wasn't honest

The majority of the US doesn't like Bush. It's not a "French thing." Get over it.

Apparently, not that many. This survey says only about 4% of Americans have actually gotten a full length movie online. A little over 1/2 are not even aware of the concept.

Nice of you to provide te link, buyt a drop from 95.48 to 94.42% in market share is nowhere near what I call a "Mass migration" either.