All: the flamewars that raged in this thread are bannable offenses on HN. It's no excuse that the article was bait; the thing to do was to flag it and move on, as others fortunately did.
We're not going to let HN go down in the flames and fumes of nationalistic battles. We ban accounts that do that, so please don't do that. Do this instead: when someone provokes you with an egregious comment, flag it (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html) and/or email us at hn@ycombinator.com to be sure to get moderator attention. Don't reply, and especially don't reply aggressively.
In other words, call the fire department, don't pour fuel, and don't start fires of your own. Sounds easy, but it's not, because it requires tolerating the burn of annoyance inside oneself instead of taking it out on the commons. That's actually what tolerance means. It's a physical process, just like any structure can tolerate a certain load before snapping. Containing this energy does not feel good, but it's the capacity we all need to build if if we want this community to survive as a place for curiosity.
This is an interesting article from the point of view of someone living in Europe. She moves away from the US because she wants out of the rat race:
> "I grew up believing that having money was an objective to strive for and that life was a ruthless competition. I worked hard in school and got a good job because that was what was expected of me. That was the path that was supposed to bring me happiness, except I followed that path, and I wasn’t happy."
Finally, she ends up living in Europe:
> "I certainly could say more about the work-life balance provided by the 35-hour workweek, the five weeks of paid vacation I enjoy each year, the two years paid unemployment benefits I would receive should I lose my job, my access to free health care, paid maternity leave, affordable child care, free education from age 3 through to university or the state-provided retirement pension I will receive at age 65."
The funny thing is, that as someone who grew up in Europe, with all those things she raves about, I feel exactly like she did in the beginning of the story. I feel like being in the rat race just like she did. Those 5 weeks of paid vacation feel more like an insult than a benefit. You get to taste a little bit of freedom for a short while and then it's back to dayprison. Retirement at 65 is a pipe dream, the boomers spent all the retirement money already and retirement age is slowly rising (currently at 67), by the time I turn 67 in 30 years I'm sure it has been raised even further or more likely there won't be any kind of state pension anymore.
Not that I expect to ever get that old. 8 hour workdays are insane, it's an arbitrary number and yet the whole of society is based around it. It leaves people too exhausted to enjoy life and causes so much stress I'm actually surprised anyone makes it to pension age. I fully expect to die of a stress-related heart attack or similar way before I get to enjoy any kind of pension.
> The funny thing is, that as someone who grew up in Europe, with all those things she raves about, I feel exactly like she did in the beginning of the story.
We always want more and better, right? We might be different from the Americans in the details (albeit important ones), but we aren't that different in the big picture worldview.
> Those 5 weeks of paid vacation feel more like an insult than a benefit.
Now imagine not having them. I moved from Australia where (due to my contract) I had 6 weeks per year, now in Japan I have two. Feels a lot worse than having them.
> 8 hour workdays are insane
8 hour work days are a breeze, I've regularly done 12-14, and not unknown to have done a few 20hours (sleep at work, I'll be doing this next week a few times due to staff shortages).
I do agree with you about retirement though, kinda worrying that all that money I paid into my Australian superannuation is locked up and will probably not be there when I eventually retire.
Ever notice how retirement age is rising at roughly 0.5/years/year ? That means, of course, that by the time someone in their 30s retires it will have moved again.
So if politicians want to keep spending like they do now (assuming deficits do not matter and do not raise spending further due to interest), a 30 year old person will retire at age 104 at this rate.
When they raised the retirement age in my country to 67 they also snuck in a provision linking it to the average life expectancy. So as life expectancy goes up, so does the retirement age.
As I expect a cure for ageing to be available within the next couple of decades, this basically means no more pensions.
Im 27/female. My annual comp this year is north of $220k. I have about $12k left in student debt, which at this point I am making smaller payments towards because paying it off will drop my credit score and I really want to get a good rate on a mortgage soon.
On paper, things look great. I save about $2500 a month after my own bills and helping siblings (parents cannot work). I have a good deal of investments already built up and max out my 401k.
However, I really can't afford to buy more than a dumpster. Its going to be several years until I can purchase a home but at the current housing spikes, it's going to be out of reach even then. I could just move, but the job prospects aren't amazing in cheaper parts of the country.
