London is HORRIBLE

[Anonymous]

I mean, the life expectancy in the UK is way higher than the US. The results speak for themselves. Don’t confuse having a lot of healthcare with having good healthcare.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Btw if op ever wonders how people feel about Americans; all the answers are in the comments on this Instagram post

https://www.instagram.com/reel/C2SZWPbrA1t/?igsh=ZndiNDEyZXUxaGlu

Good lord! That “food” is nightmare fuel! Is she trying to kill her family?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Btw if op ever wonders how people feel about Americans; all the answers are in the comments on this Instagram post

https://www.instagram.com/reel/C2SZWPbrA1t/?igsh=ZndiNDEyZXUxaGlu

Good lord! That “food” is nightmare fuel! Is she trying to kill her family?

I have had a couple of these videos in my feed and wondered about them. They are basically trolling by video. Make absurd "meals" to get people angry and respond in the comments. Drives the clicks!

[Anonymous]

Definitely the vile Indian family from Below Deck. Regional embarrassment

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I posted earlier about having lived in both London and DC. You can't really meaningfully compare your experience vacationing in a place with living there. If you haven't had to work in a place, pay taxes there, hire a plumber, or try to find a decent school for your kid, you dont really know it.

Most Americans would be horrified at the condition of rental apartments in the UK (run-down, no clothes dryers, no garbage disposals), much in the same way that Londoners would be horrified to discover the number of important US cities that are wholly inaccessible by public transit.

Most Americans would also be frustrated by the need to be on hold for 40 minutes starting at 8 am to get one of the NHS appointment slots available that day at your local surgery, with its 10000 person patient docket. They would also be shocked to hear the NHS mammogram lady say, "See you in 4 years." On the flip side, Americans would also be pleasantly surprised when their NHS mammogram, scheduled for 10:30, actually takes place at 10:30, something that you could be sure wouldnt happen in the US.

All European cities have small apartments with few amenities - it comes with being old and crowded... why pick on London?

Munich, Zurich, Frankfurt, Vienna, Hamburg, Lyon, Amsterdam, Madrid for example have much better building construction, insulation, and plumbing in their homes

American homes are cheap but insulated well and have good plumbing for the most part

Swiss, German, Austrian and northern Italian homes are built out of good materials, insulated, good plumbing but cost to salary ratio is high

uk is unique in being expensive vs incomes with uniquely poor conditions

https://news.sky.com/story/amp/english-homes-more-expensive-and-in-worse-condition-than-most-developed-nations-report-12976858

https://www.pbctoday.co.uk/news/planning-construction-news/english-housing-is-worst-in-europe-report-finds/133243/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I mean, the life expectancy in the UK is way higher than the US. The results speak for themselves. Don’t confuse having a lot of healthcare with having good healthcare.

Yet adjusting for income when I walk around London, go to work, go out — British people look so sickly vs white americans of similar ses in nyc, la etc

And its not because British whites are more pale than American whites — because Scandinavians look healthy and robust

Umc British whites are the least healthy most frail looking umc whites

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I never want to hear people say how great London is or London is better than dc.

1. Housing is atrocious. We are living in a roughly 2 million pound flat in Mayfair and the plumbing is awful, the insulation/windows are awful and we are always cold (and we are used to Montana cold but homes in London are cold whereas in the us homes stay warm). Our colleagues here have homes anywhere between 500k to 6 million pounds here in various neighborhoods and they are all dumpy

2. The parks are overrated

3. People are mean

4. The tube and trains are mindblowingly expensive

5. Service is poor

6. British “professionals” have horrible work ethic without the “la dolce vita” attitude of Italians/southern euros. It’s the worst of both worlds - uptight, high expectations yet also poor work ethic/quality.

7. Food is awful

8. Social life is way too alcohol centric

There is literally nothing redeeming about this place. I’d rather live in Dallas and I think the south is 🤮 !

dc is 100x better than London

Sure OP. You better stay away. Lol.

[Anonymous]

I couldn’t not agree more. Stay away haters!

[Anonymous]

U h8 Us cuz U Ain’t Us

[Anonymous]

I haven’t read a single lunatic post-colonial rant. Just don’t go to London. No one is missing you

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I posted earlier about having lived in both London and DC. You can't really meaningfully compare your experience vacationing in a place with living there. If you haven't had to work in a place, pay taxes there, hire a plumber, or try to find a decent school for your kid, you dont really know it.

Most Americans would be horrified at the condition of rental apartments in the UK (run-down, no clothes dryers, no garbage disposals), much in the same way that Londoners would be horrified to discover the number of important US cities that are wholly inaccessible by public transit.

Most Americans would also be frustrated by the need to be on hold for 40 minutes starting at 8 am to get one of the NHS appointment slots available that day at your local surgery, with its 10000 person patient docket. They would also be shocked to hear the NHS mammogram lady say, "See you in 4 years." On the flip side, Americans would also be pleasantly surprised when their NHS mammogram, scheduled for 10:30, actually takes place at 10:30, something that you could be sure wouldnt happen in the US.

All European cities have small apartments with few amenities - it comes with being old and crowded... why pick on London?

