3 ms·
> Feel free to downvote if you feel, as per HN guidelines, that I am not contributing to the discussion. I feel it doesn't, as it doesn't even try to present a
by Tainnor 4y ago
> Feel free to downvote if you feel, as per HN guidelines, that I am not contributing to the discussion.
I feel it doesn't, as it doesn't even try to present any sort of nuanced argument, it's really just nationalistic flame-bait.
It's one thing to express the opinion that one worries that excessive regulation might mean a competitive disadvantage in the long run. It's quite another to accuse the whole continent of Europe to be "free-loaders" just because some (paywalled) opinion piece in the Economist wrote it, or to accuse it of making its people poorer.
- whimsicalism 4y agoFree-rider (not loader!) has an economic meaning. It is easy to attack a post when you put words in peoples' mouths. The EU shares common regulatory characteristics as well as a common capital market often. Comparing the two systems is not "nationalistic flamebait" and I find it sort of absurd to suggest so. Different economic systems have an impact on people's well being. I didn't realize it was verboten to suggest so. re: paywalls, I agree they are annoying (ironic that given the subject matter of the post they will likely become much more common), but you can use archive.is
- Tainnor 4y agoNote that the article you linked has been flagged the last time it was submitted to HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30569887 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30569887 I think that's pretty telling. You're not doing "a comparison between different economic systems" in the sense of wanting to compare trade-offs. The picture you're painting is so one-dimensional that it's no basis for discussion. It's just a rallying point for people to argue whether Europe sucks or the US sucks.