My management just does not care about me. Its about their goals. I'm just a tool or a service to help them achieve those goals. Services get sunset. Services get deprecated.
Again, my compensation is amazing on paper considering my age, but I am over worked and under constant stress and anxiety. I don't take many vacations because the anxiety of my work is overpowering.
I have two weeks of vacation banked, but even if I took off, I can never deflate and distress. I don't know how at this point.
My work is pretty much all my life... oh and commuting.
I know there are people with alot less than me, far more student debt, etc. I am grateful for what I do have and cannot begin to imagine what it's like for the folks living paycheck to paycheck, although I am terrified that my career stands at the whims of egotistical men, and I could easily end up in that paycheck to paycheck situation.
I occasionally see headlines on news sites while reading on my phone during commutes... "x analyst predicts y company to hit trillion dollar by z date."
Nobody stops to ask who is reaping the majority of that and at what cost?
She is on-the-nose about the upsides, but doesn't talk about the downsides enough, IMO. It's tough leaving friends and family behind. Also, the creature comforts! They don't have Costco or Trader Joes or good diners in Europe. Knowing where to buy things, knowing the language (the worst thing is navigating phone trees in another language), knowing how the various systems of which you are a apart work. You realize how much knowledge has seeped into you, almost by osmosis, that you take for granted, and now it's gone. New knowledge will seep in, in time, and meanwhile you must be okay being ignorant, and therefore at risk.
She mentions she lives in the south of France. I don't think she has to worry about access to good food. Why would anyone who moved to Europe want to go back to the US for their shitty food ?
> creature comforts! They don't have Costco or Trader Joes or good diners
Hmm...I think you'll find that the creature comforts are actually a lot more comfy in most of Europe, which is of course a very large and diverse area. Of course, it will take you a while to figure those out, because things are different.
It's funny about the social connections... I feel like I could emigrate no problem, because I already left everybody behind when I quit Facebook. Or here's a twist, I could rejoin Facebook and "work remote" from anywhere.
I've never felt as weak an affinity with the USA as I do now, but habit and inertia have kept me here so far...
> They don't have Costco or Trader Joes or good diners in Europe.
That you include chains of whatever on the list of downsides to leaving your country, says something. Maybe something about you, maybe something about your country. It's not good what it says though.
EDIT: I think you might be the kind of person the author is talked about when she says "brainwashed". If the specific franchise of restaurant that you like is such a huge factor in your life, maybe you've just been brainwashed. And this is not even mentioning the breathtaking ignorance of saying there's no good diners "in Europe".
Don't dismiss the knowledge of store chains as something silly and bad. It's about life's little needs. You need to know where to buy tons of little items for the right price/quality and moving countries means all that knowledge needs to be rebuilt. Since I buy most of these things from the various chains then yes, moving countries means having discover again the chains/stores that I need.
I actually felt this when I moved from Europe to the US. Suddenly I had no idea where to buy food ingredients, kitchen items, etc that weren't too expensive but were not of crappy quality either. Even the relative value of things (ex. is a $4 loaf of bread expensive or cheap? Converting to the previous currency and comparing prices doesn't work at all). Also, Europeans don't realize but the US has a lot more choices for almost everything (well, I guess except broadband Internet and some other things, heh). That's great in general but it's overwhelming to the newcomer.
I moved country twice in my life and I never had much trouble with the things you mention. I acknowledge they exist, I just don't agree they're a big thing (in the sense that knowledge can be re-build relatively quickly).
Confused, her information is wrong. I was talking with a French gun owner who owned an AK and AR-15 both chambered in .222 Remington. Just because she doesn't know any gun owners who have them doesn't mean "military style weapons" are banned there.
As a European looking out the US is often befuddling. The insanity of healthcare, attitude to firearms, extreme media bias and seemingly unquestioning nationalism are worrisome to say the least.
I’ve been there several times for conferences and I’ve always been happy to leave. The constant feeling of being bleed for cash at every opportunity coupled with the fake over sincerity is frustrating.
As an Irishman there is a strong connection between our countries and many colleagues have made the move and seem happy. I can’t imagine wanting to live there, at least in the world described in the article and around big city conference centers.
