Americans have grown so accustomed to certain systemic problems that we often view them as normal. However, in some areas of the world, these same issues are uncommon and considered highly unusual. That is why the following question has gotten so much attention on Reddit:

So, let's get into some of the comments, with a big SIGH from people in the U.S...

Here are 27 honest perspectives about the United States, directly from foreigners:

1.

2.

Related: "22 Times People Had Terrifying Real-Life Experiences Like Something Out Of The Twilight Zone"

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

Related: "Creepy Camping Stories That Will Make You Rethink The Great Outdoors"

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

Related: "People Are Sharing The Wild, Unexplainable Things They've Witnessed In The Wilderness"

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

Related: "Disturbing Acts People Witnessed That Cannot Be Unseen"

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27. And, lastly:

That is a lot to digest as an American. If you have anything good or bad to add to this, let us know in the anonymous comments form below, and maybe we will make a follow-up post.

Your daily brain workout: Only People Who Love A Good Brain Teaser Will Be Able To Crack These Word Chains

Also in Internet Finds: "People Share The Most Illegal Thing They've Ever Done, And If They'd Do It Again"

Also in Internet Finds: "People Share Unbelievable True Stories That Will Give You Chills"

Read it on BuzzFeed.com

BOSTON (AP) — A federal judge in Boston on Friday ruled the Trump administration can't use an obscure clause relating to agency priorities to make billions of dollars in funding cuts.

Twenty-three states had a filed a lawsuit last year accusing the administration of using the clause to make cuts to everything from crime prevention to food security to scientific research. They were concerned that it would be used to cancel current and future grants.

U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani granted a summary judgment preventing the administration from relying on the clause to make cuts and denied a motion by the government to dismiss the case.

"Defendants' interpretation of the Termination Clause is not clearly supported by the text of the provision, runs counter to the regulatory scheme, receives no support in the rulemaking history, and would violate the Spending Clause's requirement that conditions be imposed unambiguously," Talwani, who was nominated by Democratic President Barack Obama, wrote.

The lawsuit argued that the Office of Management and Budget promulgated the use of the clause in question to justify what it described as a "nationwide slash-and-burn campaign."

The clause, which was first introduced in 2020 and revised in 2024, says federal agents can terminate a grant if the award "no longer effectuates the program goals or agency priorities." The states argued that the language, put in place during the Biden administration, was for the first time being used to terminate grants.

"Instead of working with us to keep the public safe and lower costs for hardworking New Jerseyans, the Trump Administration has recklessly and illegally gutted federal funding for public safety, disaster preparedness, scientific research, clean water, and more," New Jersey Attorney General Jennifer Davenport said in a statement.

"Today's decision is an important win for all New Jerseyans and confirms that the Trump Administration defied the law when it embarked on its campaign to gut critical federal funding to the states," she continued. "The President and his allies cannot hold critical programs hostage to their personal whims and political ideologies, destabilizing the country by yanking essential federal funding that was already awarded to the states."

Calling the case an "extraordinarily unusual lawsuit," lawyers for federal government argued it should be dismissed because some of those grants have already been terminated and plaintiffs' argument about the impact to future grants was far too speculative. They also accused the states of "raising blanket, undifferentiated objections" to the termination of thousands of grants without seeking relief that would "restore a single grant."

"That mismatch between the allegedly unlawful agency 'decision' on one hand, and the amorphous relief requested in this suit, on the other, creates a set of jurisdiction and justiciability defects that doom this lawsuit at the threshold," lawyers wrote in the motion to dismiss.

A spokesperson for the Office of Management and Budget did not respond to a request for comment.

A new survey says Las Vegas is the American city people regret visiting most. Listen, I get that — and I say that as someone who genuinely loves Las Vegas and keeps going back multiple times a year. (I'd estimate I've been about four times a year in this millennium alone, so that works out to about 100 return visits!)

According to a new survey from Travel Guard, 97 percent of Americans say they regret at least one trip they've taken, with Las Vegas topping the list of most-regretted destinations among U.S. travelers. New York City, Miami, Orlando, and Cancun rounded out the top five.

At first glance, Vegas winning this dubious honor feels a little surprising. The city remains one of the most-visited destinations in the country for bachelor and bachelorette parties, girls' trips, conventions, concerts, sporting events, food tourism, and quick weekend escapes. But yes, I suppose it tracks.

I've been going to Las Vegas for decades, and I visit several times a year now for everything from work trips to girls' weekends to couples' getaways. I know the destination well enough to understand both why people adore it… and why it can go south very quickly.

Because Vegas is, fundamentally, a city built around excess.

