4 ms·

I understand where the author is coming from and It is important to have a realist perspective on what is driving European strategy or else we will be in denial

I understand where the author is coming from and It is important to have a realist perspective on what is driving European strategy or else we will be in denial. I think it's also important to recognize that the west are interconnected in many real ways beyond economic. The first and most clearly top of mind recently is the US defense umbrella which allows the EU to invest on other things instead of defense. Another less talked about is how the US subsidizes most of global R&D for healthcare by virtue of the obscene amount Americans pay and hence make profitable that industry to the benefit of all of humanity. For American companies to contemplate selling into or building offices and having employees in Europe is to contemplate a set of trade-offs.. there's a reason why European employees are typically paid far less, it has to do with the fact that there's far less flexibility if they are a bad hire coupled with the fact that they have much better benefits provided by their governments and hence their money goes a lot further. That is of course related to the fact that they are not generally paying much for defense. Everyone is self interested and when we see the Europeans talk about human rights on the one hand but then do big wine and dine trips in China to sell their luxury goods on the other hand you see clear evidence of that fact. As much as many Europeans may loathe the united states, in the grand scheme of things we are far more interwoven with each other and ultimately entering a new cold war with China and decisions will need to be made over time around where to place bets around self-reliance. I'm sure Europeans love to sell to China but they will not love the glut of Chinese Imports that will decimate their protectionist economies at a level far more aggressive than they've ever experienced across the Atlantic