As a self-proclaimed libertarian, this is the first thing that came to mind: we need more people like her! The more people we have who feel this way and start leaving/fleeing the country, the greater incentive for the society to correct itself in order to minimize the losses.
There's a thought that the only people that can mentally hack capitalism and the stresses that come with it are a very few number of people, they often becomes owners of companies or directors. The rest of us have to follow the system to work and earn in it and dont always subscribe to it's ideals. That's why I like her courage to use the word brainwashed, something American media think only happens to people of other governments.
Why do you think the main issue is "can" and not "why on earth would you want to"?
I remember a very poignant New Yorker cartoon, with a bunch of elderly gently WASP-ish looking folk and one whispering to another: "Money is life's report card".
Choice is still a thing. If you want all those government benefits in exchange for making 1/3rd of what one makes in the US, go right ahead. Their immigration laws are quite a bit more restrictive than ours, so it won’t be easy, but it can be done. There are literally hundreds of millions of people who would like to move here. Tens of millions in South America alone, in spite of long vacations, “free” healthcare, and “pensions”.
You started a wretched political/national flamewar in this thread and then heaped fuel on it to keep it going. We ban accounts that do this, so please don't do it again.
You really violated the site rules quite egregiously here. Other commenters did too.
You have been one of the worst offenders in this thread full of horrible violations of the HN guidelines. You've also been uncivil on HN many times before. This is really bad.
I'm not going to ban you, because your recent history hasn't been as bad as this, but if you do this sort of flamewar on HN again, we will ban you. Please do not pour any trace of nationalistic poison, regardless of how badly other users are behaving. If you do, you're as bad as they are. This of course goes for every user, not just you.
> You have been one of the worst offenders in this thread
I obviously disagree with the characterisation of what I said as "nationalistic poison", but I will no longer talk politics on HN to be on the safe side.
I read something about the term “right” that I have yet to fully reconcile. For some rights, nothing is required of other people. E.g., freedom of speech, voting rights, even right to bear arms. Other rights require taking from others. Universal health, basic income, etc. requires taking money from some/all to give to others.
I dont know that the second is necessarily bad, but it is an interesting distinction. However, it may be a false distinction. Child care leave may not require taking from the employer so much as establish that if the employer wants an employee’s work, a fair trade includes leave.
Like I said, I haven’t fully thought this one through.
> Child care leave may not require taking from the employer so much as establish that if the employer wants an employee’s work, a fair trade includes leave.
I hear you, but I think the distinction isn't great because it's A) semantic more than anything, and B) too easy to take it into the realm of mental gymnastics, to the point the distinction loses all meaning. I could just as well argue that X right may not require taking from other people (in the form of taxes) so much as establish that if you want to be a part of our society (after all, no one is stopping you from leaving and go live in the jungle), a fair trade (i.e. the taxes you pay for the benefits you get) involves your taxes paying for X, and that this is true for all X.
I don't think you'll care to read or think about this reply, but others might, and HN is for me also about open-minded discussion.
I don't pay through my nose for healthcare. According to a quick Google search, it seems to be about what the average US resident pays (while I'm above average in income for my country). For that price, I don't ever have to worry about going to a doctor or hospital. I'm feeling sick - I go to the doctor. I have a toothache - I go to the doctor. I think I broke my finger - I go to the hospital, wait a few hours, and learn that everything is alright. I can't imagine having to wonder if the visit is really necessary, because I need the money. I don't want to have to choose between health and money. For me, this is comfort.
Additionally, I have friends with chronic diseases. They cannot emigrate to the USA, because they couldn't pay the medicine. That doesn't sound like a first-world country to me, where you cannot afford to treat your sickness, even though you've got skills and a paying job. That sounds like a bad dystopian movie.
I go to the doctor when I’m sick too, imagine that! And I too have a chronic disease for which I pay a princely sum of $10/mo as a co-pay for medication. It is true that Americans pay quite a bit more for healthcare. But our doctors make quite a bit more than European ones, too. I do like it when the person treating me is well off, and their income is largely decoupled from the whims of a random unelected government bureaucrat.
It’s also true that the health insurance system badly needs an overhaul. But I’d very much like to keep it private, because our government is a money black hole.
The comment was not only downvoted but flagkilled. It takes time for the community's reaction to settle.
