8 ms·
Why Don’t Americans Understand How Poor Their Lives Are?
- coldcode 9y agoBread and circuses worked for the Romans.
- swarnie_ 9y agoThe article makes a passing mention to the British NHS which is universally loved by everyone in the UK. Why do so many Americans object to universal health care yet complain about insurance premiums? Its something I've never understood as an outside observer.
- w0m 9y agothe tyranny of 'freedom'
- johndevor 9y agoTry tyranny of socialism is far, far worse. Nothing is perfect and imagining it can be will get people killed (Russia, Venezuela, China, Cuba, etc.). Individual rights are what makes the West successful compared to the rest of the world.
- ceejayoz 9y ago> Individual rights are what makes the West successful compared to the rest of the world. We're talking about Western-style democratic socialism, as found in Sweden, Norway, Germany, England, etc. here. Terrifying totalitarian hellholes they're not.
- libertyEQ 9y agoI agree with what you wrote, but why does the US have be the same as those countries? Why can't there be a variety of implementations of government such that different humans can choose different situations for their own needs? I'd still like to see Cuba change to a fully democratic communist state, for example.
- Koshkin 9y ago> democratic communist state I wonder if this is not an oxymoron. In my view, democracy means (a lot of) politics, while communism means no or very little politics (in a true sense of the word).
- beagle3 9y agoIt shouldn’t and it doesn’t. But when you discover that a system has way better objective outcomes, e.g. in the case of drug policy or healthcare policy, it’s a shame not to upgrade to a similar system. Really, the US has a lot of good systems, but healthcare isn’t one of them.
- Koshkin 9y agoTo be fair, totalitarian regimes are not always socialist, especially the outright fascist ones.
- johndevor 9y agoWhat are some examples?
- frgtpsswrdlame 9y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_totalitarian_regimes#Nationalist_totalitarian_states https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_totalitarian_regimes#N... Just scroll down.
- johndevor 9y agoWhat do you think will happen when these countries massive debts come due? I don't think they'll be peaceful then. They are living on the backs of their unborn children right now.
- ceejayoz 9y agoThese debts come due all the time. The US has one of the highest debt-to-GDP ratios of the OECD. All of the countries I mentioned have lower debt than we do. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_public_debt https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_public_de...
- Koshkin 9y agoThe socialism in Sweden has not killed anyone.
- fatwa 9y agoIt's raped a few, though.
- johndevor 9y agoNot yet, you mean.
- SketchySeaBeast 9y agoAt the moment the American quality of life is objective worse. The American healthcare system of today is killing people or bankrupting them, but Sweden's quality may one day decline to American levels, so that's a strong enough argument to say it's the worse choice?
- luck_fenovo 9y agoCapitalism + welfare does not equal socialism.
- Koshkin 9y agoWell, then "state capitalism" shouldn't, either.
- notfromhere 9y agoWhy are we pretending its a binary choice?
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- johndevor 9y ago>universally loved by everyone I don't think something can be universally loved. There are many stories of long waiting times and people going overseas for private healthcare. People like private healthcare because it aligns with America's love of freedom - which includes the freedom to fail.
- swarnie_ 9y ago>universally loved by everyone Maybe a little strong on my part. Asked "would you scrap the NHS?" to randoms on the street i bet you would get a very strong no vote.
- johndevor 9y agoIs such a system sustainable though? Isn't England in a massive hole of debt? And if that debt comes due, what would happen to the quality of the NHS?
- maxxxxx 9y agoDon't forget that the US spends by far the most per capita on health care world wide. The NHS saves money.
- beagle3 9y agoAlmost Every western country is in a massive hole of debt, the us included. I think it is more sustainable than other systems, especially the one practiced in the US. Also, please note than in the US, public spending on health is already huge, and there’s a huge private spending as well - iirc about 20% of us GDP is spent on healthcare, which is double any other western country, and with worse results to boot. It is already unsustainable.
- ceejayoz 9y ago> Isn't England in a massive hole of debt? The UK has a lower debt-to-GDP ratio than the US. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_public_debt https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_public_de... Their debt ratio is predicted to slightly lower by 2022, while ours is expected to continue to increase. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_future_gross_government_debt https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_future_gr...
- frgtpsswrdlame 9y agoI think it has to do with how easy it is to think about. I really believe there are a lot of people on the right whose implicit preference is to pay $10000/yr for healthcare to a private entity rather than $5000/yr to the government. When I get a tax bill the numbers are right there in black, this is how much was stolen from me. When I get any other sort of bill how much was 'stolen' is a portion but I have no idea how much so I basically write off the whole amount as necessary. It's probably the result of cold-war propaganda that seems to have never died off.
- rhino369 9y agoOne thing to consider is that it’s very unlikely America could actually cut half of all costs by simply going universal. We’d have to ration care and implement price controls. Who knows if that is even politically viable. And even we could reduce it by half, the only politically viable method of funding is a highly progressive tax. People on hacker news would likely pay 20k a year and the average person would pay 2,500 or less.
- frgtpsswrdlame 9y ago>One thing to consider is that it’s very unlikely America could actually cut half of all costs by simply going universal. It was just an example, but it's pretty clear that costs would be cut. >We’d have to ration care and implement price controls. Who knows if that is even politically viable. We already ration care, we just do it by how much money you have. Price controls? Pretty politically viable, just march some affected people up on stage. Hell you don't even need price controls, just make overseas drug importing legal. Right now we're a totally captive market, that's why they charge so much. >And even we could reduce it by half, the only politically viable method of funding is a highly progressive tax. Okay? Sounds fine to me. >People on hacker news would likely pay 20k a year and the average person would pay 2,500 or less. I mean that's how progressive taxes work and I don't have a problem with it, although your numbers are obviously pulled straight from your ass.