It's loud, bright, overstimulating, dehydrating, sleep-depriving, and increasingly (sometimes bafflingly) expensive. You lose all sense of time there — by design. There are no windows in casinos. Cocktails arrive at all hours, sometimes unexpectedly (but why not since it's already in my hand now, am I right?). A 10 PM dinner reservation is just a jumping-off point. 

And unlike many vacation destinations, Vegas seems specifically engineered to convince people they can keep pushing themselves a little further than they probably should. Hey, it's Vegas, baby!

That's why I've developed a personal rule after decades of visiting: Las Vegas is best enjoyed in short bursts.

For me, the sweet spot is about 48 hours. Two nights — perfection. I always leave wanting more. Three starts to get questionable. Four nights and it's trouble. The right time to leave is before the tipping point — before you actually feel ready to go. Once you're like, "OK, I've had enough" — well, you've already overstayed your welcome.

And based on the Travel Guard findings, it sounds like a lot of travelers may be overstaying their own Vegas expiration dates.

The survey found that the most common reasons people regretted trips included stress and overwhelm, poor planning, not having enough money to enjoy the experience, and choosing the wrong travel companions. Frankly, Las Vegas is uniquely capable of magnifying all of those problems at once.

A mismatched travel group can become a disaster there. So can trying to do too much. Vegas is one of those places where people often confuse maximizing a trip with enjoying it.

Popular in travel

Brittany Anas

Skip the crowds at Zion: The underrated Utah state park that stole the show on my luxury desert getaway

Ironically, I think that's also part of why so many people keep returning even after a disappointing experience. Vegas promises reinvention. Every trip feels like it could be the perfect version next time: the right hotel, the better restaurant reservations, the ideal weather, the smarter itinerary, the more spot-on group dynamic.

And when you do get the formula right… well, there's no place in the world like it.

Some of my favorite memories have happened there. But I've also learned that the city works best when you respect its limits.

Want more stories like this? Use the button below to follow me for more relatable Xennial takes on travel and lifestyle.

Just before dawn, the bridges began to fall.

One by one, American missiles reduced them to crumpled concrete, strewn across river beds and gorges.

For a week, the US had bombed southern cities, cranking up the pressure on Iran to relinquish control of the Strait of Hormuz.

But now the US military was going for the transport arteries connecting key southern ports to the rest of the country.

The bombings leave Bandar Abbas, a city of 500,000 people where roughly half the country's trade comes ashore, almost completely isolated.

By Friday morning, the roads linking the city to the rest of the nation lay broken, the railway severed, and a port that helps feed some 90 million people all but cut off from the country it sustains.

Bandar Abbas is also home to Iran's main naval base, which is critical to the regime's ability to control the Strait of Hormuz.

Michael Rubin, a former Pentagon official, said the Trump administration was becoming increasingly convinced that cutting off the port city was the key to reopening the vital sea passage.

"There's a growing sense, a growing conclusion inside the Pentagon, that whether the United States wants to do this or not, they really have no choice if they want this to end," he said.

Bandar Abbas is the city that keeps Iran alive.

More in World

Trump may have to choose between an endless quagmire and ceding the Strait of Hormuz to Iran

Fortune

324

Kim Jong Un was meant to be their only idol - then North Koreans discovered K-pop

BBC

Iran’s hardliners warn of a ‘coup’ as US truce comes under pressure

CNN

349

期間限定の強力なパックが利用可能です毎日の伝説 ·

AdAd

Its Shahid Rajaee port is the country's "golden gateway", handling close to half of all Iranian trade, including industrial machinery, construction materials, agricultural supplies, and consumer goods that stock the markets and feed the factories, along with steel, fertilisers, and petroleum products that move across its docks.

The bombs fell along the corridors running west and north of the city.

Local authorities said the Gariveh bridge, on the Bandar Abbas–Khamir–Lar route, was among five damaged overnight, along with a bridge past Latidan village, two on the Kahorestan route towards Lar, a half-finished bridge on the Bandar Khamir–Keshar road, and the crossing at Maro village in Khamir district.

Where traffic moved at all, it slowed to a crawl.

Authorities pleaded with residents to stay off the roads and keep them open for rescue crews, and to follow only official news while emergency workers started the rebuild.

The railway was also targeted, forcing passengers off their trains and on to intercity bus replacements.

Officials reported that the Bandar Abbas rail junction, about six miles west of the city, where the track branches towards passenger routes, freight yards and the Shahid Rajaee port itself, had been hit, wounding two people.

Bandar Abbas handles roughly 85 per cent of the nation's container traffic and 70 per cent of its transit trade.

Bombing rail and road links in the region was a tactic deployed by Saddam Hussein against Iran in the 1980s.

Roads were later rerouted, but the US military is seeking to cut them off again.

