Live data from Hacker News

How Europe crushes innovation

economist.com

71–80 of 146 posts

Re: How Europe crushes innovation

#71
post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> destroying yours and everyone elses standard of living, simply because it's unaffordable? As opposed to what has happened in the US, where everything is happy and everything is affordable. Innovation!

Are you not aware that this is the case? Look up affordability statistics.

Not sure if your point was caught up in all the negating but for clarity's sake:

Me + USA = starkly unaffordable. Rents here have ~doubled in 6yrs and are up 5-fold from 2000. Wages grow at a much slower pace - insuring the gap between wages and expenses grows continually.

Re: How Europe crushes innovation

#72
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It objectively is a negative. The American worker is much better off than the European worker. It doesn't matter if it makes you feel sad.

> The American worker is much better off than the European worker. In what ways, specifically? And which types of workers? Remember that labor laws aren’t exclusive to developers. > It doesn't matter if it makes you feel sad. Can we skip the transparent rage bait and personal jabs, though? There are other forums if you want to engage in that, I’m personally not interested.

> In what ways, specifically?

Median wages https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_income?useskin=vector Average work hours

Purchasing power parity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)...

Despite average work hours https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_average_a...

Better youth unemployment than Europe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_unemploym...

> And which types of workers?

High-skill professionals, entrepreneurs, specialized trades, creative workers, young people, immigrants... and most other professions.

> Can we skip the transparent rage bait and personal jabs, though?

If you make nebulous complaints about "shitting on workers" without considering tradeoffs, you've made a feelings-based argument, so expect that kind of rebuttal.

Re: How Europe crushes innovation

#73
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would it become unaffordable?

Because labor protection costs money. If you get something from that, that's net boosting your economy, you have no problem. If not, you get social cohesion, at a price. Somebody is paying that price. If it's companies they are disincentivized to employ people in your market. If companies go somewhere else to employ people, jobs disappear from your market. If the jobs disappear, so does the money.

> Because labor protection costs money

Labor protection does not "cost money". It is a limit on the degree to which workers can be exploited.

Re: How Europe crushes innovation

#74
post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> destroying yours and everyone elses standard of living, simply because it's unaffordable? As opposed to what has happened in the US, where everything is happy and everything is affordable. Innovation!

Are you not aware that this is the case? Look up affordability statistics.

Before we continue, please clarify whether you detected my sarcasm. Without that information your comment could be interpreted in two completely opposite ways

Re: How Europe crushes innovation

#75
post #68

Did anyone got the funny part? Here is it: they assume the "innovative" one to be the U.S., not China.

Well yeah, copying is not real innovation.

https://www.aspi.org.au/report/aspis-two-decade-critical-tec... (August 2024)

> Now covering 64 critical technologies and crucial fields spanning defence, space, energy, the environment, artificial intelligence (AI), biotechnology, robotics, cyber, computing, advanced materials and key quantum technology areas, the Tech Tracker’s dataset has been expanded and updated from five years of data (previously, 2018–2022) to 21 years of data (2003–2023).

> These new results reveal the stunning shift in research leadership over the past two decades towards large economies in the Indo-Pacific, led by China’s exceptional gains. The US led in 60 of 64 technologies in the five years from 2003 to 2007, but in the most recent five years (2019–2023) is leading in seven. China led in just three of 64 technologies in 2003–2007 but is now the lead country in 57 of 64 technologies in 2019–2023, increasing its lead from our rankings last year (2018–2022), where it was leading in 52 technologies.

https://www.aspi.org.au/report/critical-technology-tracker (March 2023)

> Our research reveals that China has built the foundations to position itself as the world’s leading science and technology superpower, by establishing a sometimes stunning lead in high-impact research across the majority of critical and emerging technology domains.

> China’s global lead extends to 37 out of 44 technologies that ASPI is now tracking, covering a range of crucial technology fields spanning defence, space, robotics, energy, the environment, biotechnology, artificial intelligence (AI), advanced materials and key quantum technology areas. The Critical Technology Tracker shows that, for some technologies, all of the world’s top 10 leading research institutions are based in China and are collectively generating nine times more high-impact research papers than the second-ranked country (most often the US). Notably, the Chinese Academy of Sciences ranks highly (and often first or second) across many of the 44 technologies included in the Critical Technology Tracker. We also see China’s efforts being bolstered through talent and knowledge import: one-fifth of its high-impact papers are being authored by researchers with postgraduate training in a Five-Eyes country. China’s lead is the product of deliberate design and long-term policy planning, as repeatedly outlined by Xi Jinping and his predecessors.

Re: How Europe crushes innovation

#76
post #26

I'd rather live in a society with strong labor protections than one that is "more innovative", whatever that means.

There is a small problem -- more innovative society next door will get richer and eat you anyway. So lets enjoy the good times and be weak men while it lasts.

Let them get richer, the same people who talk with these threatening remarks also talk how capitalism isn't a zero-sum game, someone else becoming richer doesn't mean someone else getting poorer, right? Just means getting richer at a slower rate, Europe is pretty rich on global standards, let's keep getting a bit richer while others get the chance to reach these levels.