There's something more important though: you helped make this horrible flamewar worse. If you post something like https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16946815, you have no basis to complain about others.
If you saw a house on fire, or a forest, or a city park, I'm sure your first reaction wouldn't be to pour fuel on it. Please bring that instinct for good behavior here too. It's not as obvious that it's needed, but it is.
To save us talking about ill defined social policies, I'm going to quickly define them (I'm not being condescending, it is easy for people to infer meaning from things like this)
* Capitalism is an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state.
* Communism a theory or system of social organization in which all property is owned by the community and each person contributes and receives according to their ability and needs.
* Socialism is a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.
Doing any single one of these is a possible disaster, I won't get into the theories here, but lets assume extremes are unhealthy.
Now, you're inferring that Europeans are "lax commies" which would mean that the goal is to get everything into the public hands. That's not quite the case, in fact it's not the case at all honestly, so it's not communism.
Secondly, you refer to Europe as one political and economic model, it's not, there are many for instance the Nordic regions have their own model which is often referred to as "Nordic Capitalism" or "Nordic Social Democracy"[0]
Finally, and I know this one is quite hard: Europeans typically are not nationalistic. Given that the rise of nationalism is seen as being very closely followed by facism; nationalism is a dirty word, and if you were to be described as "nationalist" it would be considered an insult in many European countries by the majority of the population. The principle problem here is that "patriotism" is synonymous with "nationalism". And Americans are very "patriotic", meaning any criticism of the country as a complete functioning system is met with hostility because so many people are so sensitive of the subject.
I know it's hard to be objective when you've been drilled that your way of life is objectively "better" or "freer", but its often good to take a step back and look at the system so that - at the very least - you can hold your government to account for "why can't we do healthcare too, since we pay more per person for it in taxes anyway".
I would like to point out, however, that aside from Norway (which sits on a huge barrel of hydrocarbons) all of the countries mentioned are significantly worse off in terms of per capita GDP (PPP). So it might just be that capitalism is not such a total disaster as you suggest.
Hmm...if we're doing "capitalism somewhere else" and "reaping the benefits", do tell me how come German companies are beating US companies left and right in the marketplace?
It's the US that can't compete, as shown by the amazing trade deficits that have been in place since the 80s, and in fact, the rest of the world is subsidizing this deficit.
Just in 2017, the US had a $64 billion trade deficit with Germany. 2016 was pretty much the same, and as I said, it's been like that for a long, long time.
And no, that's not by dumping cheap products due to low labor costs. Labor costs in the industrial sector tend to be quite a bit higher in Germany, strong unions and labor protection and all that awful "socialist" stuff.
The surplus is because German products are high quality and are in demand. In fact, most of the top categories of exports are the same for the US and Germany, so it's a pretty direct competition.
Overall, the US trade deficit was $478 billion in 2016. Recently, Germany had a trade surplus with China, despite the much lower Chinese wages.
The US current accounts deficit is very similar in scale, at $462 billion in 2017. That's the difference between the amount that the US (private+public) borrowed from foreign countries and the amount that foreign countries borrowed from the US.
That is very much a false dichotomy. Your german products are of good quality but largely overvalued and this shows when Trump threatens with tariffs ;). There is actually very little that makes as much money for the germans and is not directly connected to a field where german companies have a specific monopoly. I hope you are joking right now and know how borrowing public and private money works.
Would you please stop using HN for flamewars? It's totally not ok, and you've done it a lot and we've had to warn you about it repeatedly. You've posted many awesome things to Hacker News so we'd hate to ban you, but protecting the site from flames is more important. This is a problem we need you to fix.
Please read and follow https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and help take care of this place instead of helping to wreck it. I'm sure you wouldn't fuel flames in a forest or a garden, so please don't fuel them here.
The most recent moderation reply is here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16288896. If it doesn't read like a warning, that's out of politeness and respect for your positive contributions to HN.
It's true that your most recent history doesn't contain ideological flamewar (not counting this nationalistic spat), which is great. Nonetheless it has noticeably been a problem in the past, and your comments still sometimes contain uncivil swipes that need to be edited out.
Seriously picking a car industry which is and always had been different in the US than in Eu is a shitty example to prove a point. If it would not be for your liberal americans throwing billions at your german cars they would be nothing compared to what they are now. Ever been to SK ? How many non korean cars have you seen ?
