3 ms·

If this were true, the number of Americans I have known who moved to Europe would be roughly equal to the number of Europeans I have known who have moved to the

If this were true, the number of Americans I have known who moved to Europe would be roughly equal to the number of Europeans I have known who have moved to the US. That's not data, that's anecdote. But what is the European country where more people go there from the US than come to the US from there?

no_wizard 1y ago
The two things are not equals. The US has for a western country, relaxed standards for immigration[0], in particular if you were coming from Europe, it's quite a bit easier to establish residency here. The reverse is not true. European nations aren't very immigration friendly by comparison. On top of that, the US government, assuming you keep your citizenship, does not make it easy to live abroad. US government tax policy for citizens who live overseas is much more aggressive than any other western country, from what I understand. Combined with the fact its alot harder to go the other way, and the US government does a fair amount to discourage it, I'm not shocked more US citizens aren't moving to Europe. [0]: At least before Trump returned to office, I'm unsure how much of this has changed.
- georgeecollins 1y ago
  That's a fair point. But until recently you could move to a lot of countries in Europe for an investment less than a house in California. But I accept that could be the true reason.
  - no_wizard 1y ago
    >That's a fair point. But until recently you could move to a lot of countries in Europe for an investment less than a house in California. That alone is enough to put most people out of grasp of doing this, for a multitude of reasons, of which not having the capital is only part of the equation, as you would also need to have a suitable investment on the other side to put said money, not a promise. I'm sure there are other nuances involved too. Thats before the fact that the cost of a house in California would price most people out of the equation to begin with.
- throwaway2037 1y ago
  > The US has for a western country, relaxed standards for immigration My comments will only concern skilled migration, e.g., you are a computer programmer or something STEM'ish and you want to work in a different country. First, let's start with the "Anglo-American sphere" (my term): US/UK/CA/AU/NZ. Of those five, US is the hardest to get a working visa for skilled individuals. The rest are "points-based" system where you can apply for a working visa even before you have a job (95% sure about this -- pls correct if wrong). They are much more friendly. Also, the rules are simpler, clearer, and applied more consistently. I know much less about other OECD-level (and G7-level) nations, but anecdotally, overall, the process is much more straight forward compared to the US. What the rules say, the rules do. Not so much in the US where they randomly delay or reject applicants without good reason. (Also: Google to find horror stories of what happens when you lose your job in US as a foreigner who does not have PR. Fucking nitemare.) You hear this much less in (to name a few): Ireland, UK, France, Germany, Belgium, Netherlands, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Finland. (I don't hear as much about Portugal, Spain, and Italy, but quality of life looks awesome!) All of those countries are wealthy, highly developed and have excellent quality of life. All of them welcome skilled migration and have clear programmes (you can Google about them) to get a working visa. Again, strictly anecdotal: The US immigration system is much more adversarial compared to all of the other countries that I mentioned. Oh, and I forgot to add Japan: After PM Abe changed the rules, it is way easier these days to get a skilled worker visa in Japan. Last point: > European nations I see this over and over again on HN. I want to repeat: Europe is enormous -- like continent-sized -- with ~50 countries. It doesn't say much to say "in Europe". Are we talking about Belarus, Albania, Germany, or Italy? All of them are culturally and economically much more different than anything in the US (comparing US states / regions). Immigration/healthcare/public school/public safety/retirement all looks very different in those nations. Advice: It's better to say something like: "the Nordics" or "Benelux" or "GBR/FRA/GER/ITA" (the four economic giants of Europe). The best comments are when people comment about specific European nations, like "I lived & worked in Belgium for 7 years and this happened."
  - no_wizard 1y ago
    >My comments will only concern skilled migration, e.g., you are a computer programmer or something STEM'ish and you want to work in a different country. This circumvents the original predicate, which did not have such a limitation. I know many countries have priority / helpful pathways for STEM career individuals as well as capital investors, but that wouldn't apply to everyone. Even the US has very different pathways to citizenship depending on various factors. Last time I looked into it as research in depth, there alot of common limiting factors across Europe. Their policies are much more strict once you dive into the nuance. That said, the US immigration landscape is extremely lopsided, thats a fair point. >Europe is enormous -- like continent-sized -- with ~50 countries. I realize, though as a US citizen I also realize that when most US citizens say this, they mean a much smaller contingent of countries, rightly or wrongly. I'm sure Europeans dislike how loose we use the term, but as a US citizen, it usually means cold war boundary countries, so Germany and what was considered western Europe before the iron curtain fell. Thats been my experience. People also generally forget about Portugal and a few island nations. Its a safe bet most people mean the Nordics, France, Germany, the UK, Netherlands and Denmark most of the time, conceptually. However to be specific, France, Germany, Switzerland, the Nordics, all have strict general requirements to have a path to citizenship. I don't think the average US citizen would be able to meet them.