It would be "easier than people think" to blockade Iran because it only has a couple of major ports and one small navigable river, said Mr Rubin.

"I hope we're not just playing whack-a-mole," he continued. "You've got to knock out Bandar Abbas, and by knockout, I mean you take out the bridges."

At the same time, Mr Rubin said Mr Trump risked undermining the US's plans by deciding to restart negotiations without a coherent strategy.

Sina Toosi, an analyst at the Centre for International Policy, said commentators in Iran had identified three possible objectives to cutting off Bandar Abbas: "one, preparing the ground for an invasion; two, diminishing supply routes to Iranian forces responsible for Hormuz disruption; or three, increasing pressure on the public in the hope that it translates into greater pressure on the government."

The threat from the American military operation is felt on the humid streets of Bandar Abbas, a city that in ordinary times pulses with life.

The city is a place of lenjs (traditional wooden fishing vessels) and container ships, and also of fishermen hauling in shrimp, hammour and crab before dawn and hawking the catch in markets.

It is also a working port town and a holiday coast at once – cosmopolitan, mixed with Arab, African and Indian influences carried in on centuries of trade.

Bandar Abbas has no piped gas, so residents lug cylinders through the heat and chase down refill trucks while banking outages block their cards.

Iran's national power utility, Tavanir, admitted the southern grid had been damaged and said crews were working around the clock to restore it – official confirmation that Mr Trump's threat to "knock out all their power plants" had begun to land.

The strikes fall on an economy already brought to its knees by sanctions and war.

Inflation runs near 60 per cent by official measures, and higher by the prices families actually pay. The war has gutted the steel, petrochemical and industrial base. And the currency convulses with every fresh shock.

Cutting Bandar Abbas off from the interior hampers an already weak economy at a time Iranians can least afford it.

"What the US is doing is escalating, but not striking targets that will cause death and suffering in the population," said Mark Cancian, a retired US Marine colonel at the Washington-based Centre for Strategic and International Studies.

"These are the kinds of things ... that will bring the war home to the civilian population but it isn't going to cause social collapse or collapse of the healthcare system."

Col Cancian questioned how significant the strategy would be, however. "The leadership has shown that they are willing to endure tremendous sacrifice, and they're willing to impose that on the population."

Hitting bridges used by civilians once again raises questions about possible war crimes.

The 1949 Geneva Conventions, signed by 196 countries including the US, require warring parties to distinguish between military targets and civilian infrastructure.

The 1977 Additional Protocol I reinforces this by specifically protecting civilian infrastructure from attack. The US has not ratified it, but regards much of it as customary international law.

However, some legal experts argue that infrastructure such as bridges can be labelled as legitimate targets if they are not being used for purely civilian reasons.

Try full access to The Telegraph free today. Unlock their award-winning website and essential news app, plus useful tools and expert guides for your money, health and holidays.

The World Cup's biggest viral story isn't actually soccer. It's the sudden wave of strangers inviting international fans into their everyday lives and the unexpected American hospitality these fans are discovering.

At first, the social media clips from the tournament were what you might expect — visitors discovering the quirks of America in real time. There was the obsession with ranch dressing, bewildered tours of Buc-ee's and Waffle House, and shock at the sheer scale of tailgates and portion sizes.

But the videos filling feeds right now hit much deeper. They are not just about what visitors are eating or how big the Big Gulps are.

They are about the hospitality of individual Americans and how much of what visiting fans thought they knew about the U.S. changes once they start meeting people face-to-face.

While the nightly news focuses on global division, these viral moments show the kind of connection people seem especially hungry for right now. One meme making the rounds put it best, saying:

"Someone said the World Cup is just America having a giant sleepover with the cousins we never get to see because our parents hate each other."

That is what makes the tone of the tournament feel so surprising. Before the 2026 FIFA World Cup even started, there were real questions about whether the U.S. could host a global celebration that actually felt welcoming. Immigration enforcement fears, travel concerns, security worries, high prices and political tension all hovered over the buildup.

Then fans arrived, started filming, and found something much more personal than the headlines suggested.

Take Australian creator Dan McNamara, for example. He posted a now-viral Reel filmed on a boat in Miami after an American he had never met invited him out for the day. In the clip, McNamara explains that he had heard about American hospitality, but did not expect to experience it quite like this.

"He's now giving me a private tour and taking me to breakfast on the water," McNamara says, clearly still trying to process the whole thing.

"You guys don't understand," McNamara says from the deck. "This is not normal in any other country."

World Cup fans are getting the invite-only version of America

If the first wave of World Cup content was about America's food surprising people, this new wave is about Americans themselves surprising visitors.

