england is usa from temu ?

[TheAncientMacedonia]

england has no freedom no money and low quality life
while the usa has it all while being the same people at the same time

 

[TheAncientMacedonia]

the uk has soccer ?
lol

 

[Sadist]

no, england is just shit.
they are both shit but england is even more shit.

 

[TheAncientMacedonia]

no, england is just shit.
they are both shit but england is even more shit.

there are more jobs in usa more people and gas and cars are cheap
and the county is big while england is small

 

[fantasea]

.

 

[mohito]

The U.S. is basically the British Empire’s sequel series with a bigger budget and better special effects. The original colonies were overwhelmingly populated by British settlers — English, Scottish, Welsh (and later Scots-Irish) — who migrated to the New World starting in the 1600s. They didn’t just bring tea and bad weather trauma; they brought English common law, parliamentary traditions, property rights concepts, Protestant work ethic vibes, and the entire political operating system of Britain. So culturally, legally, and institutionally, America wasn’t built from scratch — it was Britain 2.0 with more land and fewer kings.
Even the Founding Fathers were heavily influenced by British intellectual currents. People like Jefferson and Madison drew from British liberal thinkers such as John Locke (natural rights, government by consent), as well as the broader Whig tradition that emphasized limits on monarchy and protection of individual liberties. The American Revolution wasn’t a rejection of British political philosophy — it was basically colonists saying, “We’re applying your own liberal principles more consistently than you are.”
Fast forward to World War II and the “passing of the torch” moment gets cinematic. By the early 20th century, Britain was financially exhausted from World War I, and WWII nearly finished the job. The U.S., meanwhile, had massive industrial capacity, geographic insulation, and growing global influence. Through programs like Lend-Lease, the U.S. became the arsenal of democracy, supplying Britain while expanding its own global footprint. By 1945, Britain was heavily indebted to the U.S., its empire overstretched, and its ability to maintain global dominance fading. In a symbolic sense — not literally handing over car keys — Churchill and British leadership recognized that the U.S. would take over as the primary Western superpower. The Atlantic Charter and postwar order (UN, Bretton Woods system, global naval dominance) were shaped largely by the U.S., effectively inheriting Britain’s role as the guarantor of a global trade and security system.
So when people say the U.S. is the successor to the British Empire, they don’t mean a legal continuation — they mean civilizational and geopolitical succession. Same language, same legal DNA, similar liberal political philosophy roots, and after WWII, the same job description: dominant navy, global financial center, worldwide military presence, and architect of international order. It’s less “rebellious colony defeats empire” and more “the empire outsourced itself to its most successful franchise location.”

 

[Sadist]

there are more jobs in usa more people and gas and cars are cheap

there are enough jobs for everyone in the uk, partially because unemployment is literally encouraged by the jewish communist government through welfare bait

more people isnt necessarily a good thing?

gas is cheaper, but wages are also lower compared to the uk

cars are pretty cheap in the uk as well considering the country is dominated by shitty little hatchbacks

and the county is big while england is small

also not necessarily a good thing

 

[Serial Coomer]

because unemployment is literally encouraged by the jewish communist government through welfare bait

yo what's your full opinion on this? im also starting to think something ain't adding up

 

[Sadist]

yo what's your full opinion on this? im also starting to think something ain't adding up

i have an education in economics, and have come to this conclusion a long time ago.

what happens is that people pay (pretty fucking high) taxes, which then go to the government for distribution to the public financial sectors (education, defense, healthcare, infrastructure and welfare, that’s if i haven’t forgotten any of them. i will pull up figures later if you want me to bc im on a flight rn).

and guess where the overwhelming majority of that budget goes to? correct, welfare. so essentially, instead of improving education, national security, the shitty nhs (i still have beef with those fucking retards, they did me DIRTY as FUCK), or literally anything else - they choose to redistribute that income to those “in need”. but who are said people “in need”? they are massive gypsy families making 8+ kids for child support; they are random alcoholics/crackheads who cant be fucked to work so they file for benefits and drink/smoke all of that money away; they are MENA/african niggers who swarm the country, claim benefits upon acquiring citizenship OR are born as second gen immigrants, who LDAR & commit crimes; and loads more different groups of lazy bastards trying to LDAR their way through life. no doubt, there are people in need as well, but first of all, there is not a single chance there are THAT many people ACTUALLY unable to work/ACTUALLY need those benefits, and second of all, is that benefits are SUPER easy to claim, like ridiculously easy.

i remember some nigga argue to me that “but muh safety net”, but nigga. that would imply that the majority of british population is unemployed, retarded (not too far from truth) or have some other issues making them completely dysfunctional to society.

now why does the government do this? honestly, there can be a lot of reasons, but i think a big one is the fact that this is one of their only ways to bribe the population to vote for them more, especially when the majority of the population as of now is the aforementioned lazy MENA/african vermin (or at least very close i REFUSE to believe otherwise). and since every major uk party right now is both jewish AND socialist - they both incorporate this strategy, and simply compete on who can give more benefits to the rotters, as one of their leverages during their campaigns.

 

[Ibohammed Eshakt’ur]

no, england is just shit.
they are both shit but england is even more shit.

> “England is shit”
> fails to mention Bradford and Birmingham, the pinnacles of England

DNR’d, bud.

 

[porn addict 67]

England rapes jewsa

 

[TheAncientMacedonia]

up

 

[GoingER]

culturally

yo what's your full opinion on this? im also starting to think something ain't adding up

Welfare