Re: How Europe crushes innovation

#77
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The American worker is much better off than the European worker. In what ways, specifically? And which types of workers? Remember that labor laws aren’t exclusive to developers. > It doesn't matter if it makes you feel sad. Can we skip the transparent rage bait and personal jabs, though? There are other forums if you want to engage in that, I’m personally not interested.

> In what ways, specifically? Median wages https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_income?useskin=vector Average work hours Purchasing power parity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)... Despite average work hours https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_average_a... Better youth unemployment than Europe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_unemploym... > And which types…

Median wages while prices are higher doesn't mean much, Americans earn more but also pay quite a bit more in most products and services needed for living: housing, healthy food, transportation, healthcare, etc.

After experiencing the American work life I'd never trade my life in Sweden to earn 2-3x more in California, I'm sorry to say but it wasn't better to earn more in the USA, I could buy more trinkets but daily life was just not better.

There's a point where you should look past wages, what's the overall quality of life of living in a place where workaholism is rampant, stress from financial anxiety is constant, having to hedge for potential catastrophic events such as a health scare putting oneself into massive debt, losing your job in a downturn (or simply due to an industry going into herd mode and colluding on layoffs), so on and so forth.

Or you can keep using wages and money as your only guidance in life, I understand that's the only way most Americans can think about life. It's rather puerile though, as if simple metrics are the determining factor of a good life.

Re: How Europe crushes innovation

#78
All these takes on European workers being too shielded are nonsense.

First of all, they're greatly exaggerated. The specific case of a large German company that is union connected doing layoffs is cherry picked. It's basically the most shielded situation possible but far from the norm in Europe as a whole.

I'm from the Netherlands myself. Up until COVID we were on a path where employers were pushing everybody into flex contracts. It's a fixed length contract (1 year with a 3 month trial period) that may or may not be extended.

Maximum flexibility for employers, minimum job security for employees.

Did this lead to some spur in growth or innovation? No.

Europe's problem isn't related to worker conditions. It's a silly thing to say considering ludicrous US tech salaries.

Silicon Valley is the result of gigantic amounts of excess (Wall street?) capital creating a tech Valhalla. A black hole ecosystem swallowing money and talent domestic and abroad. Europe doesn't have this capital and the capital we do have we probably put in US tech stocks.

It's a similar problem to US manufacturing vs Shenzen manufacturing. The Chinese government as well as many Western companies invested decades and hundreds of billions into making it the state-of-the-art factory of the world.

Once it's in place you can't replicate it.

Re: How Europe crushes innovation

#79
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would it become unaffordable?

Because labor protection costs money. If you get something from that, that's net boosting your economy, you have no problem. If not, you get social cohesion, at a price. Somebody is paying that price. If it's companies they are disincentivized to employ people in your market. If companies go somewhere else to employ people, jobs disappear from your market. If the jobs disappear, so does the money.

Not mangling your workers is for free.

Re: How Europe crushes innovation

#80
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The American worker is much better off than the European worker. In what ways, specifically? And which types of workers? Remember that labor laws aren’t exclusive to developers. > It doesn't matter if it makes you feel sad. Can we skip the transparent rage bait and personal jabs, though? There are other forums if you want to engage in that, I’m personally not interested.

> In what ways, specifically? Median wages https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_income?useskin=vector Average work hours Purchasing power parity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)... Despite average work hours https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_average_a... Better youth unemployment than Europe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_unemploym... > And which types…

Thank you for providing sources. Though you’re focused solely on money, which I think is a pretty poor measure for how “better off” one is (and was my original criticism of the article). Especially when you’re ignoring the percentage of people living in poverty and massive income inequality.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_percentag...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_in...

Furthermore, making more money can be offset by having to spend more money for basic things like healthcare.

I’d say happiness is a much better indicator of how “better off” one is than how much money one earns. The happiness index takes a much broader view with several indicators (of which GPD per capita is but one).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Happiness_Report#Interna...

You’re entitled to valuing different things. But the whole point of my original comment is that I find the focus on money over people to not be something to celebrate. Clearly you (and the author) disagree.

> High-skill professionals, entrepreneurs, specialized trades, creative workers, young people, immigrants...

Despite the ellipsis, that doesn’t really answer the question. Those definitions are so vague, they could all together describe a single person.

> immigrants

Are you really arguing, with the current state of the USA, that immigrants are “better off”? I’m somehow doubt the ones who are being grabbed and sent to jail without due process every day would agree with you.

> If you make nebulous complaints

It’s not “nebulous”. Read the article. It’s in context.

> so expect that kind of rebuttal

If you think someone made a bad argument, do better. That’s what the HN guidelines explicitly ask of us. Responding with a bad answer because you think that’s what someone did does not benefit the discussion.

Again, if your objective with a discussion is to “win”, there are other forums better suited for that.

Post reply on HN