In another Reel, Texas creator Drew Haas, who uses the handle @haasoutdoors, sits in front of a sprawling backdrop of cattle and extends a direct, open invitation to traveling World Cup fans: he would love to show them around his city.

The post quickly racked up thousands of comments, including one that perfectly sums up the mood:

Popular in travel

Brittany Anas

Skip the crowds at Zion: The underrated Utah state park that stole the show on my luxury desert getaway

"As an American I want the Texas experience WITH foreigners."

That single comment cuts right to the heart of why these videos are so much bigger than a standard, superficial "tourists love America" trend. The desire for connection isn't a one-way street. Americans are craving it, too.

Since posting his initial invitation reel, Haas has posted multiple videos of international visitors taking him up on his offer to show them a real Texas experience, including this first one:

By pulling traveling fans into their tailgates, guiding them to the best local brisket, or taking them out on a boat, everyday Americans are transforming their own backyards into a stage and showing what American hospitality is all about.

They aren't just hosting—they are actively writing themselves into someone else's lifelong World Cup memory, and making new friends along the way.

After the match, even rivals become friends

The friendship videos are not only happening in private homes or on boats. Some of the best ones are happening in public, after the match is over and everyone should theoretically be going their separate ways.

In Seattle, creator anushka_wanders posted this reel:

Her caption made the point even cleaner: "90 minutes as rivals, but the rest of the night we just dance."

That line could be the thesis of half the World Cup content going viral right now.

One commenter on the Seattle post wrote that driving home from the airport felt "so happy out there."

This is why people keep calling the World Cup "healing"

The word "healing" has been everywhere in World Cup social posts this month.

It is a big word for a soccer tournament. Maybe too big. The World Cup is not solving politics, erasing borders, or fixing the internet. But after watching enough of these videos, it is easy to understand why people keep reaching for it.

A Reel from creator Stephen Scott captured this sentiment perfectly. He called his video "a heartfelt message to the American people" with text that reads: "I never want you to forget" and "I want you to always remember."

In the comments, one person wrote that the summer of 2026 would be remembered because people had found a way to "circumvent the noise" and remind each other who they are.

That phrase gets close to what these clips are doing. They are bypassing the official channels: governments, campaigns, TV panel discussions, and all the ways people are told to be afraid of one another.

In their place are small human receipts. A boat ride. A breakfast invite. A barbecue plate. A dance floor. A stranger making room in the car, at the table, or on the dock.

Countries can disagree. Leaders can pick fights. Headlines can make the world feel impossible. And still, somewhere after a match, a group of people who were raised under different flags can end up sharing sunscreen, swapping stories, translating menus, and laughing like they have known each other for years.

That does not make the world less complicated. It just makes it harder to pretend people are only the headlines attached to them.

Maybe that is why this second wave of World Cup videos keeps spreading. They remind people that a country is not just its government. A fan is not just a flag. And a World Cup trip does not always become memorable because of what happened on the field.

Sometimes the story people tell for the rest of their lives is about the person who brought them home for dinner, put them on a boat, or told them where to go next.

For more stories about the unexpected moments that make travel, culture, and major events feel human, follow my page.

Most of us have been on a bad first date. If that means they're 30 minutes late and then spend the next 2 hours talking exclusively about themselves. Or they're perfectly nice, but you're desperately digging for ONE SINGLE THING you have in common (besides breathing). Sometimes there's just zero chemistry. And then...there are the dates where they say something so unbelievably unhinged that you wanna stand up, grab your coat, and walk out the door immediately. Well...the internet knows those dates all too well.

So when TikTok user @curlyhairg1rl asked her followers to spill their dating horror stories about the most unhinged things someone had said to them on a first date, I couldn't help but share them with you.

Take a look:

1.

2.

3.

Related: "People Are Sharing Their Unpredictable Sex Stories"

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

Related: "People Who Had "Forbidden" Sex With Someone At Work Are Sharing What Happened"

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

Related: "Straight Men Are Confessing Their "Gayest" Hookup Experiences In Life"

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

Related: "16 Seriously Disturbing Things People Caught Their Partners Secretly Doing"

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

33. And finally...

Now it's your turn. What's the wildest thing someone has said to you on a first date? And I don't just want to hear from the ladies this time — I want to hear from everyone. Tell me in the comments or through the easy anonymous form below.

And for more fun content like this, make sure you follow BuzzFeed Canada on TikTok and Instagram!

Your daily brain workout: You're Officially Harvard-Level Smart If You Can Solve These Word Chains

Also in Sex & Love: "27 (Kinda) Unconventional Things People Secretly Find *Extremely* Sexy"

Also in Sex & Love: "Women Who Slept With Someone They Weren't Supposed To Are Revealing How It Went Down"

Read it on BuzzFeed.com