- kgwgk 9y ago
- ceejayoz 9y agoMany Americans are insulated from the actual cost of their healthcare via employer-provided insurance. I used to pay like $30/month when working for a major organization, but purchasing directly on the exchanges runs my family $2,000/month. The underlying costs are likely pretty similar, and the difference was likely factored into my salary, but it results in sticker shock that people often blame on "Obamacare".
- snarfy 9y agoThe most common belief is that universal health care is a 'hand out' to others taken from their own pockets.
- fatwa 9y agoWell, it is.
- swarnie_ 9y agoI'm happy paying for schools despite having no children because it benefit society as a whole. Can we not apply the same thinking here?
- fatwa 9y agoThat was not the point. The point is that universal healthcare is taking money from my pocket and giving it to someone else.
- maxxxxx 9y agoIf you ever have a serious illness or an accident money will be taken out of someone's pocket and given to you. Unless you don't have insurance and refuse treatment.
- dmode 9y agoYou can qualify everything as a "handout" then. Like private car insurance, which is taking money from you and paying to a driver who had an accident.
- Mouse47 9y agoMaybe I'm missing the point too, but can't that description be applied to insurance itself? So what's your point?
- ceejayoz 9y agoIt's not. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:OECD_health_expenditure_per_capita_by_country.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:OECD_health_expenditure_p... We spend about the same as other OECD countries in public healthcare funding, plus we spend a bunch more privately, for an overall healthcare spend that's the highest per-capita in the world, and outcomes that aren't as good.
- kgwgk 9y ago« More people are unhappy with the NHS than satisfied for the first time in a poll of the public run by Britain’s doctors, and 70% say they think the health service is going in the wrong direction. » https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/jun/26/uk-public-are-more-dissatisfied-than-ever-with-nhs-poll-shows https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/jun/26/uk-public-ar...
- ceejayoz 9y agohttps://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/aug/15/creeping-privatisation-nhs-official-data-owen-smith-outsourcing https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/aug/15/creeping-pri... > Department of Health (DH) figures show that the amount of its funding that has gone to “independent sector providers” more than doubled from £4.1bn in 2009-10, Labour’s last year in power, to £8.7bn in 2015-16. > Slow-release privatisation has also seen the percentage of the DH budget finding its way into private hands rising from 4% in 2009-10 to 8% in the last financial year. That "wrong direction" poll may well reflect concern over the slow privatization of the NHS described here.
- ivanbakel 9y agoAs the other reply sources, the "wrong direction" the public thinks the service is going in is increased privatisation as a result of austerity measures, typically. This is also why dissatisfaction is happening "for the first time" - up until now, the standard of national healthcare has been high, to an internationally-recognised extent.
- miketery 9y agoI presume because they are under the impression that universal healthcare would be worse. Often Canadian health care is cited in America as an example of a crappy system because some Canadians will travel to the US for surgeries. Most of it is unfounded, takes anecdotes, and paints broad strokes. As opposed to looking at it as a whole, and doesn't consider the underlying costs. It would be nice if we could have a pragmatic conversation about it. The GDP portion that the US spends on public health care (Medicaid, medicare) is already comparable to the total portion other nations spend on universal healthcare. So insurance is just systemic robbery, its private yet mandatory spending. Costs are high as a result of paying for useless insurance infrastructure. Finally Americans are vey independent, as in I'll make my own keep and provide for my family, I don't want to rely on the state.
- creaghpatr 9y agoCorrect. I work in healthcare finance, and can guarantee you that a "Medicare for all" system would bankrupt all US Healthcare providers almost instantly. The real question is: why don't Americans understand how much they are already paying for other people's healthcare? If you get treatment at a provider that receives DSP reimbursements, you are not only paying for medicare but paying again out of pocket to subsidize that hospital for providing financially unsustainable medicare treatments. We're all waiting for California to prove that Universal Healthcare is possible at scale in the US. Smart money isn't holding their breath though- lawmakers know it would be career suicide to give them what they wish for.
- the_cat_kittles 9y agoi think lots of people in america view politics as a sport and root for their team, irrespective of its policies. and the republicans have been steered against single payer or other healtcare reforms, so their fans all follow their lead, simple as that.
- frandroid 9y agoThere's an entire class of super-rich people which have been working at subverting the common good and have richly bought congressmen and newspapers to propagandize about the supposedly inherent superiority of individualism. This is at the root of the settler colonialist agricultural society but has been transformed and multiplied a thousandfold by corporations which have, ironically, built their early wealth on the European reconstruction. Read Manufacturing Consent for the rest. :)
- jpea 9y agoThe Americans that reject it do so because of a lack of education. The educated classes generally don't draw a line in the sand on most things, regardless of where you live in the world. The uneducated have opinions that are distorted because they accept whatever reality is fed to them by the side they prefer to align their views with.
- ep103 9y agoThis is a two part answer. 1) The historical answer until Obama's administration: They hear that it is called Socialized Healthcare. Socialized is a derivative of "Socialism". Not taking into account the myths about American Exceptionalism mentioned in the article (which are very valid), for many, many Americans Socialism = Stalinism. Then they turn on the TV, and see health industry funded politicians selectively pointing out the worst aspects of socialized healthcare, and the best parts of the capitalist model (and if you can afford access, the American model has some great aspects). That's usually enough for most people to think that ultimately socialized healthcare doesn't actually work, even if it wasn't associated with a tyrant who's successors threatened most of the living population with nuclear annihilation. So, given the proposition of a "non-working" healthcare system that is associated with mass murder, Americans see no other choice than in the healthcare system that they have. Whereupon they take a strong pride in the fact that they were able to achieve their own level of care. An: I worked hard to get my healthcare, it is part of my status, and now you want to devalue what I had to work for by giving it to everybody for free?, mentality takes hold. And if all of that doesn't work to block the idea, the health insurance lobby simply ensures that media and politicans talk as IF the above was all true. Because the second half of this question is that since Obama's administration, 60% of Americans DO believe it is the responsibility of the federal government to provide healthcare to Americans. But if you watch Republican aligned media, they will simply act as if the majority of the populace is still opposed to healthcare because of the old story above. The vast majority of Americans don't have access to polling data, and naively and incorrectly assume that the average of their friends and media sources is representative of the viewpoints of the rest of the country.
