Europeans have more time, Americans more money. Which is better?

Some people are motivated by a sure thing for less reward while others are motivated by risk and greater reward. In my view America caters to the risk takers while much of the EU caters to the play-it-safe crowd.

There’s nothing wrong with either approach. We need both types of people to keep a healthy and balanced world.

To /really/ extrapolate I’ve wondered the same about economic systems. Is this solution A vs. B or are some individuals motivated differently? If so, can we create a world where different motivation systems can peacefully interact?

I grew up in a rural area, and different people will of course have had contrary experiences, but I recall people having more "free time" (which I understand to be time we choose how to use). That time wasn't always used in the most constructive of ways, perhaps, but the choice was there. People were busy, but how they were busy was largely (not always) a reflection of choice.

I don't recall ever seeing someone manifest the adage "hurry up so you can wait" until I moved to urban settings (including Manhattan). It was a huge weirdness to me then, and is now as well. Is waiting a choice? Perhaps, but only to some degree as the necessities of life are in more demand and queued. I moved to cities for the most commonly expressed reason: opportunity. Or, plainly, money. And it worked.

I moved away from cities to my current rural oasis to gain space and time (and greenery), having become tired of the constant need to be on time, and in the right place, competing with masses of other people at every turn -- that is, not having a choice about my time. This move also worked.

Not sure I have a point other than it isn't always obvious when time is traded for money and vise versa, perhaps be intentional about it if the opportunity presents itself (and respect those that choose differently).

Now that America is more scut jobs at impersonal chains or other far off companies, or being lost in some small sector of the massive organizational chain of command, I truly fear for Americans. The advantage of being work based comes with none of the fulfilment, leads to far far fewer people becoming community role models. We've been swallowed by the beast, are in the belly of the giants, many go which we have created (and let endlessly consolidate/amass in size).

The question supposes an individual balance, of what's better for a person. But what's good for a society, what happens to a society over time: I think there's an interesting and very strong virtue America used to get, that helped grow our people, helped keep us agentic, that kept us engaged with & shaping the world about us in a really powerful & amazing way. And losing that fire, and now just being anonymous & low agency in a huge grind, that's a brutal & scary new path for us, one where yeah of course if this is so pointless we'd pick time & leisure.

Silly article.

we can also discuss the causes for this lacking. it's probably a mix of coasting and entitlement but lately I just think it's due to the mud, the institutional and social swamp that EUrope has become. you can observe paralysis at all levels.

to the question: which is better? my view: the one that lets you have more of the other.