hef19898 3y ago
See, and therw I was worried we'd have a discussion HN involcing the EU without anyone sharing all those meme and myths about the EU, labour laws, salaries... Thank you for holding up the flag!
- jdright 3y ago
  incredibile amount of delusion of grandeur on that one.
tsak 3y ago
> US subsidizes most of global R&D for healthcare Do you have any numbers to back this claim up? > there's far less flexibility if they are a bad hire In most European countries any new employee will be on probation for an initial period [1] during which they can be let go easily. [1] https://www.eurodev.com/blog/probationary-periods-in-europe https://www.eurodev.com/blog/probationary-periods-in-europe
- hwbehrens 3y ago
  Table 3 here [0] provides a breakdown of drug discovery by country and by expenditure. In terms of number of drugs discovered, the US leads with 66%, followed by Canada, the UK, Germany, and Belgium in that order. [0]: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10134693/pdf/10961_2023_Article_10007.pdf https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10134693/pdf/10...
dbspin 3y ago
> Another less talked about is how the US subsidizes most of global R&D for healthcare by virtue of the obscene amount Americans pay and hence make profitable that industry to the benefit of all of humanity. Health Disadvantage in US Adults Aged 50 to 74 Years: A Comparison of the Health of Rich and Poor Americans With That of Europeans - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2661456/#:~:text=American%20adults%20reported%20worse%20health,more%20marked%20among%20the%20poor https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2661456/#:~:tex.... Differences in Health between Americans and Western Europeans: Effects on Longevity and Public Finance https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3383030/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3383030/ US spends more than twice as much on health as similar countries for worse outcomes, finds report https://www.bmj.com/content/383/bmj.p2340 https://www.bmj.com/content/383/bmj.p2340
- tsak 3y ago
  I don't think any of your links substantiate the claim that US healthcare expenditure subsidises global R&D on healthcare, only that healthcare is more expensive in the US (which I personally think is more due to an extremely ineffective system with an unhealthy amount of middlemen that inflate prices).
  - hef19898 3y ago
    You know what disproves this, again right wing US BS to oppose universal healthcare? The financial filings of each and every international pharma company. Regarding defence spending, it is good this point comes up. It replaced masks during Covid as a clear indicator of where a person gets its information from, or how good they are at critical thinking.
    - indymike 3y ago
      > You know what disproves this, again right wing US BS to oppose universal healthcare? Originally, universal health care was proposed by the Nixon administration, and was a right wing issue. The issue was viewed as an industrial competitiveness issue, and the solution advocated was a single payer system that would move the cost of health off of the balance sheet. I sometimes wonder what would have happened had this idea taken root.
toenail 3y ago
> The first and most clearly top of mind recently is the US defense umbrella Defense has to be believable, a 50/50 bet that treaties will be honored in the future isn't. All that debt fueled spending doesn't mean a lot.
- MarcusE1W 3y ago
  As a European I always have mixed feelings when this comes up. First things first, the European NATO members signed a contract to use 2% of GDP for defense and some are not doing that. Not right, they have to honor their agreements. But then why is the US spending so much more than the 2% ? I feel that by and large that Europe and mostly the EU tries to have international influence via commerce. (Trade agreement/or not, customs, economic pressure, regulation, that sort of thing). When you look at the US then in some instance you can't help but thinking that the military is another arm to execute international influence in the world. For that it might make sense to have a large military budget. If that's not your way of making politics, and let's be honest no European country could even do that if they wanted, then it is also less interesting to have a large army in excess of what has been agreed (the 2%) All of that also with the view that probably most people are shocked that it is actually possible to have an actual war in Europe again. This was unexpected and most people thought, we have enough weapons to deter any attacker. let's leave it there. And in fairness that still holds. The 2% seem to be about right to have a useful deterrent for an attack. So in Europe (despite how it looks now with the Ukraine war) a big army was seen less useful and when the Americans say they have to hold a defense umbrella then they are probably right with regards to nuclear defense. But for the rest the Americans seem to have their own motives to have a large army that goes beyond defense and then it feels a bit strange to hear that America has to pay for a big Army because the Europeans don't do it (except the Europeans really should stick to 2%). As the Europeans have less incentive/possibility to use their military for anything else but defense whereas the Americans do.
  - emptyfile 3y ago
    [dead]
  - indymike 3y ago
lapcat 3y ago
> Another less talked about is how the US subsidizes most of global R&D for healthcare by virtue of the obscene amount Americans pay and hence make profitable that industry to the benefit of all of humanity. As an American who pays for healthcare insurance, I must say that this is a bug and not a feature! > there's a reason why European employees are typically paid far less American companies also want to pay American employees less who switch from working in the office to working remotely.
DaiPlusPlus 3y ago
> see the Europeans talk about human rights on the one hand but then do big wine and dine trips in China Those are not the same people.
- tichiian 3y ago
