4 ms·

>commercializing innovation. That's your take? I see a different take. Europe has done more work than in the US in fighting the robbing of the middle and lowe

>commercializing innovation. That's your take? I see a different take. Europe has done more work than in the US in fighting the robbing of the middle and lower classes by the wealthy. Sure it still is a problem but wealth inequality is a huge deal. Apple exists because of rampant cut throat capitalism that comes at a cost to everyone.

alephnerd 3y ago
The Median Household Income in the US is still much higher than in most Western European countries. Inequality exists in the US, but quality of life still not all that different from Europe in most social indicators. Even stuff like health insurance or college isn't all that different when factoring household income, and the fact that it is largely subsidized by employers and the government in the US. The UX absolutely sucks in the US though compared to equivalent systems in Europe though - an employer PPO plan in the US can give you easier access to GPs than a number of Single Payer plans in Europe, but the Single Payer plans in some European countries is just conceptually easier to use. That said, scale of things the US isn't some unequal hellhole third world country any more than Europe is some hedonistic post modern continent. The average European and American have largely comparable qualities of life, which makes the lack of innovative commercialization even more jarring.
- Tainnor 3y ago
  The median isn't a good indicator for inequality. The Gini index is higher in the US than in most European countries (although the difference is admittedly not huge). I think Europe in general just manages to take care of the most vulnerable better. You can't bankrupt yourself because you have cancer - the plot of Breaking Bad doesn't make sense in Europe.
  - alephnerd 3y ago
    I'd largely agree - the bottom 10% in Europe will have a better life than the bottom 10% in the US. That said, even factoring post-tax Gini, American QoL isn't all that different from the UK or Japan. The only large (>50mil pop) European countries with a better HDI than the US is Germany and the UK (though the UK is barely higher than the US). In 2023, France, Spain, and Italy all have developmental indicators the US reached in the early 2000s. So why is Europe so behind the US that much less developed countries like China and India, and formerly developing countries like Israel, Taiwan, South Korea, and Japan can outcompete European countries in various sectors of innovation?
    - Tainnor 3y ago
      I don't think there's a single reason why European countries in general aren't always as competitive and/or developed as they could be. In the case of Italy, there's an absolutely massive north-south divide, the total breakdown of the political system in the 90s followed by a succession of mostly awful (and short-lived) governments, a general skepticism towards the common good and, in the South, the Mafia. In the case of Spain, it used to be a dictatorship until the 70s and there's still tension between the various language communities. I don't know enough about France, but it probably has its fair share of issues as well. Common to the EU as a whole is a lack of a common language (an app in English or Chinese can just naturally target a much wider audience), the Euro crisis (and austerity politics), the current energy crisis, the migration crisis, etc. Also, almost all European countries and especially their democracies are really young compared to the US. And yes, I do think that there's also a fair share of Europeans that are just complacent and think that the good days will last forever, but I'm not sure that's the biggest factor.
  - philwelch 3y ago
