I think a lot gets missed in these types of comparisons with the US because the US is both a much less urban country, and also a federal system where a lot of p

I think a lot gets missed in these types of comparisons with the US because the US is both a much less urban country, and also a federal system where a lot of problems get pushed down to local governments. These two forces work in opposite directions of attraction. Because the country is less urban than Western Europe, the most attractive places to live are not exclusively the big 3 cities. Our wealthy people are pulled away from the cities as much as they are attracted to them. Meanwhile, a lot of national problems - drug addiction, homelessness, mental illness.. are essentially handed down to cities to deal with. Blue cities by and large have more social services, shelters, lax drug laws, needle programs, etc.. which attracts people who have these problems. Further, some cities like NYC have laws on the books that essentially force the city to provide a shelter bed for anyone who wants one. Right now we are seeing this made worse by NYC absorbing a disproportionate number of migrants which are then the cities responsibility to house/feed. Wherever you stand on migrant policy, NYC has received a number of migrants equal to the pre-existing number of homeless shelter beds, at a time when shelters were at a an all time high utilization. So our homeless/shelter budget which is already higher per capita than most of the rest of the country just needed to double. So blue cities end up with disproportionate number of problems they need to solve.