Why is the U.S. wealthier than Europe? Give credit to its cities. (Report)

[10023]

To take things in the opposite direction from the U.S. vs. EU conversation, and look at a distinction that I have a feeling is more relevant:

What if we looked at the U.S. states that made up the original 13 colonies, or U.S. states east of the Mississippi, and compare those to Europe?

History and geography assure that large metropolitan cities are going to dominate the economies of the Western states. What about the part of the U.S. that has similar geography to Europe and was actually settled before modern transportation? There are a lot more small towns and midsize cities in the Eastern U.S. than in the Western U.S.

[JManc]

Originally Posted by 10023

To take things in the opposite direction from the U.S. vs. EU conversation, and look at a distinction that I have a feeling is more relevant:

What if we looked at the U.S. states that made up the original 13 colonies, or U.S. states east of the Mississippi, and compare those to Europe?

History and geography assure that large metropolitan cities are going to dominate the economies of the Western states. What about the part of the U.S. that has similar geography to Europe and was actually settled before modern transportation? There are a lot more small towns and midsize cities in the Eastern U.S. than in the Western U.S.

i always drew similarities between new york state and england. both are pretty much identical in size, have one megacity dominate politics, culture, business as well as several smaller former industrial cities (buffalo, birmibgham, rochester, leeds, syracuse, manchester, etc) with the rest of their respective areas dotted with small towns and villages. even their geography is similar. i'd say england is far and away in better shape then new york outside nyc.

[ue]

Originally Posted by 10023

You're either missing the point or willfully ignoring it.

There are no "poor, developing countries" in the European Union. France and Germany are not China and Japan. This is an economic study, and the EU is tightly integrated economically.

How much time have you spent in France and Germany, btw?

Sorry...

Yeah, there are poor, developing nations in the EU. But you later acknowledged that, so moving on. The article isn't talking just about the EU, as SHiRO mentioned, it mentions Europe, the EU, and Eurozone. 3 different things. All along what have I been talking about? Europe. Not the EU. Didn't I say the EU would be a more reasonable comparison? If not, then I'm saying it now. But as mentioned, it has developing nations, so Western Europe (aka the countries that weren't communist 25 years ago plus East Germany, maybe Poland, Czech, and Slovak republics).

Yeah, I think you're pointing out the obvious that France/Germany isn't China/Japan. But you're missing the point. You could've said that about any other example in the book. The point is other countries have shared histories, yet still maintain their own distinct cultures and histories. I understand France and Germany are more integrated than China and Japan, but that does not mean France is essentially Germany and vise-versa.

Edit: Haven't been to Germany or France. Not that it really is any of your business.

[FREKI]

Originally Posted by 10023

There are no "poor, developing countries" in the European Union.

Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Greece, Latvia, Hungary, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia, are all poor and developing..


If there are no "poor developing countries" in the EU there aren't any in North Amercia either..

[mousquet]

Originally Posted by FREKI

Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Greece, Latvia, Hungary, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia, are all poor and developing..

Just to say some of these are wealthier than others, though. Those within the Eurozone in particular, at least before the sovereign debt criris put them in difficulty.
For example, you can no longer call Slovenia a poor country, whereas Romania's still poor indeed.

[emathias]

Originally Posted by ue

... China and Japan shared a few good moments, but they are hardly the same place.
...

I think if you used the phrase "shared a few good moments" to describe Sino-Japanese relations to someone from China you'd be viewed as either an idiot or an enemy by them forever.

While, as neighbors, Japan and China have had cultural exchange over the past 2,000 years, and Japan (along with every other neighbor of China) paid Imperial China tributes off-and-on for several hundred years, and Japan invaded China this century, at no time have they ever been the same country or under the same ruler.

[LtBk]

I wouldn't consider countries like Poland, Slovenia, and Czech Republic to be poor and developing

[Greavsie]

western europe,the uk,scandinavia and southern europe all have strong ties.To be honest i think eastern europeans and balkanites are quite different.

[FREKI]

Originally Posted by LtBk

I wouldn't consider countries like Poland, Slovenia, and Czech Republic to be poor and developing

Then why the exodus of their workforce and per capita GDPs fractions of other European nations?

I don't think we should kid usself here - the EU is like NAFTA not a magic wand - heck quite the opposit really and the list of counties I mentioned have per capita GDP's in the ballpark of Mexico, Kazarkstan and Russis and os very much developing and poor..

That's not to say that they aren't nice nations or have improved, but we can sat that about just about all nations on this planet..

The European subcontinent is home to 50 nations of whom so far little over half are in the EU - most in a desperate attempt to break away from Russia and forget their Soviet past..

What goes for all is that just like on other continents that all nations are unique and differs quite more that what initially meets the eye..

One can not seriously compare nations with trade unions, subcontinents or any other group of nations and get a useful result..
I do get that it's one of the last ways for some people in the US to thumb their chest and hang on to the "we're #1" mentality they grew up with, but I would expect more from journalists and SSP members whom should all be well aware that just like they don't live the NAFTA average or NA average, neither do European nations people live any other way than their national standard..

And if we do need to compare we have only 3 ways to get a real result..

Per capita to per capita or nation to nation or continent to continent... ( apples to apples )

Of all ways only per capita makes and real sence as no two nations have similar economies or population..

