Trump's View of History: Making America Great Again

Trump speaks repeatedly of the need for making America great again and he has a good point.

Most everyone in this history group can think back to a time when America was not so low in global rankings.

It is fascinating to watch history unfold before one's eyes.

World Rankings

I.Health Care

Source:
World Health Organization Ranking; The World’s Health Systems
1 France
2 Italy
3 San Marino
4 Andorra
5 Malta
6 Singapore
7 Spain
8 Oman
9 Austria
10 Japan
11 Norway
12 Portugal
13 Monaco
14 Greece
15 Iceland
16 Luxembourg
17 Netherlands
18 United Kingdom
19 Ireland
20 Switzerland
21 Belgium
22 Colombia
23 Sweden
24 Cyprus
25 Germany
26 Saudi Arabia
27 United Arab Emirates
28 Israel
29 Morocco
30 Canada
31 Finland
32 Australia
33 Chile
34 Denmark
35 Dominica
36 Costa Rica
37 USA
38 Slovenia
39 Cuba

II. Education
Source: World Education Forum
Countries ranked on maths and science

1. Singapore
2. Hong Kong
3. South Korea
4. Japan (joint)
4. Taiwan (joint)
6. Finland
7. Estonia
8. Switzerland
9. Netherlands
10. Canada
11. Poland
12. Vietnam
13. Germany
14. Australia
15. Ireland
16. Belgium
17. New Zealand
18. Slovenia
19. Austria
20. United Kingdom
21. Czech Republic
22. Denmark
23. France
24. Latvia
25. Norway
26. Luxembourg
27. Spain
28. Italy (joint)
28. United States (joint)
30. Portugal
31. Lithuania
32. Hungary
33. Iceland

III. National infrastructure
Source:
In national infrastructure we are 25th
http://www.businessinsider.com/us-infrastructure-behind-developed-world-2013-1

IV. Military Spending
Source:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2014/07/12/countries-spending-most-...

1. United States
> Military expenditure: $618.7 billion
> Expenditure as pct. of GDP: 3.8% (14th highest)
> 1-yr. spending change: -7.8% (12th lowest)
> Total arms imports: $759 million (8th highest)
> Total arms exports: $6.2 billion (2nd highest)
The $619 billion military expenditure in the U.S. nearly outpaced the combined spending of every other country on this list in 2013.

2. China
> Military expenditure: $171.4 billion
> Expenditure as pct. of GDP: 2.0% (45th highest)
> 1-yr. spending change: 7.4% (36th highest)
> Total arms imports: $1.5 billion (3rd highest)
> Total arms exports: $1.8 billion (3rd highest)

3. Russia
> Military expenditure: $84.9 billion
> Expenditure as pct. of GDP: 4.1% (10th highest)
> 1-yr. spending change: 4.8% (48th highest)
> Total arms imports: $148 million (33rd highest)
> Total arms exports: $8.3 billion (the highest)
4. Saudi Arabia
> Military expenditure: $62.8 billion
> Expenditure as pct. of GDP: 9.3% (2nd highest)
> 1-yr. spending change: 14.3% (16th highest)
> Total arms imports: $1.5 billion (4th highest)
> Total arms exports: N/A

5. France
> Military expenditure: $62.3 billion
> Expenditure as pct. of GDP: 2.2% (39th highest)
> 1-yr. spending change: -2.3% (35th lowest)
> Total arms imports: $43 million (55th highest)
> Total arms exports: $1.5 billion (4th highest)

"Make America great again" is one of those emotional but poorly defined sentences Americans, maybe everyone, loves to fall in love with. The problem is it means something different to everyone. It is like "Save the babies" most often it means a fetus or even a zygote but sometimes people that want to provide health care to children use it. I don't know what Trump means, does he think 1950 or 1850 was the high point of the United States' greatness? Personally I think the "again" is a silly and unnecessary addition to the sentence. I would like to make the United States great faster than we have been improving over the last 200+ years.

The 'again' feeds to the feeling that it used to be better before now. It doesn't have to have been 'great' then, it just needs to feel worse now that it has been before, some time.

Nostalgia is a funny feeling.

US military spending is a big number.

What happens if military spending is cut by $100 billion?

#4 What happens if military spending is cut by $100 billion?

Less giveaway freebies to reliable ally Israel?

WAPO for Trump

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-cruz-is-more-dangerous-than-trump/20...

>6 Urquhart::
Can you define WAPO?
>5 vy0123::
If the USA spent $100 billion on education for the poor, it would raise its GNP by a great deal more than the military spending. Here is a list of "Economic returns on $1.00 spent by governments. "
For every dollar spent on childcare $2.00 would be added to GNP.
Infrastructure like roads and bridges, $1.50.
Straight out Welfare like unemployment insurance $1.48
Funding for arts groups like the NFA $1.42
Housing initiatives, like renovations allowance $1.40
and tax cuts for individuals 0.20 or 20 cents.
So that's part of the joy your military costs you, a lower standard of living for all.

DinadansFriend
Do you have a linked source for that info.

>8 richardbsmith::
The bulk of the figures are from Stats Canada. The Arts one from a survey by the Calgary Herald, and the childcare figures from a pressure group for a national government election plank by the NDP party of Canada. If you go to their sites the rest of the provenance trail will be provided.
having checked out your profile, and scoring high in the literary nerd category myself, I feel that being a literary Nerd in Chatanooga must have some special challenges.

Thanks. Those figures are very interesting and should be part of the discussion.

As for infrastructure, I think our situation in the US is a bit embarrassing, condition and modernization.

And funds directed towards improving the lives of children, reducing the cost of later adult delinquency and improving the chances of later adult productivity, seem a good opportunity for return.

WAPO = acronym for Washington Post.

My apologies.

How wonderful to have "Great Again" as your signpost and goal.

It means as many things to as many people and is not currently used in a context that is Quantifiable.

You can't lose....

I would like to know when he feels the US stopped being great. I guess the greatness of the US may depend on one's colour; for example I doubt the 1950s are thought of as great by African Americans born in the South. Or, does he mean the military dominance of the cold war? Perhaps he just means the feeling of "greatness" that existed between 1989 and 9/11/2001?

I doubt his opinions are as thought out as that. He seems to respond to a feeling he has that he thinks has a correlate in public sentiment. Then he says it, without careful examination.

#7 The USA's non military spending on research and development post 1949 was high until the HK-Nixon administration. I heard a non-USA military is paid danger money when putting their life at risk which quickens paying off the mortgage to a hand full of years.