- sgwealti 9y agoThey have no point of reference for comparison.
- naasking 9y agoIndeed, and they travel more domestically than abroad [1]. There isn't enough difference between states to broad those horizons. [1] https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/countries-whose-citizens-travel-the-most.html https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/countries-whose-citizens...
- LargeWu 9y agoA large part of that is because traveling abroad is prohibitively expensive for a lot of people (which the article touches on). Especially if you don't live on one of the coasts. California to London is over 10 hours of flight time. I don't think Europeans fully appreciate how huge the United States is. Texas alone is bigger than every country in Europe, save Turkey.
- GiorgioG 9y agoThe U.S. is a huge country and most people have little desire to sit in a cattle-car (airplane) for 8-12 hours. A 12 hour drive to Florida is much more palatable for most people than a 12 hour plane ride to a country where they don't speak the language (typically.)
- lucideer 9y agoThey do - other countries. Which I guess begs a follow-up question: why aren't they more outward-looking? This is the question the article asks halfway through, but it still ends without much of an answer. As someone living in Ireland, where many things are of similar low quality (e.g. healthcare), we are outward-looking but only in one specific way: we look toward the US for a lot of things. I've often asked this question in a different way: why do we look to the US and not elsewhere (e.g. the UK, France, other EU states, where healthcare is actually ok). The two answers I've come up with are anglophone bias and anti-English sentiment arising out of our history, only one of which applies to the US, and yet they definitely don't look too us, to Canada, to other anglophone countries. So I suspect I'm wrong on this explanation in both cases... It's likely a very multifaceted answer.
- skybrian 9y agoMaybe it's because personal experience is usually not enough to make such sweeping generalizations? All we know is this person liked the places they lived in Europe better than the places they lived in the US. But what about the places they haven't lived yet? European cities are not all the same. Similarly for US cities.
- franciscop 9y agoI have been in most capitals in Europe, and in quite a few cities of USA, and totally agree with the story. Of course there are some individual exceptions, but he is talking about the feeling from different cities, the state of public transportation or healthcare, which IMHO is fairly generalizable.
- skybrian 9y agoYou are doing it too. Our lives are not random samples.
- FabHK 9y agoBut is it fair to say that observers with more samples have a better vantage point than observers with fewer?
- skybrian 9y agoYes, of course experience can be very valuable! However, it's rather tricky to share with people you don't know. You can't just make a bare assertion: "Life is much better in Europe than in the US." "How do you know?" "Someone said so on the Internet." You see? It doesn't transfer. I think it makes more sense to tell stories of specific things that happened to you, and let people make their own generalizations.
- tabeth 9y agoThis is the ultimate question -- which is superior: individualism or collectivism? Personally I think collectivism is far superior -- however the forces that be want people to believe individualism is superior, especially in America. This results in people, individuals, denying their fellow peers access to things. As for the question the title poses, there's no answer, because it depends on who you ask. I don't think Americans will ever be convinced collectivism is superior until there's some organization or company created within the States that ends up being far superior to everything else. Only then will people see the overwhelming advantage that comes with the "spread", which is the main advantage of collectivism (meaning the spread of burden and the spread of fortune). The Musketeers said it best: All for one and one for all.
- adamnemecek 9y agoCalling EU collectivist is a stretch.
- tabeth 9y agoI didn't mention the EU once in my comment, so I'm a bit confused.
- adamnemecek 9y agoIt's a comment in response to an article comparing Europe and US?
- tabeth 9y agoSo? I still didn't say the EU is collectivist or mention it at all. Both EU and the US have collectivist and individualist policies.
- adamnemecek 9y ago"I don't think Americans will ever be convinced collectivism is superior until there's some organization or company created within the States that ends up being far superior to everything else."
- Isamu 9y agoA lot of money is spent keeping American attitudes this way.
- fre3k 9y agoWe do, but what are we gonna do about it? We don't really have any ability to effect these kinds of changes as a common man. Our opinions have literally 0 effect on the legislative process. Our country is bought and paid for by corporate interests. Multiple studies have shown that our opinions count for nothing, and that lobbyists control legislation and policy. We have now descended into the hyper-atomization of the individual as a series of micro-collectives, for whom we must fight among ourselves against others with different series of collectives. We now care not for whether our lives are good, merely that we see the other having a bad time. Mourn for us, and learn from us - do not follow in our footsteps.
- krapp 9y ago>Multiple studies have shown that our opinions count for nothing, and that lobbyists control legislation and policy. And yet Donald Trump was basically memed into office.
- fre3k 9y agoAnd? Like 2/5 of the people that voted for him regret it because he isn't doing what they thought he would. He campaigned for the common man, and is now fucking him over hardcore. I think this only provides evidence for my point.
- krapp 9y agoTrump's election provides a counterexample to the claim that the opinions of voters count for nothing, otherwise we'd be looking at Hillary Clinton's second term or first after Mitt Romney. Many of the promises Trump made were absurd, irrational and couldn't reasonably be delivered on, and Trump himself was the easiest candidate to read in recent American political history. Voters being unwilling to exercise their power judiciously isn't the same as them having no real power to exercise.
