Between 2009 and today, the US doubled GDP while life expectancies fell. In the EU, GDP is stagnant but life expectancy went up.
Those who say Europe’s economy is a failure should at least consider what the purpose of an economy should even be.
Those who say Europe’s economy is a failure should at least consider what the purpose of an economy should even be.
Now, the city wants to show GDP/capita growth. Simple : let's pay a company X that will pay the gardeners. It'll cost 95k. Now the GDP is 95k+ 55k (let's say the gardeners are on the same pay and have the same work). But wait, maintenance can be done by the company Y! Now the GDP is 95k+55k+20k (maintenance fixed cost 10k+worker time 7k+ 3k profit). But wait, now during winter, our gardeners have nothing to do! That eat into our profits!
Now the GDP is 95k + 50k (what is paid to the temp company)+20k+45k, and gardeners are both paid 20k/year gor this job, and can do other stuff during winter (I hear a repair shop need temp workers during inter to fix gardener tools).
The GDP grew from 75k to 160k, a bit more than 100% growth, and we optimized the economy as now gardeners can keep specializing and do gardener stuff during winter instead of learning about motors and mechanics. Great!
There is an assumption behind GDP: people generally pay production for a fair amount of money. The more untrue this assumption is, the less meaningful GDP is.
Where does that 95k come from?
Or you're asking generally where money comes from? It's a good (and complicated) question. Google monetary and banking. In multiple senses, money DOES come out of thin air.
I'm joking: even without corruption, you can find an ideological reason, as a company will surely be more efficient than public servants!
But more likely because of incertitude: what do we do if a gardener resign? Paying an existing company 95k/year instead of spending 75k/year directly isn't a huge expense increase, and if 20k/year is the price for peace of mind (no new equipment to buy, no HR issues...) it can very well be worth it.
I'm not saying this is good or bad by the way, i'm saying this is how GDP work. It's factual. Yes, there is a left-wing slant about how i presented it, but it wasn't heavy, and a liberal could use the same example in the same way and justifying a better distribution of work and concerns (while still finding that GDP is worthless in this case)
This is interesting as an indicator, it's meaningless as a target.
This is the mistake the OP made. You can't "goose" GDP by borrowing because that money has to come from somewhere. And the money used to "goose" GDP is money that doesn't go to other productive uses.
USA: https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/USA/united-states/life...
I'm sure there are nuances but according to this particular source European life expectancy went from 75 to 79, US life expectancy went from 78 to 79 with a period of a decline between 2013 and 2018.
At the same time, a lot of the increase in life expectancy in the EU is due to improvements in medicine that are significantly driven by US-funded research.
Also, why do you think that the European live longer thanks to the medicine developed in the USA? Maybe the USA develops medicine thanks to the free and equal opportunity education culture in the Europe? If you look closely to the researchers, you will see that lot's of the people who develop these things have European roots and by roots I don't mean their grandpa was Irish, I mean they were educated in Europe and it just happens that the organisation that develops these drugs is incorporated in the USA.
The tech revolution that changed the world was also developed in Europe, the web was developed by the British in EU institution, Linux was made by a Finnish guy called Linus, Nginx is Russian-made.
Also, we are at a verge of AI revolution and some of the leading researchers are Europe educated people. Just check the bio of the top researchers who were instrumental at Tesla or OpenAI.
Maybe the USA is just the industrial zone of Europe? Maybe the US appears rich and acts poor simply because because the richness comes from the accounting choices? Just kidding of course, the USA is a superpower and is actually rich thanks to many things like its abundant resources and brilliant people but the notion that the Europe is doing better because they just drink smoothies and meditate all day on the American resources and innovation is ridiculous.
However the US subsidizes European defense (refer to current events) allowing European countries to spend less GDP on their military.
Talent comes to the US from all over the world. That's how it works and has since almost the beginning of the country.
Easier access to capital (and easy bankruptcy, etc), entrepreneurial mindset (less Tall Poppy syndrome), etc etc means business is generally easier in US.
Linus moved to the US. The web was possible bc the internet was funded by the US (arpanet, etc).
Europeans enjoy the Pax Americana without paying tribute to the Amerian empire.
https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/nato-spen...
But I like the Linus argument, however this complicates things further: Are tech becoming European when the tech CEO's are having a vacation in the French riviera?
And by the way Europe has nukes.
It's very safe to say that US-originated science had a major influence in life expectancy worldwide, including Europe. What's so controversial about it? The increase in life expectancy in Europe, then, was "significantly" influenced by US innovations.
Frankly, I don't believe it's true, for two reasons. First, the European Big Pharma is quite strong. It would be more fair - but not precise - to say the rest of the world benefits from the advances made in the West.
As for the second point, it was succinctly put by Dr. Marcia Angell from The New England Journal of Medicine in her famous book. From the blurb: "Drug companies, she shows, routinely rely on publicly funded institutions for their basic research; they rig clinical trials to make their products look better than they are; and they use their legions of lawyers to stretch out government-granted exclusive marketing rights for years. They also flood the market with copycat drugs that cost a lot more than the drugs they mimic but are no more effective."
I suggest that perhaps it’s a difference in perspective on rights. In Europe, there is a positive right to healthcare. In the US, there is no such right apart from certain circumstances. We turn our nose up at “handouts”. The US expects the free market to handle it instead, which it has. This has led to large portions of the country with few doctors and even fewer affordable ones.
Basically things in America got more expensive (gas, health, education being big contributors). There is lots of wriggle room in the numbers but the vast gulf by nominal GDP is surprising and so unlikely .
But your point is valid, life expectancy is not the same as quality of life.
I'd personally rather live five years less and be in great general health than be slogging through pain and medical bingo for my last 10 years.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expe...
Source of 12 minute arrival policy of ambulance:
I would not cite this as a success story. Europe does not seem to be heading in a good direction imo. The consequences are largely unrealized. Even pretending the war never happened and they continued slurping Russian gas.
Also now America can supply Germany with Gas.
Is all by design. American Hegemony.
But I think your analysis is poor. The homeless rate is higher in Germany than the US for example. Germany isn’t on fire, but I think it’s awkward to color it in a way that implies people are doing better there than the US. It will be a painful economic transition.
JB = Jacques Baud, who worked for NATO.
https://mronline.org/2022/03/31/the-policy-of-the-usa-has-al...
But even had that not happened Europe wasn’t trending very well.