[Miu]

Originally Posted by 10023

As I have before on this forum, I dispute this statement. Germany and Poland perhaps - Poland until fairly recently was behind the Iron Curtain - but I don't find Germany and the Netherlands, Belgium and France, or even France and Germany to be any more different, in many respects, than the Deep South and New England.

Well, if some of the most closely connected neighboring countries in Europe are only as similar to each other as what are perhaps the two most different regions in the U.S., doesn't that mean that Europe as a whole is a lot more diverse than the U.S.? (I disagree about France and Germany, btw).
There's simply so much history, culture, trends etc. that's defined by national and linguistic borders in Europe. America on the other hand has a very strongly unifying national culture and identity.

Europe is probably the most closely intertwined group of nations there is in the world, but a country it is not. Sometimes it makes sense to compare Western Europe or the EU as a whole to the U.S, but often it doesn't. It might seem like cherry picking, but that's because Europe is very integrated in some, but not at all in other areas. [/OT]

[Crawford]

I generally agree with the Europeans on this one, and think that Europe is far, far, less uniform than the U.S.

I mean, there's a huge difference between the German and French mindset, to say nothing of the Irish & Slovanian mindset.

I'm most familiar with Germany, and there are wild differences between regions. You can drive 30km, and be in a totally different region, with different religion, dialect, cultural traditions and ethnic background. Swabians have little to do with Rhinelanders, who have little to do with Northerners.

If anything, I would say that Germany alone has bigger differences than the U.S. Just East vs. West is huge for anyone older than 20.

And my sense is that Italy has far more regional distinctions. Ever been to Basilicata, in Southern Italy? That province is traditionally so isolated as to be amazingly distinct. They didn't even have "conventional" Christianity until after WWII, having used this unique hybrid of traditional religions and Catholicism until relatively recently.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by Crawford

I'm most familiar with Germany, and there are wild differences between regions. You can drive 30km, and be in a totally different region, with different religion, dialect, cultural traditions and ethnic background. Swabians have little to do with Rhinelanders, who have little to do with Northerners.

The classic Bavarian insult is to call somebody a Prussian.

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by kool maudit

inefficiency adds to gdp. it's good for the economy to drive two hours to your workplace. it just isn't any fun.

Yep, just look at US health care vs. WE and Canada.

[Nantais]

On another point, it would be quite interesting to know the real percentage of people living in really large metro area (over 500,000 inh. or over 1,000,000 maybe) in the different developped nations, or on the contrary in the little towns considered as urban.
Because we all know that developped nations are very urbanized but urbanization can adopt very different patterns. 80 % of French people living in cities doesn't mean the same thing that 80 % of German people living in cities.
For example, France and UK have probably similar rates of urbanization, yet I would be curious to know what exact part of each urban population live in large metro areas (over 1,000,000 people), or in medium metro areas (from 100,000 to 1,000,000 people for example) or in small metro areas (under 100,000 people). I am pretty sure there would be significant differences, as France remains a country of little towns, more than a lot of its europeans neighbours.

[CPVLIVE]

Originally Posted by SHiRO

Me neither. This report is severly lacking. But it's clear that they're not comparing like for like as Western Europe has way more 150,000+ cities (metro) than just 186. Proof lies in that number. They do state that the 259 US cities of 150,000+ are MSA.


"2nd largest city in the world in 2025 will remain New York...4th largest city in 2025 will be Los Angeles"

They're not talking about GDP...

Wrong - They are absolutely referring to GDP.

• Of the 600 cities that MGI expects will account for 60 percent of global GDP growth by 2025, nearly 1 in 7 is in the United States.

• Today, the metropolitan areas of New York and Los Angeles are the world’s second and sixth largest, respectively, by GDP.

Please read the report.

[Minato Ku]

[SHiRO]

Originally Posted by CPVLIVE

Wrong - They are absolutely referring to GDP.

• Of the 600 cities that MGI expects will account for 60 percent of global GDP growth by 2025, nearly 1 in 7 is in the United States.

• Today, the metropolitan areas of New York and Los Angeles are the world’s second and sixth largest, respectively, by GDP.

Please read the report.

That's not what I was quoting. Believe me, I read the report. The line I quoted didn't say anything about GDP, only way down in the report it was repeated and elaborated on (as I read later).

If I write in bold and caps THE SKY IS PINK on the cover of a report and 500 pages down I add (if you look at it through pink glasses)...who is trying to bullshit who?


Not at all clear, language used ("largest") points to it referring to population. Nothing to quantify this statement untill dozens of pages down...

[bunt_q]

Nevermind. You're seeing what you want to see, and there's no arguing with that. Clearly all Americans are arrogant liars. And every report produced in America is just an ego stroke from the propaganda ministry.

Europe is the best, wooooo!

[SHiRO]

Originally Posted by Minato Ku

Seoul should be up there.

[SHiRO]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Nevermind. You're seeing what you want to see, and there's no arguing with that. Clearly all Americans are arrogant liars. And every report produced in America is just an ego stroke from the propaganda ministry.

Europe is the best, wooooo!

You're beyond ridiculous...

I pointed out a major flaw in this report, one so major it invalidates its entire conclusion.
I also pointed out further misleading catchphrases.

You have nothing to refute this or to excuse this so you resort to these kinds of posts which is beyond lame.