- jdlyga 9y agoThis really, really depends on where you live. If you live in New York, you can get amazing food everywhere. We have things like paid family leave, free college, universal pre-k, etc that most Americans don't have. Also if you're working at a high pressure finance job, of course you will work long hours. But those are the exception. Working from 10 - 6 is pretty common for most people I know.
- xyhopguy 9y agoi wouldn't call new york an example of a "high quality of living." Subways that barely work? Terrifyingly chaotic traffic? A "me-first" attitude that is visible everywhere from the people complaining about citi-bikes to the advertisements literally EVERYWHERE. Going from coast-to-coast is like walking into a time machine.
- pdabbadabba 9y agoThe clear explanation here is that different people value different things. I lived in NYC and didn't enjoy it for two out of the three reasons you mention (I didn't really detect the "me-first attitude," although it's certainly a common NYC stereotype). But there are clearly a lot of other redeeming qualities such as the food, cultural opportunities, and general sense (accurate or not) or being at the center of the world. (And come on. The Subways don't "barely work." They work. I took the subway to work virtually every day with few problems. They're just dirty and don't keep an extremely precise schedule.) Of course, one's experience will also vary by neighborhood, income level, etc.
- ryanianian 9y agoYes NY subways are in a state of disrepair at the moment, but that misses the forest for the trees. Public outcry is already starting to force bureaucrats to address this. I hope people remain outraged here. But 99% of the time you can get from A->B in NY without much stress. You hardly ever need a car. You have almost literally the best of anything in the world within that hour-or-less subway ride. You may not be able to afford all the best-of-everything, but the best X is there as an option if you decide you'd prefer X instead of rent (or paying medical bills). Almost always you can turn sweat into $ to buy X without anybody saying no. Nobody forces you to live in NY, and nobody forces you to buy X. But it's there if you want it. (Of course you can argue that X is too expensive or that the sweat-to-$ ratio is wildly unbalanced but that doesn't change the facts.)
- kardianos 9y agoYou lost me at "toxins".
- rthomas6 9y agoThis seems oversimplified to me. I think it's fairer to say the graph of quality of life vs. income in Europe has a lower slope than America. Meaning, quality of life in America can be much higher for the wealthy, somewhat higher for upper middle income, lower for middle income, and much worse for low income.
- padseeker 9y agoThis article starts off terribly. It does not get contain enough real substance till it gets to the point about the differential in life expectancy and discusses the point about 'the myth of exceptionalism in America'. The whole line about the difference in entertainment is utter drivel. Big Brother started in the UK, there is plenty of garbage culture coming from Europe. For the record I've met quite a few Europeans (French and Germans) and I've asked them about what compelled them to come to the US. At times it does seem like Europe is a less stressful place to live. And the answer I get typically amounts to this; "In France (or Germany or UK) security is much better than the US. But the opportunity in the US is much better." I find it strange to mention Spain, and really all the PIIGS nations who not long ago were in financial dire straits and Greece has still not escaped. The lack of a decent safety net in the US scares the crap out of me. The richest nation in the world should not have this poor a safety net. But to make Europe seem like some workers paradise is laughable.
- 1_2__4 9y agoDo they ever qualify or quantify what is meant by “more opportunity”?
- padseeker 9y agoKeep in mind everything I'm about to tell you refers to those in the corporate world, where many people have college educations, etc. This is not finding or losing a minimum wage job in retail. If you are of lower education or working a low wage job you might have less stress in a place like Europe. Take everything I say with a grain of salt, just like you should with the author of this article. The most recent conversations about that issue was with a Frenchman who told me that seniority and hierarchy is very inflexible in Europe. There are a lot of people who are bad at their jobs but have a good position and will hold on to it for quite some time. No one ever loses their job for being terrible at it. And it makes it difficult for young people to move up the ladder where that ladder is. And I found it very interesting that I read an article about the making of the American version of the Office versus the UK version. Ricky Gervais said specifically that the character of Michael had to be good at his job. This was due to the fact that in the US if you were as bad at your job in the US as Ricky was in the UK Version of the Office you'd be fired. It seems to be a common theme of the handful of French people I've met - there are a lot of laggards with high level positions in France. I knew another French woman who was a consultant for a company that had a US office and spent a year here in Chicago. She did a lot of 'change management'. This refers to a few things, but one of those changes is 'layoffs'. And she walked me thru the whole process of when people lose their jobs in France and how different it is in the US. In France if you are the victim of corporate downsizing you get a year of pay. You get job training. You get services to find a new job. And she told me how demoralized most of the French people were, how'd they'd feel sorry for themselves or be lazy. Some of them would not look for jobs at all. Meanwhile when she had the experience in the US typically the layoff transition period some of these people only got 3 months of pay. However most of them had some hope, at least some of them had found another position before that period of time had run out. Keep in mind this is mostly information based on France, the UK and Germany. I can't speak to other nations. I've heard nothing but good things from Norway and Sweden, and I've heard terrible stories in Spain, Portugal, Greece, Italy, Ireland, etc. In all honesty I wish we had some sort of federalized health care. The lack of security scares the crap out of me. If I were to die quickly my family would have some life insurance that would keep them afloat for a time. But I'm also a cancer survivor, it was only stage one. The US is filled with stories of people getting sick and hanging on for years and suffering and then losing their job. In that situation my family would probably be better off if we lived in the UK with the NHA. I just hate to empty drive about crossiants and better entertainment in Europe makes it a utopia.
- tici_88 9y agoMaybe this is because, as someone once put it, Americans don't see themselves as worse off. Rather, they see themselves as "temporarily embarrassed millionaires"?
- sidcool 9y agoThis is true of every nation, just the premise changes. In India it's how bad the corruption is. In many countries it's how their religious leaders are screwing them. The cause it seems is propaganda.
