I wish we could draw that line.
Take the heat and hate out of debate.
Right now it is early morning, by tonight, about 12 hours we may be in recession even depression.
And need desperate to be united not divided to think not blame.
Every issue could be better considered.

Yes ammonite, they are higher regulated than us (although partly because American consumers don't stand for the kind of prices and services we put up with)- particularly in their consumer standards; Having said that, in America business largely gets a free ride- which reflects quite a lot on Australia really.
Of course, with every area of Australian business, fields, channels, supermarket chains, running under at best, a duopoly, or a monopoly (unlike America where almost every field has a substantial amount of competition)- it might be hard to tell them apart.

King Hazza

Just arrived at this thread after reading your highly entertaining and "funny because its true" posts on the left/right bias of the ABC.

With you all the way mate. There is more competition in the USA, but not the choice one would expect as a result. Have you ever lived in the USA? Go into a supermarket there, be overloaded with what appears to be choice, but is really variations of the same, made by the same umbrella companies just in slightly different packages.

I don't agree with you all the time and am aware that sometimes you are very tongue in cheek. Either way keep on doing what you do - I guess one could say you are the thinking person's Houllebecq. I mean that in the nicest possible way - your gags continually evolve, unlike the single gag act of the self appointed OLO jester.

TRTL
"Wouldn't it be fair to argue that this system is becoming more dysfunctional than ours, ironically because of 'more' not 'less' democratic participation by citizens?"

I would argue the US has less participation but it is dysfunctional. My layman's interpretation is ideas of liberty and democracy in the US are heavily tied in with personal freedom (eg. gun ownership) rather than participation in decision making. Which is why the disenfranchised will often vote Conservative even if the policies of the Democrats (such as universal health care) would greatly reduce the hardship of the working classes.

Democracy is not simple (read John Keane's The Life and Death of Democracy). Sometimes the veneer of democracy such as the process of electing Judges in some judicial positions may have the reverse affect by politicising 'justice'.

The US is characterised as having a low voting participation rate albeit the turnout was higher when Obama stood for the presidency.

It is true there is much mistrust of the Executive and it is commonly derided the number of political appointments on Boards and within agencies that are meant to be bipartisan but merely reflect government policy.

There was the whole issue over vote rigging in the Flordia and Ohio elections - which meant the Bush presidency was illegitimate if those claims are valid. Very few American Presidents are ever held accountable for their actions even if verging on the criminal or illegally waging war to protect interests at home.

The Australian referendum on a Republic was also interesting. I had no problem with a Head of State being selected via a bipartisan process given the role is ostensibly a figurehead with some other ceremonial duties yet to be defined. But many Australians thought differently.

Opposing views about religion or politics tend to produce similar reactions. The nature of our 'values' are closely linked with identity and self worth. Perhaps this is why there is a such a mental block when it comes to evaluating or assessing ideas in a more bipartisan way.

Thankyou Ammonite.

Generally yes, you are quite right in that sense about American choice/regulation as well.

(and more importantly, the successes of the US's broader coverage of services is more the fact that it is simply a larger country with more demanding (and diverse) consumers and thus more businesses form.

Of course, you could divide regulation into many sub-categories as well (I didn't previously because the post would drag on too much)- GM standards, labelling laws, quality and hygiene standards, pricing regulation, among a few other things.

Pelican;
I think you will find that many people regard 'progress/functionality' in the national sense as a government being able to push policy ahead without getting snagged by things like a disagreeing public not actually wanting the policy or demanding refinement, getting it sent back to the drawing board.
Hence why 'more democracy' is detrimental, because large disagreeable groups debating and compromising looks a little like "squabbling and not getting things done" when the person only wants to see 'finished' products (policy) coming out the door at regular intervals.

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/hit-by-the-debt-boomerang-20110805-1ifh5.html
Surely we need to look at story's like this more often.
Not to produce a halo for our current government.
But the last 4, more, to focus on the fact just how much better we find our selves.
In doing so, we may catch yet another glimpse at how very bad our public debate has become.