  Those are exactly the same people. E.g. the German leadership is notorious for traveling to China, holding trade talks, getting wined and dined, with a ritual token "but remember to uphold human rights!" sentence somewhere in a speech. https://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/olaf-scholz-china-reise-xi-jinping-1.5686821 https://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/olaf-scholz-china-reise-... https://www.sueddeutsche.de/meinung/china-merkel-menschenrechte-hongkong-1.5369693 https://www.sueddeutsche.de/meinung/china-merkel-menschenrec...
seszett 3y ago
> Everyone is self interested and when we see the Europeans talk about human rights on the one hand but then do big wine and dine trips in China to sell their luxury goods on the other hand you see clear evidence of that fact. I think you're falling into another typical mistake, which is to think "Europeans" are one person. In fact, it's very likely that the Europeans who talk about human rights don't travel to China and those who do "wine and dine trips in China" are different people who aren't very interested in human rights.
- seydor 3y ago
  Given how the Brussels controls trade with China for all the member-states, the statement is accurate.The same Commission who waves human rights flags will do all kinds of energy deals with saudi& Azerbaijan for example
  - seszett 3y ago
    The European Commission isn't one person either, actually.
    - seydor 3y ago
      I didn't say it is.
MarcusE1W 3y ago
> As much as many Europeans may loathe the united states First to get it out of the way, I don't think many Europeans loathe the USA. Some might disagree with some of the major influences from the US, but that comes from a position of respect, something like agree to disagree. With regards to the health R&D, well. My view is that to call what happens in the US subsidizing others sounds surprisingly charitable when it is all but that. The US health industry is a surprisingly economically unregulated cut-throat market. What the private companies that make up the majority of the American health industry do is what they are supposed to do, maximize profits. No surprise there. What is surprising is that some people expect that maximizing profits leads to good and value for money healthcare for individual people. What happens is that the US health system/regulations/laws lead to high prices for patients and huge profits for companies. So if the US intention is to have good health care they shot themself in the foot. But I don't know that.
troupo 3y ago
> The first and most clearly top of mind recently is the US defense umbrella which allows the EU to invest on other things instead of defense. In the past 30-40 years the US has been the direct or indirect cause of most of the world's conflicts and wars. "US defense umbrella" has cost the EU more than its claimed benefit. > the fact that they have much better benefits provided by their governments and hence their money goes a lot further. That is of course related to the fact that they are not generally paying much for defense. Ah yes. Europeans have benefits because US spends so much on military. I find no fault in this logic.
Lutger 3y ago
> The first and most clearly top of mind recently is the US defense umbrella which allows the EU to invest on other things instead of defense. And also to have the US stay in control, that was the deal post WW2. This is changing though, looking at how much EU countries spend in terms of GDP they are slowly closing in on the US. Some countries are even outspending the US on this metric. There is a real urgency to become independent of the US for our security of course. Thanks to both Trump and Putin. > Another less talked about is how the US subsidizes most of global R&D for healthcare by virtue of the obscene amount Americans pay and hence make profitable that industry to the benefit of all of humanity. This puzzles me most, Americans clearly do not benefit from the arrangement. They spend vast amounts on healthcare, way more than almost any other country, and the health outcomes are quite mediocre. This is not in the interest of the average American, its a broken model. > For American companies to contemplate selling into or building offices and having employees in Europe is to contemplate a set of trade-offs.. there's a reason why European employees are typically paid far less, it has to do with the fact that there's far less flexibility if they are a bad hire coupled with the fact that they have much better benefits provided by their governments and hence their money goes a lot further. That is of course related to the fact that they are not generally paying much for defense. I don't think this is the case. America is spending way more on defense, but in terms of GDP its still just 3.5% or so whereas the mean EU country spends just slightly under 2%. I think its rather the sheer size of the US economy and the VC money going into it to stay competitive. When you look at lower paid jobs vs cost of living instead of the privileged, the story is quite different. There is a lot of poverty in America. If you have no education, in most EU countries you don't need 3 jobs just to make ends meet, even with heavy taxes. > As much as many Europeans may loathe the united states, in the grand scheme of things we are far more interwoven with each other and ultimately entering a new cold war with China and decisions will need to be made over time around where to place bets around self-reliance. I'm sure Europeans love to sell to China but they will not love the glut of Chinese Imports that will decimate their protectionist economies at a level far more aggressive than they've ever experienced across the Atlantic Absolutely, the EU is no saint. As a general rule, its easier to loathe those that are most like us but just not us. The United States are almost as interwoven with China and in love with its cheap labour and resources as the EU though. And very dependent on it. And I think both the US and EU are now realizing this has a security risk. However, as the article points out, there is a strong conviction in the EU that economic interdependence prevents war. To the point of ideology I might add, because a lot of Europeans were sure that economic interdependence with Russia would prevent Putin going to war, to the point of blindness. After Ukraine, this doctrine has been challenged to say the least. Europe is changing now. And so is the US.