frikskit 1y ago
High fractions of Europeans speak English, eg Poland has 50% of population speaking English (for those of working age it’s probably much higher) whereas the fractions of Americans speaking non-English European languages is much lower (0.25% for Americans speaking Polish). If 50% of Americans spoke Polish by the shake of a wand, I bet there’d be more Americans in Poland than Poles in Poland.
- LastTrain 1y ago
  Your wand would also need to erase the reason people speak (or don’t speak) the languages they do, otherwise what you said would already be true for the UK, Australia, etc.
  - frikskit 1y ago
    Would it? People don’t exclusively learn English to migrate to the US. What language do you think Germans and Spaniards use to do commerce with each other? There needs to be a common language, there’s no bandwidth to learn all languages, so due to historical and modern reasons, English prevailed. Re Australia, Australians have highly preferential options to move to US which is not reciprocated.
    - trollbridge 1y ago
      Same for NZ, Canada, UK…
    - LastTrain 1y ago
      So you are already saying it isn't just language, your wand would also need to erase "preferential options" facilitating the direction of migration. Which is what I said but in different words.
- georgeecollins 1y ago
  OK, but by that logic lots more USA citizens should be moving to the UK, Ireland, Spain than the other way around. That's just not the case, at least until very recently. I could see that the appeal of Ireland can be increasing and Poland sounds cool. I'm not saying that the USA is great, it has tons of problems.
jhgb 1y ago
USAians are not exactly famous for commonly speaking most European languages at a level that would allow them to resettle to the respective European countries. This makes for a considerable barrier that essentially doesn't exist in the opposite direction.
- georgeecollins 1y ago
  I have never heard this term before, but to clarify what I mean (it's so weird to bring race into this!): I have worked with dozens of native born dutch, german, french people etc. and lots of latin people etc. But I know almost very few that I grew up with, went to school with, who moved from the US to another country. I am not saying this is good, the US is good etc. I am saying you have to understand the revealed preference vs what people tell you. I wouldn't be surprised if this changes in the future, I am talking about the period of my life to date.
  - deanishe 1y ago
    > I am saying you have to understand the revealed preference vs what people tell you. And what they're saying is that this isn't just an indication of how awesome the US is compared to other places, but also of how averse Americans are to learning other languages compared to other people.
    - guy_5676 1y ago
      Very uncharitable way to phrase that, American second language prevalance is similar to other English dominant countries like the UK or the Australia. Americans in general don't speak as many languages as Europeans because they already speak arguably the most useful language. I've lived in 20 countries, and in every single one for them I've been able to find someone who speaks English. People are so ingrained with the need to know the language that I've actually met people who are embarrassed about their English talking to me in their own native country. If you grew up speaking Greek, Romanian, or even something like Italian, this absolutely would not be true. Maybe you could find a person or two to talk to, but definitely not dozens casually in everyday situations. So you have to learn multiple languages by necessity. And since European countries are so small, close together and all have their own languages, you also end up picking up your neighbors languages.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
alemanek 1y ago
All the benefits OP lists are at or below mandated minimums for Western EU countries. It’s trivial to lookup and confirm for yourself. In software the money difference you still end up ahead of where you would be on an equivalent salary in the EU. Also last time I was considering a move to the EU job market was weaker than the US. Also you still need to get all the necessary work visas which aren’t automatic. Even as a dual citizen I can’t just show up to work at a company in the EU.
keybored 1y ago
> If this were true, the number of Americans I have known who People only live in one unvarnished (more or less) reality at a time. Americans live in America and get told stuff about “Europe”; Europeans live in Europe (or their respective countries if we want to get anal about it) and get told stuff about America. Only a very very small number of people get to live in multiple places and for long enough stretches of time to be able to compare them pretty fairly. In what kind of dream reality do people come to have such perfect (I’m being hyperbolic) information about other places that they then are able to base their move-or-not decisions on? This is just not reality. People know what their own place is like. They “know” other places through propaganda, mostly. But Americans are so propagandized that you have to teach them about their own propaganda.