Munich, Zurich, Frankfurt, Vienna, Hamburg, Lyon, Amsterdam, Madrid for example have much better building construction, insulation, and plumbing in their homes

American homes are cheap but insulated well and have good plumbing for the most part

Swiss, German, Austrian and northern Italian homes are built out of good materials, insulated, good plumbing but cost to salary ratio is high

uk is unique in being expensive vs incomes with uniquely poor conditions

https://news.sky.com/story/amp/english-homes-more-expensive-and-in-worse-condition-than-most-developed-nations-report-12976858

https://www.pbctoday.co.uk/news/planning-construction-news/english-housing-is-worst-in-europe-report-finds/133243/

Sure. I’d happily live in London again but having just finished expensive repairs on my Victorian terrace house, I totally agree the housing is often of a poor standard. I don’t think anyone disputes that, do they? As pointed out in the report, most of the housing is much older than what you find in other European cities. This is to be expected as London’s wealth and growth meant it developed into a large metropolis much earlier than many other places. The curse of developing earlier is what might have been cutting edge infrastructure or construction at the time can be quite difficult to adapt many years later. Hence, the sewage system is now sub par, tunnels in the tube are too narrow to fit air conditioning onto train carriages, etc. Materials and building standards have changed a lot since the late 1800s when many of these places were built.

The most obvious solution is to knock it all down and build new modern efficient housing (if anyone had the money). Of course the irony is the old style of architecture is what lends London and many British towns and villages much of their charm. It’s all a trade off.

[Anonymous]

do not remove my messages or e;es!!!
jossy reyes "the rizzler" barrios

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I mean, the life expectancy in the UK is way higher than the US. The results speak for themselves. Don’t confuse having a lot of healthcare with having good healthcare.

Someone who doesn’t understand life expectancy, which is not a measure of health care… gun violence, suicide, drug overdose and efforts to save extremely premature babies all skew U.S. life expectancy down because these things kill young people. With the exception of premature babies (although infant mortality is also on the rise), these are terrible problems for our society, but do not reflect the quality of our health care. Also, we import millions of people from the Third World each year and despite our efforts and expenditures, these people do die earlier for a number of reasons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mean, the life expectancy in the UK is way higher than the US. The results speak for themselves. Don’t confuse having a lot of healthcare with having good healthcare.

Someone who doesn’t understand life expectancy, which is not a measure of health care… gun violence, suicide, drug overdose and efforts to save extremely premature babies all skew U.S. life expectancy down because these things kill young people. With the exception of premature babies (although infant mortality is also on the rise), these are terrible problems for our society, but do not reflect the quality of our health care. Also, we import millions of people from the Third World each year and despite our efforts and expenditures, these people do die earlier for a number of reasons.

Beat me to it.

In addition, minority, specifically black people, specifically black women have very poor health outcomes that transcend income brackets and national borders. Some of that is racism of different manifestations, but most of it is a result in (US led) advances that determine prior assumptions about all people being the same were wrong. Clinical trials, health studies, etc simply didn’t include enough minorities under the assumption that everyone was the same in the inside. We are just beginning to peel back that onion but it helps explain why US has certain poorer health outcomes. We are the only advanced economy with such a diverse population. NHS isn’t setting the world on fire with care of those of african descent. There’s just not as many of them to skew the numbers.

So you have compounding problems, poor people receive worse care, minorities receive care not necessarily personalized for them, gun violence, drug abuse, efforts to save extremely premature births, and others factors that skew the life expectancy.

There’s not a 65 year old Brit alive who would prefer the NHS to Medicare, nor is there an employed Brit who would prefer NHS to the PPO options the vast majority of employed Americans have access to.

There are models of universal coverage that make sense… single payer just isn’t one of them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mean, the life expectancy in the UK is way higher than the US. The results speak for themselves. Don’t confuse having a lot of healthcare with having good healthcare.

Someone who doesn’t understand life expectancy, which is not a measure of health care… gun violence, suicide, drug overdose and efforts to save extremely premature babies all skew U.S. life expectancy down because these things kill young people. With the exception of premature babies (although infant mortality is also on the rise), these are terrible problems for our society, but do not reflect the quality of our health care. Also, we import millions of people from the Third World each year and despite our efforts and expenditures, these people do die earlier for a number of reasons.

Beat me to it.

In addition, minority, specifically black people, specifically black women have very poor health outcomes that transcend income brackets and national borders. Some of that is racism of different manifestations, but most of it is a result in (US led) advances that determine prior assumptions about all people being the same were wrong. Clinical trials, health studies, etc simply didn’t include enough minorities under the assumption that everyone was the same in the inside. We are just beginning to peel back that onion but it helps explain why US has certain poorer health outcomes. We are the only advanced economy with such a diverse population. NHS isn’t setting the world on fire with care of those of african descent. There’s just not as many of them to skew the numbers.

So you have compounding problems, poor people receive worse care, minorities receive care not necessarily personalized for them, gun violence, drug abuse, efforts to save extremely premature births, and others factors that skew the life expectancy.

There’s not a 65 year old Brit alive who would prefer the NHS to Medicare, nor is there an employed Brit who would prefer NHS to the PPO options the vast majority of employed Americans have access to.

There are models of universal coverage that make sense… single payer just isn’t one of them.

That part isn’t true. Many employed Brits have private health insurance through their jobs and it is much much cheaper than health insurance here, and pretty similar in terms of what you get.

But who cares anyway? Why is this now a referendum on which is a better country to live in? OP isn’t becoming British, she’s just there for a short time and should try to find ways to enjoy herself - British life expectancy shouldn’t really come into it