The entire IT industry dwarfs everything Europe has or will have in the next decades and still it is just a fraction of the US of A produces or trades with the world.
Besides Germany is your China of europe dumping shit to weaker markets en masse. Just looking at the list of largest german companies gives you a hint of how Germany really operates.
> Seriously picking a car industry which is and always had been different in the US than in Eu is a shitty example to prove a point. (etc)
I'm not trying to "prove a point". You asked for an example ("Where and how are the german companies beating the US ?") and I gave you one: German car companies are beating american car companies in the us.
So before you change the subject into china, south korea, the IT industry, weaker markets, mass production, and so on and on, can you first acknowledge that you asked for an example of German companies beating american ones, and I gave you exactly one such example?
Well, you asked for an example, so you were given an example.
However, I agree that examples are not all that useful. Numbers are, and these show that, in aggregate, German companies are beating US companies, individual sectors notwithstanding.
And the US is borrowing tons of money from the outside world and has been doing that for decades.
Now you can try to dispute that, but you'd need to come up with some solid arguments backed with data. Certainly your point that these awful commies are mooching off the great capitalists is ... a little off base. As in not compatible with the facts.
Your inability to understand the subject is astounding.
Funny how you demand from me to show you numbers when you are not doing so yourself .. but what can i expect from a german right ? ;)
My point was never about commies mooching off the great capitalists so again you missed this one as well. The point was that the european economies gained its wealth and glory by employing capitalist practiced in the countries of 2nd and 3rd world while pretending moral superiority and bad mouthing countries like the US or China.
You violated the site guidelines badly more than once in this wretched flamewar. That's bad, and we ban accounts that do this. We've also had to warn you before about this.
Would you please (re-)read https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and use the site only as intended from now on? The rules are the way they are because we don't want this community to destroy itself. If it's valuable enough for you to participate in, it's valuable enough for you to help preserve it. Helping to wreck it is incongruent, and I'm sure you're not doing that intentionally, but unfortunately the effects are the same, and we have to moderate by effects (not intent, which we don't have direct access to).
And I'm sure that you know that is not true. You can't possibly believe that someone who says "but what can i expect from a german" does not know exactly the effect he will provoke on the other person.
The capacity to not see something like that goes orders of magnitude further than you'd expect. That's one thing I've learned from moderating HN: nearly all abuse, including what you'd swear is outright trolling, is unconscious and unintentional. Any vague awareness that one is doing it is accompanied by the righteous feeling that the other person has done much worse; which is another variant of self-deception.
I'd even say that in their trivial way, these internet forum dynamics are connected to the causes of violence and war. If that's true, it has an interesting consequence: internet forums are an opportunity—trivial, yes, but therefore also safe—to work on the sources of violence and war in oneself.
Mate, no offense, but there’s nothing to rebuff. When you are that far gone, people should have the right to mock you. Spouting meaningless platitudes does not an argument make, and we’d only be feeding his stupidity by answering any of those, frankly, ridiculous points.
I mean, just look at the fantastic discussion your rebuff started.
This is actually wrong! You tell yourself this lie to keep going I guess! As a software engineer in the south of France mi salary is 70% of what I would get in the San Francisco area but my purchase power is way higher! Goods and services cost way less here than in the US!
You can get $350-400k/yr total in San Francisco as a mid-career IC SWE. I have surveyed what SWEs make in Europe and it brought a tear to my eye. I guess that’s why most of the good ones are already here.
US health insurance costs about $13k a year for a family of 3, for a decent plan, and that’s if you pay for all of it yourself (ie you’re unemployed but wealthy, so don’t qualify for special rates). In-state tuition is also not too bad.
Glassdoor estimates are low, and they do not include equity, bonuses, etc, which can easily add up to more than the base. How do you think all those people are paying their insane rent? The best set up is to get Bay Area money without living there. It’s doable. :-)
Purchasing power is also better in the US seeing how we get to keep more of our money, and businesses are taxed less as well. This is reflected in per capita GDP.
San Francisco is just about the worst possible place to be. Almost anywhere else, cost of living will be far cheaper, and housing a fraction of Bay Area rates.
