351–360 of 767 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That’s mostly due to obesity, which is a consequence of the quantity and (flavor) quality of food getting better over time; a side effect of economic prosperity.
You meant getting worse.
Obesity is a side effect of having so much food that calories are cheap and plentiful. That’s why obesity rates are rising everywhere in the first world. It’s also something virtually unprecedented in human history.
Note this chart shows nominal dollars, not PPP-adjusted. The EU has certainly kept up with the US when looking at PPP GDP from 2008 to 2022: US grew from $14.8T to $25.5T EU grew from $14.3T to $24.3T What that means is that the prices of goods are inflated in the US compared to similar goods in the EU. That's all. Want something interesting? Look at China who grew from $10.0T to $30.3T over the same period (!) Sourc…
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Size is denominated in terms of some measure. You don’t eat dollars, and you can’t build a house out of one. GDP has doubled, but so have US prices. Does that mean the economy is actually stronger? Using PPP simply chooses to denominate GDP in terms of things other that fiat currency.
PPP is usually meant to compare economies and control for differences in cost of living, not comparing time periods. Inflation is when you compare the same economy in two time periods. Furthermore, economic growth is measured in "real" dollars, aka, excludig inflation. If US prices doubled as you say, then their economy is therefore now four times as large in the new, inflated dollars. None of this has anything to do…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That’s mostly due to obesity, which is a consequence of the quantity and (flavor) quality of food getting better over time; a side effect of economic prosperity.
s/economic prosperity/lack of regulation/ Palm oil is in everything in the US, in France there's a lot more lighter oils and butter.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>I’d like to point out that the open door policy to refugees came because Europe was trying to escape the demographic trap and the collapse of the social safety net. This sounds like post hoc justification. If you want immigrants, wouldn't you want to pick the best and brightest, rather than whoever washes up on your shore?
Depends on what you need -- chemical engineers can make for good pizza delivery guys, but that's not making the best use of them
* speaks the local language
* is highly educated (eg. post-secondary degree)
* is young
* has expertise in an in-demand industry
than one who is missing one or more of the above? For non-refugees, you can screen for the above factors and only admit the ones who are qualified, but for refugees you can't.
People are weird about Europe.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If food is killing more people than it used to that's not an improvement in food.
If you have so much food even the poorest people can get fat, you are a richer and more prosperous society than 99.9% of human history. Btw obesity is rising in Europe as well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Am I? I think not. You are saying that you would rather live a shorter time in good health than a longer time being unhealthy at the end. I am saying that the day will come when you start to deteriorate, get aches, getting slower, maybe even critically ill. During all that you will most likely still not want to die. People suffer in every age group most of them don't want to die. Why do you think you would?
It seems like you know me better than i do!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’d like to point out that the open door policy to refugees came because Europe was trying to escape the demographic trap and the collapse of the social safety net. The hope was that young refugees would become net positive GDP contributors for decades, an idea borrowed from the US. If that has failed, it’s due to a failure of integration. Europe can actually be quite a racist place and in many ways the US is better…
>I’d like to point out that the open door policy to refugees came because Europe was trying to escape the demographic trap and the collapse of the social safety net. This sounds like post hoc justification. If you want immigrants, wouldn't you want to pick the best and brightest, rather than whoever washes up on your shore?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’d like to point out that the open door policy to refugees came because Europe was trying to escape the demographic trap and the collapse of the social safety net. The hope was that young refugees would become net positive GDP contributors for decades, an idea borrowed from the US. If that has failed, it’s due to a failure of integration. Europe can actually be quite a racist place and in many ways the US is better…
The US’s secret sauce is that is an empire that can, will and does constantly project its massive military and clandestine power around the world to further its interests at all times, while never having to deal with any of its blowback. And then americans laugh at the EU welcoming refugees you created in the first place, or pretend the EU is socialist while laughing at its massive energy crisis caused by its complet…
You all created us. So, you all are technically responsible for your own problems. ;)