no_wizard 1y ago

The two things are not equals. The US has for a western country, relaxed standards for immigration[0], in particular if you were coming from Europe, it's quite a bit easier to establish residency here. The reverse is not true. European nations aren't very immigration friendly by comparison. On top of that, the US government, assuming you keep your citizenship, does not make it easy to live abroad. US government tax policy for citizens who live overseas is much more aggressive than any other western country, from what I understand. Combined with the fact its alot harder to go the other way, and the US government does a fair amount to discourage it, I'm not shocked more US citizens aren't moving to Europe. [0]: At least before Trump returned to office, I'm unsure how much of this has changed.

georgeecollins 1y ago
That's a fair point. But until recently you could move to a lot of countries in Europe for an investment less than a house in California. But I accept that could be the true reason.
- no_wizard 1y ago
  >That's a fair point. But until recently you could move to a lot of countries in Europe for an investment less than a house in California. That alone is enough to put most people out of grasp of doing this, for a multitude of reasons, of which not having the capital is only part of the equation, as you would also need to have a suitable investment on the other side to put said money, not a promise. I'm sure there are other nuances involved too. Thats before the fact that the cost of a house in California would price most people out of the equation to begin with.
throwaway2037 1y ago
> The US has for a western country, relaxed standards for immigration My comments will only concern skilled migration, e.g., you are a computer programmer or something STEM'ish and you want to work in a different country. First, let's start with the "Anglo-American sphere" (my term): US/UK/CA/AU/NZ. Of those five, US is the hardest to get a working visa for skilled individuals. The rest are "points-based" system where you can apply for a working visa even before you have a job (95% sure about this -- pls correct if wrong). They are much more friendly. Also, the rules are simpler, clearer, and applied more consistently. I know much less about other OECD-level (and G7-level) nations, but anecdotally, overall, the process is much more straight forward compared to the US. What the rules say, the rules do. Not so much in the US where they randomly delay or reject applicants without good reason. (Also: Google to find horror stories of what happens when you lose your job in US as a foreigner who does not have PR. Fucking nitemare.) You hear this much less in (to name a few): Ireland, UK, France, Germany, Belgium, Netherlands, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Finland. (I don't hear as much about Portugal, Spain, and Italy, but quality of life looks awesome!) All of those countries are wealthy, highly developed and have excellent quality of life. All of them welcome skilled migration and have clear programmes (you can Google about them) to get a working visa. Again, strictly anecdotal: The US immigration system is much more adversarial compared to all of the other countries that I mentioned. Oh, and I forgot to add Japan: After PM Abe changed the rules, it is way easier these days to get a skilled worker visa in Japan. Last point: > European nations I see this over and over again on HN. I want to repeat: Europe is enormous -- like continent-sized -- with ~50 countries. It doesn't say much to say "in Europe". Are we talking about Belarus, Albania, Germany, or Italy? All of them are culturally and economically much more different than anything in the US (comparing US states / regions). Immigration/healthcare/public school/public safety/retirement all looks very different in those nations. Advice: It's better to say something like: "the Nordics" or "Benelux" or "GBR/FRA/GER/ITA" (the four economic giants of Europe). The best comments are when people comment about specific European nations, like "I lived & worked in Belgium for 7 years and this happened."
- no_wizard 1y ago
  >My comments will only concern skilled migration, e.g., you are a computer programmer or something STEM'ish and you want to work in a different country. This circumvents the original predicate, which did not have such a limitation. I know many countries have priority / helpful pathways for STEM career individuals as well as capital investors, but that wouldn't apply to everyone. Even the US has very different pathways to citizenship depending on various factors. Last time I looked into it as research in depth, there alot of common limiting factors across Europe. Their policies are much more strict once you dive into the nuance. That said, the US immigration landscape is extremely lopsided, thats a fair point. >Europe is enormous -- like continent-sized -- with ~50 countries. I realize, though as a US citizen I also realize that when most US citizens say this, they mean a much smaller contingent of countries, rightly or wrongly. I'm sure Europeans dislike how loose we use the term, but as a US citizen, it usually means cold war boundary countries, so Germany and what was considered western Europe before the iron curtain fell. Thats been my experience. People also generally forget about Portugal and a few island nations. Its a safe bet most people mean the Nordics, France, Germany, the UK, Netherlands and Denmark most of the time, conceptually. However to be specific, France, Germany, Switzerland, the Nordics, all have strict general requirements to have a path to citizenship. I don't think the average US citizen would be able to meet them.