    > the plot of Breaking Bad doesn't make sense in Europe. It’s not that Walter was going to be bankrupted by the cost of cancer treatment; it’s that the health insurance he has as a public schoolteacher does not pay for the level of cancer treatment he would like to get. Public health care does not always pay for top-of-the-line cancer treatment even in European countries and wealthy Europeans will sometimes travel to the United States and pay out of pocket for medical treatment. During roughly the same period of time Breaking Bad originally aired, the manager of FC Barcelona, Tito Vilanova, took multiple trips to New York for his own cancer treatment. So at least in this respect, the plot of Breaking Bad would have made just as much sense in Spain as it did in New Mexico.
    - Novosell 3y ago
      Doesn't he just do chemo? Is chemo considered a fancy treatment?
      - lotsofpulp 3y ago
        The show‘s plot does not make sense after the Affordable Care Act was passed in 2010 which eliminated benefit maximums and implemented out of pocket maximums. After 2010, Walter’s treatment would have been fully paid for.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- philwelch 3y ago
  If anything you are understating it. The average American is much more well off than the average European, much more likely to live in a climate controlled home that is heated or cooled to a comfortable temperature year round, pays significantly less to fuel his vehicles (and is likely to own more of them), has a bigger home, and so forth.
79a6ed87 3y ago
>Sure it still is a problem but wealth inequality is a huge deal. Wealth inequality is really a problem. But Europe not being as competitive as the US means that their most qualified professionals move there. They tend to call this "brain drain" Now, let's also take a look at the fertility rate in Europe. That's not a good combo
lotsofpulp 3y ago
In this comparison of public market capitalizations, I don’t think that is as relevant as the difference in global utility offered by the companies on the exchange. For example, the business with France’s highest market cap, LVMH, could vanish tomorrow and make almost no difference in utility to anyone except LVMH’s employees and vendors.
- realusername 3y ago
  Probably controversial on HN but I'm thinking the same about Apple, I could certainly imagine a phone landscape without them. Utility is subjective at the end of the day.
  - abduhl 3y ago
    What operating system did you type this post on? Apple is more than phones.
    - realusername 3y ago
      I'm currently using Linux with pop-os, both for work and personal stuff. I do have a macbook stored under my desk but it's only used for specific Apple-only stuff and it's really slow, not sure what's wrong with it.
  - lotsofpulp 3y ago
    I can give a couple examples of utility, showing the difference between a business like Apple and LVMH. That is not to say Apple is completely and forever irreplaceable. Replace Apple with Google or Samsung. I had a completely uneducated, non English speaking great grandma living halfway around the world from all her grandkids. Due to the consistency, performance, and ease of use of FaceTime, we could easily video call to her regularly. I have a business where IT/tech support costs are way down due to implementing iPads for all the front line employees. Troubleshooting is as easy as turning it off and on, or replacing the device. Training is cheaper too. On the other hand, you have LVMH. I don’t see how anything they sell benefits 90% of the world’s population, and while people might buy expensive purses and whatnot, they will buy a smartphone first. Edit: another one I just thought of. I just helped someone calculate a return on investment using a shared spreadsheet in google drive. Clearly provided greater utility to me and my relative than me buying expensive clothing.