- tbirrell 9y agoBecause the money we put into Defense, Europe puts into the comunal programs that boost said quality-of-life indicators. Perks of being a superpower I guess. Love it or hate it, the argument could be made that without America choosing that path, Europe would not be able to enjoy the quality-of-life they have now.
- te_chris 9y agoI think part of your argument is true: Europe benefits from being in the American sphere of defence, but, I also think this is a red herring as the USA is more than rich enough to have both a strong military and look after its population.
- uoaei 9y agoThe defense spending isn't necessarily the issue, it's the meteoric rise of allocation in the budget year after year to defense spending. We are overspending, and it only gets worse for the citizens.
- tbirrell 9y agoI think this is a result of never truly leaving a wartime economy. We had WWII, then the Korean War, then the Cold War (with Vietnam in the middle) all on top of each other and justifying the expense for almost 50 years. I don't think America knows how to cut defense without losing military dominance. As te_chris said, Defense spending might be a red herring, but I would say it is almost certainly the foundation of the problem. The other major budget problem is welfare/comunal programs. These have been hyperinflated over the last 20-30 years or so. I personally believe one of the reasons it works so much better in Europe is the fact that any given program is orders of magnitude smaller than American attempts. To improve quality-of-life to the level the article wants, I think America need to trim (trim, not cut) military spending and stop welfare spending entirely and let the states handle it (with parameters of course, but it would be a far less unwieldy beast for them handle).
- 9y ago
- somethingsimple 9y ago> There is a myth of exceptionalism in America that prevents it from looking outward, and learning from the world In my experience, this is not exclusive to America. It seems to be a feature of very large and diverse countries. I’m an immigrant from Brazil and I saw the exact same thing there. When a country is large and diverse enough, people seem to think that all that there is to be seen is in their own land, and nothing outside can be much different from that. I had friends that refused to accept that life in other nations was objectively better. They claimed it was just “different”, but that quality of life was the same everywhere. Evidently, they had never traveled abroad.
- cr0sh 9y agoI wonder if religion, particularly evangelical Christianity, has anything to do with this? America is deeply enthralled in it; in fact, atheists are considered "lowest of the low" in certain polls (like whether one would vote or elect such a person, for instance). Brazil - correct me if I am wrong - has a similar enthrallment, but more of the "evangelical Catholicism" variety. It is (like many "south of the border" countries, if you will) is highly religious and Christianity is on display. I tend to wonder how these similar trends play into the disparity, as Europe (as a whole) is known to not be as religious, and what religion there is, is relatively downplayed...?
- hartator 9y agoExcept hapiness statistics are superior in the US than in EU [1] while suicide rates are higher in the EU than in the US [2]. 1: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Happiness_Report https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Happiness_Report 2: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/world/suiciderate.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/world/suiciderate.html Maybe we shouldn’t use vacation anedoctes to try to find what the best political system is?
- AstralStorm 9y agoHappy people tend to not choose demagogues as their leaders. Please read the actual report with its casual analysis rather than look just at the numbers. Aspirations play a huge part here. perceptions of stability and social net too. (As opposed to actual quality thereof.) Input data for numbers is additionally flawed by taking averages, which is unfortunate. As for suicides, take a peek at all cause mortality instead and you will find a less interesting though much more informative picture. (Homicide rate in the US for one.)
- cultureulterior 9y agoCompletely unnecessary stab at GMOs
- holdenc 9y agoIn America Europeans are easy to spot because of their clear healthy looking skin. My theory is their diet is better, but it's likely due to many factors that relate to a healthier higher quality of life.
- maxxxxx 9y agoCome to California coast towns to see some really healthy looking people :-)
- cyou 9y agoEurope is still to some extent enjoying the fruit of capitalism, but probably not for too long. There is always a day when roman does not have free bread to hand out any more.
- brer 9y agoWhy don't Europeans understand how little we care what they think? Their rights have been systematically eroded and their countries stolen right out from underneath them. That condescending, undeserved attitude of faux superiority means absolutely nothing to red-blooded Americans. They can keep their baguettes, I'll be just fine with my 30.06 and my F-250.
- neckhair 9y agoI absolutely like how comments like this one confirm most of this article.
- pmc1 9y agoMany comments have this delusion of things being free. Free college, free healthcare, free this/that, etc. In this world of limited resources nothing is free. Either your tax money, someone else's tax money, or your govt through debt is paying for these "free" things.
- DanBC 9y agoThe UK has healthcare free at the point of delivery. The UK government spends considerably less per capita on healthcare than the US governemnt. "Free" healthcare is cheaper to provide than non-free.
- cthalupa 9y agoThis isn't the whole story, though. Part of the reasons US healthcare costs are so high is that the majority of all medical research is done in the US. America needs to do a hell of a lot better on this front - universal healthcare should be a basic human right! - but it doesn't immediately solve the issue.
- sharpercoder 9y agoAs a European having lived in the US in a fairly rich state on many measures, and coming into contact with quite some American culture, this article "feels" spot-on. It seems to me that Europeans are simply much more practical. Where Americans fall into a sort of philosophical debate quickly, Europeans regard the philosophical view yet take practical measures. The healthcare system as a very apt example: "Socialistic state-sponsored healthcare" is what it is: state-sponsored healthcare in a socialistic setting. But it works for us, and as such we don't care too much. In many online debates were Americans make a point, extremism is encouraged. Two opposing sides or one strong side is heavily argumented for. This causes a deep divide between anything to be discussed in US culture, I feel. In EU the attitude seems to be more: "yeah, these indeed are the extremes, but let's decide on a practical solution most can live with". In the US, usually an (extremist) side is picked.
