Americans Head to Europe for the Good Life on the Cheap
nytimes.com
nytimes.com
I lived in this exact neighborhood (C. de Ourique) in fact I lived meters away from where the photo was taken. Half my family was born and raised there.
Each time I go back I get sick to my stomach because it's obvious that society is getting segregated into two independent and very different groups with very different wealth levels and purchase power. The locals are just servants to these "expats".
I blame the local politicians of course. They always wanted to get rich on the real estate and they have pulled it off.
But it's kind of irrelevant because they already cashed out
I've met a couple Portuguese diaspora members and they are great people, but it's so sad how the only option to build a strong career is to go abroad to London, Spain, or France despite Portugal having increasingly decent higher educational programs.
America has one city that allowed itself to grow naturally and it became the economic Mecca of the world.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._metropolitan_area...
Using State+Provincial Level HDI as a proxy, entire States+Provinces [0][1] are comparable to entire Tier 1 European countries [2] on a socioeconomic basis.
When you look at purely economic indicators such as GDP/GDP Per Capita the same story holds [3][4][5]
If you're complaining about urban planning around walkability, you will need to specify which European cities you are comparing to, and which American cities as well.
It's unfair to compare a Tier 2/3 North American city like SLC or Phoenix or Vancouver to London or Paris when those cities are the Primate Cities of their entire country. Comparing cities like London/Paris/Frankfurt to NYC or Berlin to DC or Munich to the SF Bay makes more sense.
And finally, the kind of suburbanization you're complaining about is VERY common in Europe as well.
Also, here is the ranking of cities globally by influence and economic power - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Globalization_and_World_Citi...
[0] - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_terr...
[1] - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_in_...
[2] - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Canadian_provinces_a...
[3]- https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_terr...
[4] - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Canadian_provinces_a...
[5] - https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/NGDPDPC@WEO/UVK/EURO...
Yeah, and sociability/quality of life/crime rate compared to some dystopian hell-hole
As I shared in the comment above, HDIs of all 50 states in the US are comparable to Western Europe. The worst state, Mississippi, is comparable to Portugal, and the US average is comparable to the UK, Luxembourg, and Slovenia (on a separate note I'm very surprised by how Slovenia delevoped after the Iron Curtain fell) and well above France.
There are of course issues in the US that we need to tackle, but fetishizing European countries makes no sense when at best they are roughly middle of the pack if they would have been states in the US.
Which goes to show how official indexes can be worth nothing!
Anybody who has been to both Mississippi and Portugal can attest to that...
I've had a great time eating ribs in Tupelo and hiking in Peneda-Geres National Park near Porto.
Lisbon and Porto is a pretty city but Portugal as a whole has historically been an underdeveloped laggard in Europe due to political mismanagement (just like Mississippi) and only developed thanks to massive cash+infrastructure transfers by the EU, just like how Mississippi and other southern states were transformed via FDR's New Deal and LBJ's Great Society.
Modern day Mississippi is not even comparable with Portugal, even though the latter is still an "underdeveloped laggard in Europe".
And Mississippi has been that way (developing-worldish) for many decades.
It most definitely isn’t. It’s a very flawed metric which has rightfully been heavily criticised and it isn’t obvious it measures anything interesting at all. For all its flaw, a combination of GDP PPP and Gini index is a lot more interesting and trustworthy.
The default HDI formula devised by the UN is a mix of GNI per Capita ADJUSTED TO THE PRICE LEVEL OF THE COUNTRY; expected years of schooling of children at school-entry age and mean years of schooling of the adult population; and life expectancy.
Literally in any Developmental Econ 101 class HDI is pointed to as the primary metric to compare regions.
Of course there are valid criticisms with weightages in HDI, but no one and literally no Economist or Policymaker worth their salt has straight ignored it.
GDP PPP per Capita and Gini are critically important as well, and are factored into modified HDI indexes as well, for example Inequality HDIs which add the GINI, and the post-tax Gini Ineqaulity HDI because the naive Gini formula didn't take taxation and income transfers into account.
Sorry but it absolutely isn’t. Pointedly, the HDI is a composite indicator weirdly mixing together criteria with a formula which doesn’t make sense. It’s a total ass pull from the UNDP and shouldn’t be taken seriously.
> ADJUSTED TO THE PRICE LEVEL OF THE COUNTRY;
No need to all caps. As stated the issue of the HDI is that it’s a non sensical composite aggregating together correlated variables using arbitrary weights, not that it doesn’t adjust for price level.
