I'm always happy to learn from countries which have succeeded at something, but insofar as Europe has succeeded at things, it hasn't been a simple matter of "end capitalism". The devil is in the details.
Also remember that Europe freerides on the US a great deal. They get bargain prices on drugs+health innovations discovered by US companies, and have an amazing defensive arrangement in NATO that comes at low cost for them and the US hardly benefits from.
During the cold war it was realized that unless the broad mass of people in Europe were reasonably happy / well off, they would turn to communism as it was right next door. The US had no such compelling imperative, so capitalism was allowed a freer rein.
Drugs+innovations are largely funded by the public sector (see a previous discussion on HN I can't find right now), but in Europe we don't have a predatory healthcare industry.
As for NATO, that was formed to stop the entirety of the Eurasian landmass falling under Soviet control. It is hard to imagine an isolated US fairing too well in that kind of world.
>Drugs+innovations are largely funded by the public sector (see a previous discussion on HN I can't find right now)
Insofar as Europe pays less for drugs than the US, the US is subsidizing drug development. (I.e. when pharma companies decide whether they will recoup their R&D costs for a new drug, they are disproportionately looking to countries that pay the most.) Public/private doesn't affect my point here -- the US shouldn't necessarily copy the European model if the success of the European model is based on freeriding, even if it's freeriding on US govt spending.
>As for NATO, that was formed to stop the entirety of the Eurasian landmass falling under Soviet control. It is hard to imagine an isolated US fairing too well in that kind of world.
The US has oceans on both sides and friendly nations on our borders. We're gonna be fine. Isolationism was working perfectly well for us prior to WW2.
If you really believe in the European model, you should advocate for Europe to defend itself. Stand up for what you believe in. If the European model is truly effective, then Europe should be perfectly capable of taking care of itself. The US can then offer humanitarian alliances to other, poorer countries that actually need help.
No, the US is not subsidizing drug development for Europe. What is happening is that US pharma is profiteering in the US because they can.
The US is dependent on international trade - not least for Middle East oil. How you going to get that if the Med and the Gulf are Soviet lakes?
For sure Europe should shoulder it's burden when it comes to defense - but the reason you have homeless people in every major city is not because of your defense bill! It is because your society is malfunctioning.
Bear in mind that isolationism is exactly what Putin's Russia (and Xi's China) wants, be careful that you are not being indoctrinated by anti-US interests.
> No, the US is not subsidizing drug development for Europe. What is happening is that US pharma is profiteering in the US because they can.
2 ways of describing the same thing. The difference between US "profiteering" vs Europe "getting a bargain" depends on your reference point. At the end of the day, the US is doing more to foot the bill for new drugs, and Europeans point and laugh instead of saying thank you.
>The US is dependent on international trade - not least for Middle East oil
The US is now a net energy exporter. I think we should retool to reduce dependence on foreign oil and reduce foreign entanglements. Should be good for the climate as well. And much cheaper than helping Europe with defense.
>For sure Europe should shoulder it's burden when it comes to defense - but the reason you have homeless people in every major city is not because of your defense bill! It is because your society is malfunctioning.
Resources are finite. You earlier implied that the US govt should spend more on social programs. That means either taking on more debt (terrible idea), or reducing large expenditures like defense. Furthermore, if it's true that the US is "malfunctioning", increased expenditure on social programs (as you earlier implied, remember our discussion was originally about capitalism vs social democracy) wouldn't necessarily even fix the problem.
This was a sufficiently disingenuous argument on your part that I don't plan to reply further in this thread.
>Bear in mind that isolationism is exactly what Putin's Russia (and Xi's China) wants, be careful that you are not being indoctrinated by anti-US interests.
I see Europeans trash the US about as much as I see Russia/China trashing the US. Where are the anti-US interests?
I never saw a Russian or Chinese person claim that US society is "malfunctioning". How would you feel if I said Europe was "malfunctioning" due to its low GDP?
You're talking about US interests. Being friendly with other major powers like Russia and China is in the US interest, for the purpose of preventing another world war. But at the end of the day, NATO is not in the US interest -- certainly not after the cold war has ended, which you seem to have forgotten about (cf "Soviet lakes"). Nor does it make sense as a humanitarian alliance. It's time for the US to leave. It's also time to charge Europeans more for drugs. They need to pay their fair share.
(To clarify, it's clear to me that your comments are far more motivated by contempt than constructive critique. That's why I don't regard you as an ally, and I don't plan to reply to you further.)
But seriously, though our GDP may be lagging behind the US, we do seem to be able to deal with homelessness and drug addiction somewhat better.