This last American financial crisis has shown the real weaknesses of this nation's economic strength. The United States are or were, one of the wealthiest and strongest economic nation in the world. But how much of all that, is still holding true nowadays?
Is the American capitalistic model, a model of bankruptcy especially for the common U.S. citizens?
The rich of the U.S. will sail this current economic crisis with more or less worries for their own pockets. In the other end, while this economic storm is still going on, who is really bearing (as always happens in these kinds of situations) the full brunt of this economic turmoil are the common citizens with less cash availability in the hands, and even less confidence to overcome it.
This U.S. financial crisis has also spurred a global economic recess, and while the United States has to deal with it in various ways to solve this economic crisis, I find out that in the world there are some exceptions of nations been more capable to deal with it.
Some of these exceptions are in the old continent. In particular one of the European's nations, which is it Italy. What I have learned, was indeed that Italy is coping with this economic crisis much better than the United States of America.
Afterwards to it, my personal question was: the why of that?
In Italy the private debts are much lower than the U.S. debts, and for the mere facts even lower than the English debts, or the Irish's debts (these nations share most of the same financial and economical models).
In fact, while Italy doesn't have to create more public debts to cure its own financial woes, the United States has to invest a lot of money in the hope to avert an immediate financial meltdown. And of course to get fresh cash to pay for avoiding a financial meltdown, the United States has to squeeze more juice from the wallets of the American people.
Now my thinking on this financial situation is this: perhaps inside the American's economical models lies the truth about their own economy's weakness on the global markets...
Using different approaches by national governments for the social benefits.
Now, what are the differences between these two economic systems which are allowing them to deal with this global economic crisis.
While in Italy the social economic market is that of a state which is closer to the needs of the majority of its own people, rather than, closer to the needs of the few Italian's industrial tycoons.
On the contrary in the United States, the social economic market seems to be all bent to protect the welfares of the industrial tycoons, in spite of all the needs of the majority of the American people.
In what ways, the Italian people are benefiting more from an Italian economic system than the U.S. people with their own economic system?
First and foremost, the Italian people are getting some more benefits from their own social economic system by allowing them to not be worried to the extremes in the case of they losing their jobs. Because in the event that it happens, they, the Italians will get some more social protections than their U.S. counterparts.
Second, the Italian are more inclined to save than more on spending their hard earned money. Instead most of the U.S. citizens, because of their attitude to frenziedly spend all of their money like there's no tomorrow, most of these people when they've lost their jobs are left in deep desperation and with almost none of the same social protective net of the Italians.
You see: most Italians have saving in the Italian banks, but most U.S. citizens have only debts with the American banks. This American spending attitude is due to the American life style's pressures on its own people.
Third, most of the Italians own their houses...in the other hand, how many U.S. citizens own a house?
Fourth, Italians are getting better (unfortunately this is not always true, especially in the south of Italy... but this is an other story) and mostly free health cares than the U.S. citizens.
Next: A new economic rating for nations is needed.