frikskit 1y ago

High fractions of Europeans speak English, eg Poland has 50% of population speaking English (for those of working age it’s probably much higher) whereas the fractions of Americans speaking non-English European languages is much lower (0.25% for Americans speaking Polish). If 50% of Americans spoke Polish by the shake of a wand, I bet there’d be more Americans in Poland than Poles in Poland.

LastTrain 1y ago
Your wand would also need to erase the reason people speak (or don’t speak) the languages they do, otherwise what you said would already be true for the UK, Australia, etc.
- frikskit 1y ago
  Would it? People don’t exclusively learn English to migrate to the US. What language do you think Germans and Spaniards use to do commerce with each other? There needs to be a common language, there’s no bandwidth to learn all languages, so due to historical and modern reasons, English prevailed. Re Australia, Australians have highly preferential options to move to US which is not reciprocated.
  - trollbridge 1y ago
    Same for NZ, Canada, UK…
  - LastTrain 1y ago
    So you are already saying it isn't just language, your wand would also need to erase "preferential options" facilitating the direction of migration. Which is what I said but in different words.
georgeecollins 1y ago
OK, but by that logic lots more USA citizens should be moving to the UK, Ireland, Spain than the other way around. That's just not the case, at least until very recently. I could see that the appeal of Ireland can be increasing and Poland sounds cool. I'm not saying that the USA is great, it has tons of problems.

jhgb 1y ago

USAians are not exactly famous for commonly speaking most European languages at a level that would allow them to resettle to the respective European countries. This makes for a considerable barrier that essentially doesn't exist in the opposite direction.

georgeecollins 1y ago
I have never heard this term before, but to clarify what I mean (it's so weird to bring race into this!): I have worked with dozens of native born dutch, german, french people etc. and lots of latin people etc. But I know almost very few that I grew up with, went to school with, who moved from the US to another country. I am not saying this is good, the US is good etc. I am saying you have to understand the revealed preference vs what people tell you. I wouldn't be surprised if this changes in the future, I am talking about the period of my life to date.
- deanishe 1y ago
  > I am saying you have to understand the revealed preference vs what people tell you. And what they're saying is that this isn't just an indication of how awesome the US is compared to other places, but also of how averse Americans are to learning other languages compared to other people.
  - guy_5676 1y ago
    Very uncharitable way to phrase that, American second language prevalance is similar to other English dominant countries like the UK or the Australia. Americans in general don't speak as many languages as Europeans because they already speak arguably the most useful language. I've lived in 20 countries, and in every single one for them I've been able to find someone who speaks English. People are so ingrained with the need to know the language that I've actually met people who are embarrassed about their English talking to me in their own native country. If you grew up speaking Greek, Romanian, or even something like Italian, this absolutely would not be true. Maybe you could find a person or two to talk to, but definitely not dozens casually in everyday situations. So you have to learn multiple languages by necessity. And since European countries are so small, close together and all have their own languages, you also end up picking up your neighbors languages.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

alemanek 1y ago

All the benefits OP lists are at or below mandated minimums for Western EU countries. It’s trivial to lookup and confirm for yourself. In software the money difference you still end up ahead of where you would be on an equivalent salary in the EU. Also last time I was considering a move to the EU job market was weaker than the US. Also you still need to get all the necessary work visas which aren’t automatic. Even as a dual citizen I can’t just show up to work at a company in the EU.

keybored 1y ago

> If this were true, the number of Americans I have known who People only live in one unvarnished (more or less) reality at a time. Americans live in America and get told stuff about “Europe”; Europeans live in Europe (or their respective countries if we want to get anal about it) and get told stuff about America. Only a very very small number of people get to live in multiple places and for long enough stretches of time to be able to compare them pretty fairly. In what kind of dream reality do people come to have such perfect (I’m being hyperbolic) information about other places that they then are able to base their move-or-not decisions on? This is just not reality. People know what their own place is like. They “know” other places through propaganda, mostly. But Americans are so propagandized that you have to teach them about their own propaganda.