- GiorgioG 9y agoThe author must live in an alternate universe. I'm a dual-citizen (US/France) due to my mother being born in France. "so they already look half-dead — order coffee and a croissant, both of which are fairly tasteless" Sorry, but there are plenty of places where croissants don't suck (give Wegmans a try) - and I'd be hard-pressed to believe that those major US cities don't have bakeries run/owned by real frenchmen. "Everything I consume in the States is of a vastly, abysmally lower quality. Every single thing. The food," Really? Everytime I go to europe, the meat tastes like crap in comparison to US-raised meat, it's tough as a shoe-sole and it's overpriced. "So my quality of life — despite all my privileges..." There you have it, this guy has homes in London AND New York. Ask the average EU citizen (I'm not talking about techies, I'm talking about the blue-collar workers) how good they have it. I compare my upbringing in the States (we lived in France for a year when I was young and it just wasn't for me) and life is far easier on the blue-collar worker in the US if you could find a decent job. An uncle of mine spent 4 years out of work (machinist) before he found a new job in France. My father worked in a factory in the US for 37 years. This is obviously too small a sample to be significant, but other family have had similar outcomes and difficulties. My mom (who still barely speaks english) wouldn't go back to live in France. This is still the land of opportunity for those who are willing to work their butts off and take risks. The only thing I wish we had in the US is universal healthcare. It's coming, when the republicans manage to lose congress in 2018. So yeah, if you're rich a rich hipster, Europe might be "better." I'll keep my guns, my F150, and my 4,000 square foot (372 sq. meter) house, merci beaucoup.
- padseeker 9y agoI posted this comment but this does echo what I've heard from other European expats. Certain industrial nations in Europe have more security (health care, welfare) than the US, but the US has opportunity. I can't say Im one the same page about availability of guns and all the gas guzzling vehicles, but otherwise making Europe into some workers utopia is utterly ridiculous. The most recent conversations about that issue was with a Frenchman who told me that seniority and hierarchy is very inflexible in Europe. There are a lot of people who are bad at their jobs but have a good position and will hold on to it for quite some time. No one ever loses their job for being terrible at it. And it makes it difficult for young people to move up the ladder where that ladder is. And I found it very interesting that I read an article about the making of the American version of the Office versus the UK version. Ricky Gervais said specifically that the character of Michael had to be good at his job. This was due to the fact that in the US if you were as bad at your job in the US as Ricky was in the UK Version of the Office you'd be fired. It seems to be a common theme of the handful of French people I've met - there are a lot of laggards with high level positions in France.
- nateburke 9y agoMy understanding is that it's easier to get a culturally homogenous population to buy into economic collectivism, vs. a culturally diverse population. E.g. the migrant "problem" that the EU is dealing with--last I checked, most of Europe wasn't stumbling over themselves to provide social services to all of their recent arrivals...
- kmm 9y agoI'm not sure how that's relevant. The US is remarkably homogeneous for its size
- cdoxsey 9y agoAmeericans do realize how unhappy they are. There's an epidemic of opiate addiction. That unhappiness is the result of many things: major changes in the job market leaving millions without opportunities, the collapse of hundreds of small towns and communities, the disintegration of the nuclear family, etc. Ironically, materially, Americans are much better off than they were decades ago, but all that material prosperity has left people unsatisfied. In my opinion the problem goes much deeper than this, as Augustine said: > You have made us for yourself, O Lord, and our heart is restless until it rests in you. But the inadequacy of consumerism is maybe more clear.
- tptacek 9y agoNon-medical opiate use is up double digits in Europe as well. The opiate epidemic is coming to Europe. There's more to it than "life is hard".
- raarts 9y agoI think you refer to this article: The Opioid Epidemic Hits The European Union [1]. Note that the title of that article contradicts the contents though. There is a big difference between the current opioid epidemic in the US, and an 'increase in non-medical drug use for prescription painkillers'.. One of the researchers is even quoted to say: "We can learn much from the E.U. in terms of how to prescribe opioids in the context of a national healthcare system" [1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/cjarlotta/2016/08/09/high-rates-of-nonmedical-opioid-use-hit-european-union/#6a50baf721fb https://www.forbes.com/sites/cjarlotta/2016/08/09/high-rates...
- scythe 9y ago>pick up some mass-produced groceries, full of toxins and colourings and GMOs Seriously? This is an absurd exaggeration. For one thing, GMOs are safe, and EU policy on them is utterly backwards. For another, this is some transparent application of the "natural food is safer" fallacy. Food here isn't "full of toxins", that's mythology invented to support the bottom line of "organic" grocers -- there are occasional issues, but those also happen in Europe. And food colorings are much less dangerous than, say, sugar. But Europe has fake olive oil and the infamous practice of dumping substandard products in Hungary and other poor countries and probably some other problems I'm not aware of because I'm not a propagandist. Should we have a better healthcare system? Absolutely. Everything else in this article is mostly an issue of lifestyle preference and ideology.
- ringaroundthetx 9y agoThe author's bland food, bland commute, bland coffee and bland entertainment options can easily be fixed by money. America's got the choices, they are expensive because they are not subsidized the same ways or at all.