hef19898 3y ago

See, and therw I was worried we'd have a discussion HN involcing the EU without anyone sharing all those meme and myths about the EU, labour laws, salaries... Thank you for holding up the flag!

jdright 3y ago
incredibile amount of delusion of grandeur on that one.

tsak 3y ago

> US subsidizes most of global R&D for healthcare Do you have any numbers to back this claim up? > there's far less flexibility if they are a bad hire In most European countries any new employee will be on probation for an initial period [1] during which they can be let go easily. [1] https://www.eurodev.com/blog/probationary-periods-in-europe https://www.eurodev.com/blog/probationary-periods-in-europe

hwbehrens 3y ago
Table 3 here [0] provides a breakdown of drug discovery by country and by expenditure. In terms of number of drugs discovered, the US leads with 66%, followed by Canada, the UK, Germany, and Belgium in that order. [0]: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10134693/pdf/10961_2023_Article_10007.pdf https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10134693/pdf/10...

dbspin 3y ago

> Another less talked about is how the US subsidizes most of global R&D for healthcare by virtue of the obscene amount Americans pay and hence make profitable that industry to the benefit of all of humanity. Health Disadvantage in US Adults Aged 50 to 74 Years: A Comparison of the Health of Rich and Poor Americans With That of Europeans - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2661456/#:~:text=American%20adults%20reported%20worse%20health,more%20marked%20among%20the%20poor https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2661456/#:~:tex.... Differences in Health between Americans and Western Europeans: Effects on Longevity and Public Finance https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3383030/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3383030/ US spends more than twice as much on health as similar countries for worse outcomes, finds report https://www.bmj.com/content/383/bmj.p2340 https://www.bmj.com/content/383/bmj.p2340

tsak 3y ago
I don't think any of your links substantiate the claim that US healthcare expenditure subsidises global R&D on healthcare, only that healthcare is more expensive in the US (which I personally think is more due to an extremely ineffective system with an unhealthy amount of middlemen that inflate prices).
- hef19898 3y ago
  You know what disproves this, again right wing US BS to oppose universal healthcare? The financial filings of each and every international pharma company. Regarding defence spending, it is good this point comes up. It replaced masks during Covid as a clear indicator of where a person gets its information from, or how good they are at critical thinking.
  - indymike 3y ago
    > You know what disproves this, again right wing US BS to oppose universal healthcare? Originally, universal health care was proposed by the Nixon administration, and was a right wing issue. The issue was viewed as an industrial competitiveness issue, and the solution advocated was a single payer system that would move the cost of health off of the balance sheet. I sometimes wonder what would have happened had this idea taken root.

toenail 3y ago

> The first and most clearly top of mind recently is the US defense umbrella Defense has to be believable, a 50/50 bet that treaties will be honored in the future isn't. All that debt fueled spending doesn't mean a lot.

MarcusE1W 3y ago
As a European I always have mixed feelings when this comes up. First things first, the European NATO members signed a contract to use 2% of GDP for defense and some are not doing that. Not right, they have to honor their agreements. But then why is the US spending so much more than the 2% ? I feel that by and large that Europe and mostly the EU tries to have international influence via commerce. (Trade agreement/or not, customs, economic pressure, regulation, that sort of thing). When you look at the US then in some instance you can't help but thinking that the military is another arm to execute international influence in the world. For that it might make sense to have a large military budget. If that's not your way of making politics, and let's be honest no European country could even do that if they wanted, then it is also less interesting to have a large army in excess of what has been agreed (the 2%) All of that also with the view that probably most people are shocked that it is actually possible to have an actual war in Europe again. This was unexpected and most people thought, we have enough weapons to deter any attacker. let's leave it there. And in fairness that still holds. The 2% seem to be about right to have a useful deterrent for an attack. So in Europe (despite how it looks now with the Ukraine war) a big army was seen less useful and when the Americans say they have to hold a defense umbrella then they are probably right with regards to nuclear defense. But for the rest the Americans seem to have their own motives to have a large army that goes beyond defense and then it feels a bit strange to hear that America has to pay for a big Army because the Europeans don't do it (except the Europeans really should stick to 2%). As the Europeans have less incentive/possibility to use their military for anything else but defense whereas the Americans do.
- emptyfile 3y ago
  [dead]
- indymike 3y ago

lapcat 3y ago

> Another less talked about is how the US subsidizes most of global R&D for healthcare by virtue of the obscene amount Americans pay and hence make profitable that industry to the benefit of all of humanity. As an American who pays for healthcare insurance, I must say that this is a bug and not a feature! > there's a reason why European employees are typically paid far less American companies also want to pay American employees less who switch from working in the office to working remotely.

DaiPlusPlus 3y ago

> see the Europeans talk about human rights on the one hand but then do big wine and dine trips in China Those are not the same people.

tichiian 3y ago
Those are exactly the same people. E.g. the German leadership is notorious for traveling to China, holding trade talks, getting wined and dined, with a ritual token "but remember to uphold human rights!" sentence somewhere in a speech. https://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/olaf-scholz-china-reise-xi-jinping-1.5686821 https://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/olaf-scholz-china-reise-... https://www.sueddeutsche.de/meinung/china-merkel-menschenrechte-hongkong-1.5369693 https://www.sueddeutsche.de/meinung/china-merkel-menschenrec...

seszett 3y ago

> Everyone is self interested and when we see the Europeans talk about human rights on the one hand but then do big wine and dine trips in China to sell their luxury goods on the other hand you see clear evidence of that fact. I think you're falling into another typical mistake, which is to think "Europeans" are one person. In fact, it's very likely that the Europeans who talk about human rights don't travel to China and those who do "wine and dine trips in China" are different people who aren't very interested in human rights.

seydor 3y ago
Given how the Brussels controls trade with China for all the member-states, the statement is accurate.The same Commission who waves human rights flags will do all kinds of energy deals with saudi& Azerbaijan for example
- seszett 3y ago
  The European Commission isn't one person either, actually.
  - seydor 3y ago
    I didn't say it is.