> Literally in any Developmental Econ 101 class HDI is pointed to as the primary metric to compare regions. Of course there are valid criticisms with weightages in HDI, but no one and literally no Economist or Policymaker worth their salt has straight ignored it.
I have a degree in economics and I have yet to meet someone taking the HDI seriously.
I did appreciate your comment about ”valid criticisms”. It did remind of one of my friend mentioning his “little issue” with alcohol. I will concede that the HDI is a composite indicator for which there are valid criticisms regarding variables selection and weights and by that I mean that it is a garbage indicator.
> GDP PPP per Capita and Gini are critically important as well
Yes, it helps that they actually make sense.
Equivalently, one could also look at proper metrics for the rest of the HDI components if they wanted but most of them are tightly correlated to GDP PPP anyway.
Doesn't stop it from being useless.
>literally no Economist or Policymaker worth their salt has straight ignored it.
They should. No Economist of Policymaker has ignored the GDP either, but that's another bona fide BS metric. The job of the majority of economists and policymakers working for governments and related organizations is more as political careerists and representatives of power interests - and their predictions and results have a horrible track record.
Economists actually doing serious research look down on such metrics.
Those who think they can city plan the utopia of tomorrow with "zoning but with different priorities than last time" would do well to learn the lessens therein.
I should have known better than to leave an opening for types like you.
Under the guise of urban renewal after WW II, they literally bulldozed rows of downtown business' to install the interstate loop. The interstates chopped the neighborhoods apart making it nearly impossible to walk from one to another. They tore down about half the other buildings to accommodate parking for all the people that now lived in suburbs and drove in. They widened roads and shrunk sidewalks. They tore out most of the passenger train service and all of the street car lines. The effect was the downtown area of KC all but died, with many boarded up buildings. It became a place nobody wanted to live with a family.
With several major infrastructure projects it is just now starting to come back. But it is still a far cry from what it was. It is still not that walkable. There is still little public transportation, with only one short street car line and one or two slow and clunky Amtrak trains a day. Most people still live in suburbs and drive in, so we have never deleted all the parking lots and rebuilt the buildings to make space for a vibrant business scene or ample housing.
It was exactly the same thing with the EU contracts with the Covid19 vaccine manufacturers.
I lived in expat-friendly suburb of Lisbon, Cascais, and commuted into Lisbon or airport as needed. Terrible rush hour traffic, though it was years ago.
Everybody wants to hate, but if you are a local and able to get in contact with these people there can be a huge benefit to you too.
I mean, that pretty much sums up everybody, but it seems to only be the upper classes who paint it as altruistic.
Failure to integrate is a huge issue, and it's currently tearing the UK and Sweden apart
This is a very poorly thought-out statement. There's no reason why an upper middle-class family shouldn't be able to move to Europe, but claiming to need a "safe harbor" is a bit of a stretch.
But doesn't work out as nicely if you're trying to match a California time zone
Edit: I was wrong. Thanks for correcting me.
It was 100% free. So I definitely got free health care on a tourist visa as an American.
In reality, if the person doesn't seem to be trying to take advantage of the system, I'd not be surprised that hospital staff don't bother sorting out billing the patient.
If not, private healthcare is peanuts compared to the us (think $200/month no deductible no limit)
As most EU medical systems are not really geared toward private billing, if you go to a government-run medical centre for something small, it's going to be more effort for them to figure out how to bill you, so they don't.
Sometimes tourist-heavy places will definitely be set up to get you to pay, other times they just see treating actually minorly-ill tourists for low/no-cost as a cost of being a tourist-dependent area.
Sometimes the anecdotes about only having to pay 20 EUR at the hospital were really the salaried clinic doctor squeezing some EUR out of you that really should have been paid to the state.
Other times, if you go to a private-clinic doctor solo, they'll likely make you pre-pay. But if it's your local family's doctor, they may see you for free on a goodwill-basis, or fraudulently bill your local family member's plan and/or write any prescription in their name.
This term seems to be reserved (with an often racist/classist connotation) for people from the global south.
> Lack of universal healthcare in the US isn't that big a deal to the upper-class/upper-middle class people
It's not an issue for poor people either, since they have Medicaid. Or old people, who have Medicare. Or veterans who have Tricare.Health insurance is generally only an issue for middle to lower middle class.