Meanwhile, China is playing the long game and is building infrastructure projects all over the world, including the EU [0]
You have a source for this? I haven't heard of any threat of military intervention for Canada and/or Denmark.
"Trudeau more recently suggested behind closed doors that Trump’s sustained annexation calls may not be just light talk and appear to be “a real thing.”" [1]
"Trump refuses to rule out use of military force to take control of Greenland and the Panama Canal" [2]
"US will take Greenland ‘one way or the other,’ Trump says" [3]
[0] https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cddy2q2z8dzo
[1] https://apnews.com/article/how-canada-could-become-us-state-...
[2] https://apnews.com/article/trump-biden-offshore-drilling-gul...
[3] https://www.politico.eu/article/us-will-take-greenland-one-w...
"What he wants is to see a total collapse of the Canadian economy," he explains. "Because that will make it easier to annex us."
Source: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cvgpdk4257zt?post=asset%3A3b...
"Trump has previously spoken of using "economic force" to make Canada the 51st state of America. But he said he was not considering using military force - an assurance he has not given while stating his ambitions of taking the Panama Canal and Greenland."
Personal freedoms can't be manufactured. They are a product of the underlying system governing a country. The US has very strong institutions and legal framework in the form of the constitution (again, at this point in time; I expect the current admin to weaken those, either directly or by eroding public trust in them).
Culture is something that's very hard to replicate. The language of the world in English, Hollywood is American, Hip hop is American and I can't really think of any other country in a position to globally influence and create an ethos in the same way US can. You can call it branding. US fully controls the societal narrative around the world.
Financial opportunities is the easiest one to manufacture (see Dubai). You can give incentives left and right and in few years attract investors and high earners. But without #1 and #2, you'll just attract transients, not people who want to become influential citizens.
This needs to be past-tensed. In fact, currently, the US is the global leader in regressing with regards to these and other commendable qualities.
> Culture is something that's very hard to replicate.
You are highlighting the global influence of the US. By definition, you'll get access to that global shine almost wherever you live. Nobody will immigrate to the US to watch Disney movies or eat McDonalds. On the other hand, you might need to be in Korea to get most of the Korean culture. You'd need to assert that the US local and exclusive culture is more attractive than other countries own culture, and that sounds like a hard debate.
To your point, it's easier to move to the US if you already know the culture a bit, but that still presumes wanting to move there.
Or not. Unsurprisingly US immigration dropped a lot during the first Trump presidency, which coincided with COVID making things worse. In numbers Germany was also getting more influx than the US, but they sure weren't happy with it either.
https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/international-migration...
> China [...] would draw immigrants in.
Assuming that China wishes for more population to come in sounds pretty weird to me. They fought an incredibly unpopular fight on their own citizens for decades to reduce population growth, a foreign influx of people is probably the last thing they want IMHO.
The big pros of the USA are 1) the unified market, where everyone shares the language, most laws and regulations, a lot of culture and political vision. Also 2) the ability to take risks. Starting a company is easy, and failing it is not carreer-terminating. You don't need a piece of paper for absolutely everything.
Also, I've learned first French and later English, by osmosis, as that's the language of whatever came into the country. I noticed recently I am starting to osmosis-learn Chinese now, and I am not the only one. Also, I've seen brain drain to the USA in my student years, but today, people also choose to go to China
In the academic world, I am definitely seeing brain-drain from the EU towards China now. 10-20 years ago, it was almost exclusively the US. I expect this shift to rapidly continue now. From a European perspective, China appears to be more stable than the US at the moment.
> The language of the world in English, Hollywood is American, Hip hop is American and I can't really think of any other country in a position to globally influence and create an ethos in the same way US can. You can call it branding. US fully controls the societal narrative around the world.
You are describing the world 20 years ago. A large and respected German newspaper (FAZ) had an article today, titled: "Is the US our enemy now?" [0]. The Financial Times had an article last week titled: "The US is now the enemy of the west" [1]. This would have been completely unthinkable just a few weeks ago. 27% of Canadians already see the US as an enemy state [2].
Would you get your daily entertainment from the enemy? China is already the major trading partner for most of the world. Why shouldn't it became the major entertainment provider?
[0] https://www.faz.net/podcasts/f-a-z-podcast-fuer-deutschland/...
[1] https://www.ft.com/content/b46e2e24-ca71-4269-a7ca-3344e6215...
[2] https://www.ctvnews.ca/windsor/article/27-per-cent-of-canadi...
What metric is this being measured by?
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_in_the_World
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Press_Freedom_Index
Anecdotally I don't consider the US a particularly free country, nor do most people I know. Americans might have all these nice sounding rights on paper but they're all blatantly undermined in practice.
Thought experiment: swap Americans with a country that is dysfunctional, the result would be that there would be only a marginal improvement in the quality of living for the swapped population. On the other hand the originally dysfunctional country with the new Americans occupants will soon strengthen the institutions and legal framework.
The point I'm trying to make is that institutions and legal framework are far less relevant compared to the personal ethics of the population at large.
Nothing! And that is sort of the point. If the US can provide freedom, rule of law, education, good salary, etc... and the other countries do the same to keep the best at home that's a win for everyone.