- gumby 9y agoI think this is an indeed an unfair jeremiad (despite its disclaimer) yet it does make a correct point. The overall objectives in the US are different. So in most countries, for example, a transportation system is designed to move people around. So a train line can run to an airport,for example. In most US cities its goals are seemingly different (spend as little as possible, regardless of externalities? Punish people who can't afford a car? Make a political point? It's never clear). The transaction costs (both in time as well as actual $) of the most routine things are higher. So yes the taxes are lower but overall costs (the difference between total and disposable income) usually end up higher. I do love working in the USA, and have done so for the majority of my (35+y) working life. The people are friendly (as they typically are most places). But day to day life in the US is a drag compared to life in other wealthy countries (I have lived and worked for years in Australia, Asia and Europe). Part of my objection to that article is that things are more alike than they are different. Cartels can exert control to maintain rents (taxi unions, for example -- my train example isn't quite as cut and dried as I made out). And in in the US when there's a difficult political dispute both sides typically battle it out, and amp it up, making resolution harder and fostering public cynicism and apathy. In Europe when there's a difficult political dispute both sides typically make a muddle, kicking the ball down the street and hoping the problem will go away, making resolution harder and fostering public cynicism and apathy. In the parts of Asia where I lived, when there's a difficult political dispute nothing really happens unless someone is strong enough to simply make a decision (a strongman perhaps, or the bureaucracy) which isn't particularly democratic and fosters, at best, public cynicism and apathy.
- golergka 9y agoI've moved between countries with different work habits and cultures a few years ago. In the old country, I arrived in the office in the morning and routinely stayed there until 10 or 11; in the new, work shuttle made sure that I never stayed in the office longer than 8 hours. Instead of weekends of crunch time, I got labour laws. Instead of everybody around me constantly talking about work, I got relaxed people going to the beach every day, discussing art, just "living the life". For a couple of years, it was a great, relaxing experience. But on the third year I travelled back for a few days to realize that I miss it like hell - and moved back a month later. As I'm typing this, I have worked two weeks of crunch time without weekend, in the office late in the evening. For the holidays (which are government mandated off-days), everybody's going on away on vacation, while I'll be coming back to office to finally work on a new thing in silence. I'm full of energy drinks, coffee and sleep deprivation. I chose this. Not everybody wants a relaxed life. I will die in about 50 years, and I have even less productive ones - I want to spend them making something, not waste them relaxing, lying around. I'm happy like this. May be that's what's special about America, too?
- mnm1 9y agoSure, it's a great place for workaholics in just the way you describe.
- golergka 9y agoI have only been in US for two weeks in my life, so I don't really know much about this. But different countries are different, people living in them value different things, and they optimize their lives for different values. So, may be it's a national character of people living in this country, and an attempt to make it more like other counties with other cultures may be a little misplaced?
- InTheArena 9y agoOkay, I travel a lot between the US and Europe (primarily Berlin, Frankfurt and London) and also between the US and Asia (primarily Japan, India and Bangkok). I have had my choice in where to live, and I would live in the USA every time. American exceptionalism isn't a myth, it's a thing. But it has both positive and negative side effects. The positive side effects are a big reason why America still dominates the computer science world - empowering individuals results in innovation, freedom to experiment, freedom to fail (this in particular is lacking in the rest of the world) and freedom to chart your own path. Obviously, this is a range, it's not a binary switch, but over and over, I consistantly see American engineers take risks and try things that their foreign counterparts don't often do. Of course, as with everything, individuals differ, but opportunity exists here. This matters - Americans routinely identify as happier, less prone to suicide, and have higher productivity. The second factor that this author seems blind to is that the rest of the world has become more and more American - not just western, but American. This is often sad, the difference between walking down Sukhumvit in Bangkok even five years ago - with the tuk-tuks and ethnic celebrations and baht's in the pocket - versus listening to rap, catching a uber from the airport, and using your US credit card is pronounced. But in general, Americanization (under the name globalization) has resulted world wide in a world that is kinder, more inclusive, more humane, less people dying of war & starvation etc. There is a result of the post-war strategy that American embraced and led the world on (and is now turning it's back on with Trump). The fact that Europe can focus on it's own prosperity and not the never-ending regional conflicts is built on Winston Churchill's call for "A united states of Europe" and the security of NATO. Now are there things that should be much better then they are? Obviously yes. Health care is a obvious one. But again, that also ignores the fact that Americans are basically fronting the R&D cost for almost all of the world right now. We have to improve this. We have to improve income disparity, but without going through the devesation that collectivist systems can impose. We have to relearn how to compromise, and return to the first principles of democracy. But this article is mostly the typical European-exceptionalism ;-)
- at-fates-hands 9y agoAnother one of these, "Europe is sooooooo much better than the US." articles. I love how he compares the some of the worst US cities to some the best European cities. All the while ignoring the issues those European cities are currently facing (mounting debt, exit from the European Union, mass immigration) while highlighting all the bad things in the US cities he cherry picks to prove his points. I wonder if the author has ever been the Northwest. Has he ever been to Washington? Oregon, Idaho, or Colorado? I have and they're all amazing states with many, many cities with their own little cultures and laid back lifestyles. The scenery is second to none, the air clean, the people incredibly hospitable. I won't dissect the entire article, but when you're cherry picking statistics to prove your points (most of which are subjective and not even factual) it's easy to say how much more awesome Europe is.
- rvail2 9y agoI'm sure the baker who made your croissant didn't go into work until 9am....
- rhapsodic 9y agoDid this post get flagged? It currently has 83 points in 53 minutes, yet it is on page 4 at rank 112. Just curious. It currently does not have [flagged] next to it.
