Well, if you’ll click the link to Halstead’s article you will see that he did not actually construct his chart to imply that each item on the left side is in direct oppositional relationship to the one on the right. I made it appear that way, because to make the chart come out with two columns I had to add a line of hyphens for spacing – otherwise each line would be two sets of words scrunched together. Maybe there’s some other way to make a chart-with-columns on this board but I don’t know it.
I think you’ll find the Euros clamoring to move here are highly-educated or highly-skilled professionals (no cite for that, but people often speak of a “brain drain” moving west across the Atlantic). The reason for that would be obvious: Such people can make a lot of money here, and America is a very good place to be rich. But that does not mean the things that make it so are good for the rest of us.
You seem to be implying, without actually saying, that if we went even further in accentuating the aspects of our society that make us different from Europe – if, e.g., we abolished the welfare state entirely, deregulated all our businesses, minimized all our taxes, busted all our labor unions, and pursued a path of total economic libertarianism – then the “Worsts” on the right side of Halstead’s chart would change for the better. Do you really believe that? And are you prepared with an argument in support?
Americans should remember that the above mentioned Brain Drain added to the fact that the US prints dollars is why their economy can keep consuming so heavily and saving so little. Add that to easy to fire labour laws and you have a super heated up economy and good efficiency… the extra work hours don’t hurt of course.
Not any more. Nowadays, Europeans don’t need defense against anybody but terrorists, and they’re handling that all right by themselves.
If there were some we we could have a lower GDP, less productivity, and worse long-term unemployment, and in exchange gain less poverty, less economic inequality, and higher life expectancy, that would be a good tradeoff.
Oh good! I guess that means we can remove all our divisions from Europe then, ehe? Certainly save us a lot of money. And I guess we can let the Europeans handle stuff in Bosnia all on their own…and any future Bosnia type adventures they wish to take on. Excellent!
-XT
But what good is it for us to be more “wealthy” than the Europeans if our quality of life is inferior? As it is, in many well-documented ways.
That sounds good in theory, but look at the results. The Soviet Union failed, but the social democracies of Western Europe are succeeding. They appear to have found the right mix of private and public goods. And we haven’t.
It does mean exactly that. Why is your tone so sarcastic?
One thing I’d like to add is that you can have a halfway house between the US work ethic and the continental European one. E.g. the 35-hour week in France strikes me as somewhat dangerous in terms of innovation and productivity.
But look to this country: Ireland is the largest exporter of software in the world. It’s one of the richest countries in Europe, a budget surplus, and has the fastest growing economy. All this has been achieved in the last ten years.
We work our asses off (when we’re not posting to the SDMB).
But we have achieved this with extremely generous workers’ rights. Workers get a statutory minimum 20 days paid vacation per year, and many people get more than that, 11 paid public holidays, paid sick leave with few restrictions. You can’t just fire someone in Ireland: you have to give notice in accordance with labor law, which usually involves 30 days’ notice. Redundancy is two weeks’ salary per year worked, plus one week, tax free.
We also have indefinite government assistance for the unemployed, government pensions, free education right up to tertiary level, and government-funded healthcare (not very well realised, but that’s another thread).
It is possible to pick and choose the best of all worlds.
I spoke of Europe as a whole, not the UK. The EU has **more **people than the US. And I didn’t say it would be lost, I only postulated that it would decrease.
Even if this is true, it only goes to illustrate the point. You want to design a society in which the most productive members would tend to want to leave. I guess if the whole world is a welfare state, there won’t be any place to go (except perhaps Galt’s Gulch 
).
Rather than importing the European model here (which you have advocated in dozens of threads) it might be simpler to export yourself to Europe. Which kind of begs the question: if you passionately think that model is so much better in so many ways, and since it is clear that the US isn’t going to adopt that model, why haven’t you moved to Europe? I don’t mean this to be a snarky “America, love or leave it” type of response, but really, what’s holding you back?
Exactly, and if you look at the Seven Deadly Sins you will see that they are all positive, or at least neutral, actions taken to excess. All things in moderation, and all.
And I at sandals with socks. We must maintain our standards, as long as it doesn’t require too much effort.
A co-worker was telling of when a previous employer was bought out by a French company. Vacations galore, respect in the workplace, and the rest of the good stuff. I told him of when a previous employer was bought out by a Japanese concern. They’d send engineers over but had to bring them back home after six months because the guys would get corrupted and stop operating at the standard Japanese 11/10ths. I guess America is somewhere between Europe and Japan. (looking at a globe) Yeah, just about halfway.
Missed this.
Yes, thats what I’m saying, though not exactly to your listed terms…but yes, I think if we went to a more open free market system with much less government control (i.e. more privatization of some of those essential services) we’d be a lot better off. Or, conversely, I’m also saying if we went the other way, and socialized all those programs completely (a la Europe), they would be better (though IMO only in the short term…but thats another debate). Essentially what I’m getting at is that by taking half measure and not fully going one way or the other, we have an extremely expensive system that doesn’t get us a good return on investment. Going to either end would get us a better return on our money IMO than taking half measures or a middle course.
-XT
Sorry. But I dont think the Europeans would be too keen about the US pulling out, and much less keen about the US pretty much dropping most of our non-NATO commitments militarily to Europe. Perhaps I’m wrong and they would welcome shouldering more of the burden of their own defense.
-XT
But the Irish are taking a “middle course” in your terms and it seems to be working out very well for them – see jjimm’s post above.
I’m an American. My ancestors have lived in this country since before the Revolution. All my friends and family are here. My native language is English, I struggle with any other – the only English-speaking countries in Europe are the UK and Ireland, and who wants to live with all that foggy weather? Besides, I think I’ll do more good to the world as a whole if I stay here and try to change America so it’s more like Europe is today – and less like Europe was in Age of Imperialism.
I notice nobody has yet dropped in to defend American religiosity as having any social (as distinct from spiritual) value. The religious right often blames our social problems on decline in traditional faith – but the “post-Christian” societies of Europe actually have lower crime rates, etc., than we have. Wonder why?
How does the labor of people who work for monopolies or “robber barons” fit into this?
For instance, I used to work for Walmart (yes, I’m ashamed of it). This was a company without a decent healthcare plan that only gives employees four paid sick days every year (and only two weeks of vacation). They also deny workers a union, which means that Walmart workers make three dollars less an hour on average than workers at unionized stores. Would it be killing the independent spirit if Walmart gave people a decent healthcare plan, if they gave them enough sick time? I’m not getting into welfare here, I’m talking about within the company. It appears that in Walmartland, people give up their labor for little reward all the time, except it’s not the government “stealing” from them, it’s their company. Is it any more righteous that their stolen income (and that’s what I would call it when the pay disparity between unionized businesses and Walmart workers is so great, it is theft of a sort) goes to line the pockets of C.E.O.s instead of people on welfare?
I haven’t mentioned it because it’s purely a subject of presonal choice. I don’t know of any legal or ethical way to make people less religious. Do you?
I agree, I was offering UK as a middle ground between Europe and USA for work and education ethics.
I see a 35 hour standard week as dangerous, and lazy. But a system that accepted 35 hour weeks when work load is low, plus 50+ hour weeks when workload is high with a requirement for overtime pay any time the weekly average goes beyond 40 hours a day, as being both fair and still capable of being highly productive when high productivity is needed. I’d like to see flexitime more widespread in US companies (I’m not sure how wide spread it is) as it is great for employees and employers if handled well. A higher level of socialised care with more stringent safeguards against its missuse seems to me the way to go.