alephnerd 3y ago

The Median Household Income in the US is still much higher than in most Western European countries. Inequality exists in the US, but quality of life still not all that different from Europe in most social indicators. Even stuff like health insurance or college isn't all that different when factoring household income, and the fact that it is largely subsidized by employers and the government in the US. The UX absolutely sucks in the US though compared to equivalent systems in Europe though - an employer PPO plan in the US can give you easier access to GPs than a number of Single Payer plans in Europe, but the Single Payer plans in some European countries is just conceptually easier to use. That said, scale of things the US isn't some unequal hellhole third world country any more than Europe is some hedonistic post modern continent. The average European and American have largely comparable qualities of life, which makes the lack of innovative commercialization even more jarring.

Tainnor 3y ago
The median isn't a good indicator for inequality. The Gini index is higher in the US than in most European countries (although the difference is admittedly not huge). I think Europe in general just manages to take care of the most vulnerable better. You can't bankrupt yourself because you have cancer - the plot of Breaking Bad doesn't make sense in Europe.
- alephnerd 3y ago
  I'd largely agree - the bottom 10% in Europe will have a better life than the bottom 10% in the US. That said, even factoring post-tax Gini, American QoL isn't all that different from the UK or Japan. The only large (>50mil pop) European countries with a better HDI than the US is Germany and the UK (though the UK is barely higher than the US). In 2023, France, Spain, and Italy all have developmental indicators the US reached in the early 2000s. So why is Europe so behind the US that much less developed countries like China and India, and formerly developing countries like Israel, Taiwan, South Korea, and Japan can outcompete European countries in various sectors of innovation?
  - Tainnor 3y ago
    I don't think there's a single reason why European countries in general aren't always as competitive and/or developed as they could be. In the case of Italy, there's an absolutely massive north-south divide, the total breakdown of the political system in the 90s followed by a succession of mostly awful (and short-lived) governments, a general skepticism towards the common good and, in the South, the Mafia. In the case of Spain, it used to be a dictatorship until the 70s and there's still tension between the various language communities. I don't know enough about France, but it probably has its fair share of issues as well. Common to the EU as a whole is a lack of a common language (an app in English or Chinese can just naturally target a much wider audience), the Euro crisis (and austerity politics), the current energy crisis, the migration crisis, etc. Also, almost all European countries and especially their democracies are really young compared to the US. And yes, I do think that there's also a fair share of Europeans that are just complacent and think that the good days will last forever, but I'm not sure that's the biggest factor.
- philwelch 3y ago
  > the plot of Breaking Bad doesn't make sense in Europe. It’s not that Walter was going to be bankrupted by the cost of cancer treatment; it’s that the health insurance he has as a public schoolteacher does not pay for the level of cancer treatment he would like to get. Public health care does not always pay for top-of-the-line cancer treatment even in European countries and wealthy Europeans will sometimes travel to the United States and pay out of pocket for medical treatment. During roughly the same period of time Breaking Bad originally aired, the manager of FC Barcelona, Tito Vilanova, took multiple trips to New York for his own cancer treatment. So at least in this respect, the plot of Breaking Bad would have made just as much sense in Spain as it did in New Mexico.
  - Novosell 3y ago
    Doesn't he just do chemo? Is chemo considered a fancy treatment?
    - lotsofpulp 3y ago
      The show‘s plot does not make sense after the Affordable Care Act was passed in 2010 which eliminated benefit maximums and implemented out of pocket maximums. After 2010, Walter’s treatment would have been fully paid for.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
philwelch 3y ago
If anything you are understating it. The average American is much more well off than the average European, much more likely to live in a climate controlled home that is heated or cooled to a comfortable temperature year round, pays significantly less to fuel his vehicles (and is likely to own more of them), has a bigger home, and so forth.

79a6ed87 3y ago

>Sure it still is a problem but wealth inequality is a huge deal. Wealth inequality is really a problem. But Europe not being as competitive as the US means that their most qualified professionals move there. They tend to call this "brain drain" Now, let's also take a look at the fertility rate in Europe. That's not a good combo

lotsofpulp 3y ago

In this comparison of public market capitalizations, I don’t think that is as relevant as the difference in global utility offered by the companies on the exchange. For example, the business with France’s highest market cap, LVMH, could vanish tomorrow and make almost no difference in utility to anyone except LVMH’s employees and vendors.

realusername 3y ago
Probably controversial on HN but I'm thinking the same about Apple, I could certainly imagine a phone landscape without them. Utility is subjective at the end of the day.
- abduhl 3y ago
  What operating system did you type this post on? Apple is more than phones.
  - realusername 3y ago
    I'm currently using Linux with pop-os, both for work and personal stuff. I do have a macbook stored under my desk but it's only used for specific Apple-only stuff and it's really slow, not sure what's wrong with it.
- lotsofpulp 3y ago
  I can give a couple examples of utility, showing the difference between a business like Apple and LVMH. That is not to say Apple is completely and forever irreplaceable. Replace Apple with Google or Samsung. I had a completely uneducated, non English speaking great grandma living halfway around the world from all her grandkids. Due to the consistency, performance, and ease of use of FaceTime, we could easily video call to her regularly. I have a business where IT/tech support costs are way down due to implementing iPads for all the front line employees. Troubleshooting is as easy as turning it off and on, or replacing the device. Training is cheaper too. On the other hand, you have LVMH. I don’t see how anything they sell benefits 90% of the world’s population, and while people might buy expensive purses and whatnot, they will buy a smartphone first. Edit: another one I just thought of. I just helped someone calculate a return on investment using a shared spreadsheet in google drive. Clearly provided greater utility to me and my relative than me buying expensive clothing.