- cthalupa 9y agoFor some context, I travel about 20% of the time for work. While the amount of that that is international varies from year to ear, it's usually the majority of said travel. I've been to every continent on the planet, except for Antartica. My opinion here is not formed by lack of exposure. While I generally try to avoid talking like this on HN, I don't see how to avoid it here: The author of this piece is a pretentious asshole. Basically every premise he argues is wrong or purely opinion based. Taking a quick look at his Medium post history, this sort of article seems to be his bread and butter of writing subjects, as well. Some people have to work earlier than 9 or 10am in these countries. (Who does he think is making the trains run and brewing the coffee he drinks? Do they not count as people working?) Plenty of people in the US don't have to work until 9 or 10. Plenty of people go home at 5 in the US. US food tastes worse? Man, I've been to London. I've been to Berlin. Two of his examples. I've had a variety of food at each. Were their non-chain cafes and restaurants better than some of the US chains? Sure. Were they better than non-chain cafes and restaurants in the US? No. And the US has EVERYWHERE else beat on food diversity. Not a single city in Europe can hold a candle to the food diversity you get in New York City, Los Angeles, or even Houston. With average quality being similar at non-chains, and the absolute diversity being significantly better in the US compared to anywhere else in the world, the American diner that wants to eat more than Chile's or Applebee's or whatever is in a better position than the average diner in the UK. On the top end, in the Michelin world, I don't think there's a clear winner, but having eaten at a variety of 3 star places in the US and abroad, I can say it's comparable. You can't watch documentaries on US TV? Completely false. You can't watch Swedish crime noir? Well, probably true. But we're also living in a post-cable world. Things like Netflix and other streaming services open up much more global access to media. And the idea that America is incapable of producing quality and interesting media is insane. Fashion, art, etc? All somehow objectively worse in America? The suppositions here are just blatantly influenced by personal opinion. I don't think America is the best at everything in the world. Basically everywhere I've spent time internationally - and some of that is a lot of time! - there are specific things that I think are done better than their American counterpart. But I can also point at things that are done worse. Even things that people laud a country for. People act like Germany has the best beer in the world - yet from an objective standpoint they have been largely at a creative standstill for more than a century. America is clearly at the forefront of craft beer, experimenting more, creating more, doing more and better than anywhere else. And beer might seem like a silly thing to measure anything by, but this whole article kicked off by talking about coffee, so whatever. He pulls out one statistic that he can prove - life expectancy - and then lists a string of others stating that they are the same. Some of them are so vague as to be meaningless - America is statistically worse at "stress" - what does that mean? Others, you look, and sure enough, America isn't on top. But then you look at something else. Japan is #1 in Life Expectancy - but then press freedom, another one of the things the author is championing as an important measurement, Japan is significantly worse than the US. Or the UK is ranked basically the equivalent. Quality of democracy? The US ranks higher than portions of the EU, lower than some, but the absolute quality is so similar that the first 30 points in ranking are largely indistinguishable. There are things wrong with America. There are very few things I can say that I think America is best at - though there are some! But it's a pretty good place to live. And if you look at the balance of all of these important rankings, the US averages out pretty well, because while it isn't topping any of them, it'w consistently good to okay at worst, whereas some other countries that are exemplary of some of what he claims as important have crazy swings on their rankings and are terrible at others. The US ranks higher in happiness than the majority of the EU. It ranks lower in suicide rates. If we're going to look at specific sets of statistics, are these not important too? If this article was "Why don't Americans understand that they're not the world leaders on every single aspect of life", it would make sense. The US could do with understanding that it is a world leader in very few things. That there is a lot of room for improvement. But the idea that life on average is so much worse in America than it is in the rest of the world is stupid.
- aesto 9y agoAs a German living in the US, I wholeheartedly agree with this article, especially the bit about everything being somewhat lower quality. And despite the lower quality, things usually are considerably more expensive anyway. If I might just add one more example: housing. Rent prices in the U.S. are generally about twice what they are in Germany for comparable units, and yet the houses here are incredibly flimsy (walls made out of plywood and windows without proper insulation - you just don't see that in Germany) for anyone but the upper class. And if the comments here are any indicator, the article is also right about the fact that Americans are never even going to realize how poor the quality of life is in comparison to Europe. Instead, they just placate themselves with myths about collectivism, socialism or communism in Europe (none of those are even remotely a thing). Which is all the more heartbreaking because there are some things about the US that I absolutely love.
- cthalupa 9y agoYour claims are not backed by reality. http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/Germany/United-States/Cost-of-living http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/Germany/Uni... You can dive into each individual metric, but the purchasing power is probably the single best one to look at for determining how economically empowered people are, and the US is significantly better than Germany - 2nd in the world, in fact, beaten only by Switzerland. Looking at housing in particular, "Double" is flat out incorrect for rent prices. In the US it is a bit higher, but only about 10%. Double IS correct for purchasing housing... but in the opposite direction of what you're claiming. If you went from living outside of the city in Germany to living inside a major city in the US, then yeah, I could see things being more expensive, but comparing the two countries against each other, it's just completely incorrect.
- aesto 9y agoI will concede that you make some good points, however: These statistics simplify things a little because they rely on measures of central tendency - mostly the mean, from what I can tell. Purchasing power is the best example of that. Yes, salaries in the U.S. are on average higher than in Europe, even Germany. However, as we all know, the mean is heavily influenced by extreme values, which occur far more often in the US due to greater inequality. So yes, you can buy more with the average salary, but there are less people who have an average salary. As for the housing stuff: Yes, 'double' was probably an exaggeration (it just happened to be true in my case - although I'm not living anywhere near a major city). However, depending on the size of the apartment, the stats you posted show that the difference can be up to 35%, and as I said, the SIZE of the apartment doesn't necessarily correlate with quality. Apartments and houses can more easily be bigger in the US because there is more space. You are correct that some things are more expensive in Europe. Buying houses, definitely (although it also depends on the country, Germany is a particularly extreme example in that regard (so is the US, though)). However, it doesn't always work out that way. For example, the metrics you posted show that power is 40% more expensive in Germany. That does reflect my own experience. HOWEVER, appliances etc. here in the US are often so crappy (i.e. power hungry), that in the end, you somehow end up paying more anyway. On paper, the US compares pretty well against Europe in terms of standards of living, but my experience is that in practice, this is only true for people from the upper middle class onward.
- nunez 9y ago> Everything I consume in the States is of a vastly, abysmally lower quality. Every single thing. The food, You're going to the wrong restaurants, friend