MarcusE1W 3y ago

> As much as many Europeans may loathe the united states First to get it out of the way, I don't think many Europeans loathe the USA. Some might disagree with some of the major influences from the US, but that comes from a position of respect, something like agree to disagree. With regards to the health R&D, well. My view is that to call what happens in the US subsidizing others sounds surprisingly charitable when it is all but that. The US health industry is a surprisingly economically unregulated cut-throat market. What the private companies that make up the majority of the American health industry do is what they are supposed to do, maximize profits. No surprise there. What is surprising is that some people expect that maximizing profits leads to good and value for money healthcare for individual people. What happens is that the US health system/regulations/laws lead to high prices for patients and huge profits for companies. So if the US intention is to have good health care they shot themself in the foot. But I don't know that.

troupo 3y ago

> The first and most clearly top of mind recently is the US defense umbrella which allows the EU to invest on other things instead of defense. In the past 30-40 years the US has been the direct or indirect cause of most of the world's conflicts and wars. "US defense umbrella" has cost the EU more than its claimed benefit. > the fact that they have much better benefits provided by their governments and hence their money goes a lot further. That is of course related to the fact that they are not generally paying much for defense. Ah yes. Europeans have benefits because US spends so much on military. I find no fault in this logic.

Lutger 3y ago

> The first and most clearly top of mind recently is the US defense umbrella which allows the EU to invest on other things instead of defense. And also to have the US stay in control, that was the deal post WW2. This is changing though, looking at how much EU countries spend in terms of GDP they are slowly closing in on the US. Some countries are even outspending the US on this metric. There is a real urgency to become independent of the US for our security of course. Thanks to both Trump and Putin. > Another less talked about is how the US subsidizes most of global R&D for healthcare by virtue of the obscene amount Americans pay and hence make profitable that industry to the benefit of all of humanity. This puzzles me most, Americans clearly do not benefit from the arrangement. They spend vast amounts on healthcare, way more than almost any other country, and the health outcomes are quite mediocre. This is not in the interest of the average American, its a broken model. > For American companies to contemplate selling into or building offices and having employees in Europe is to contemplate a set of trade-offs.. there's a reason why European employees are typically paid far less, it has to do with the fact that there's far less flexibility if they are a bad hire coupled with the fact that they have much better benefits provided by their governments and hence their money goes a lot further. That is of course related to the fact that they are not generally paying much for defense. I don't think this is the case. America is spending way more on defense, but in terms of GDP its still just 3.5% or so whereas the mean EU country spends just slightly under 2%. I think its rather the sheer size of the US economy and the VC money going into it to stay competitive. When you look at lower paid jobs vs cost of living instead of the privileged, the story is quite different. There is a lot of poverty in America. If you have no education, in most EU countries you don't need 3 jobs just to make ends meet, even with heavy taxes. > As much as many Europeans may loathe the united states, in the grand scheme of things we are far more interwoven with each other and ultimately entering a new cold war with China and decisions will need to be made over time around where to place bets around self-reliance. I'm sure Europeans love to sell to China but they will not love the glut of Chinese Imports that will decimate their protectionist economies at a level far more aggressive than they've ever experienced across the Atlantic Absolutely, the EU is no saint. As a general rule, its easier to loathe those that are most like us but just not us. The United States are almost as interwoven with China and in love with its cheap labour and resources as the EU though. And very dependent on it. And I think both the US and EU are now realizing this has a security risk. However, as the article points out, there is a strong conviction in the EU that economic interdependence prevents war. To the point of ideology I might add, because a lot of Europeans were sure that economic interdependence with Russia would prevent Putin going to war, to the point of blindness. After Ukraine, this doctrine has been challenged to say the least. Europe is changing now. And so is the US.