I wholeheartedly agree. You don’t have to live there to make SF-grade money though. And even if you do, even after all the expenses, you’re still very likely better off than most Europeans. You just don’t get anything for “free”.
I have not yet seen a remote friendly company that does not adjust for NOT living in SF. I’ve been remote for 10 years now.
The only scenario I can think of is to start in-office in SF, prove your value and then go remote after some time and maintain salary. I have not tried that yet.
I only want to say something about the "gun" subject in the article, since she gives it a prominent place.
I'm from East Germany originally (used to live in the US for a decade). That country was the true successor of Prussia as far as militaristic traditions go. While we did have "gun control", so no weapons other than air guns at home for most people, shooting was very much part of culture. I was taught marching like a professional soldier as part of school, before job training and studying. Same goes for shooting (small caliber weapons), throwing hand grenades (replicas of hand grenades were used in throwing exercises during normal sports lessons), how to use chemical protection gear and a gas mask, and a lot more.
The real difference, and this is my point that I think is usually missed about US gun culture, was that never, ever did it occur to me as a gun-obsessed child that if I had more than two air guns at home, or even for those, that I should ever want to use weapons against my fellow citizens.
Weapons were always for only three purposes: sports, hunting (organized and government regulated and controlled, not "for fun") and military.
In all the discussions about US gun culture, to me this is the far larger factor than just having access to guns, that the thought that this could be used in "self defense" against your own people exists. I sure had a lot of "gun fantasies" as a child and would happily have owned a "real" gun, but never, ever would it have occurred to me that I could use this against people, except for in military conflict.
You can restrict access all you want, and I'm sure that will limit some problems, but to me it seems unless there is a much, much deeper change in attitude that will only be a band aid removing the worst symptoms of a problem that goes deeper and is much more broad. This probably cannot be changed though. It's an attitude I find in too many movies produced in the US (unless it's romance or comedy and has no guns), it's all about fighting/shooting people.
For all her ranting, she seemingly still has a U.S. passport which gives her a great deal more freedom than if she had a passport from central America. Let's see if she renounces her citizenship anytime soon and put her money where her mouth is.
I don't find this article particularly offensive, just extremely naive.
For all it's problems, in the U.S. we still enjoy both freedom of speech and freedom from the tyranny of socialized govt, both have reared it's ugly head in pretty spectacular ways recently..
Namely, you can end up in jail if you teach your dog to salute at Heil Hitler, or if you decide you want to present the middle finger to your govt overlords on a traffic cam, or if you think you might like to send your child to a different hospital that offers hope, no matter how grim the ultimate outcome, or if you defend yourself in your home from a robber with a knife.. Just to name a few..
The first and second amendments of the U.S. are unlike very few In the world. Statistically most people are very unlikely to encounter such gun crimes like school shootings, but you'd never know that because we have a media and culture driven by ratings and agenda.
But there is a lot of truth that people have much less value for life. That's not just a U.S. problem.. I'm a U.S. citizen, so I can criticize the mayor of London openly without fear, but their plans(or talks) to remove any and all knives from stores and the hands of their citizens is a pretty good example.. But no knife, no problem, you can do it pretty effectively with a truck, I recall 80 or so were killed a few years ago, and at least 10 were killed a few days ago in Toronto. And anyone with any sizeable amount of intellect could probably devise a plan that is highly effective by stealing a semi.. Someone with actual intelligence could probably devise a scheme to drop small IED's via drones and could probably be pretty lethal and remain effectively safe from capture, let alone any of the other mainstream methods..
And on top of it all, even with all the gun bans, one of the worst gun massacres in recent history occurred not in the U.S., but good old Europe.. Many countries have effectively banned all weapons, But that just means that the law abiding citizens are the ones who become defenseless.. I've sarcastically argued numerous times that the Charlie Hebdo attacks were fake news, and the people were just made up, after all, such firearms are actually banned there, so such an event isn't actually possible to happen, those weapons are banned..
It gets even better when looking at countries like Mexico, S. America etc, where the police may actually be part of the mob, flip a coin as to whether you'll survive if you call for help (I suppose if your passport is blue or from the euro block they probably try to take care of you for tourism sake)..
In any case, I think a recent episode of econtalk with Jonah Goldberg http://www.econtalk.org/archives/2018/04/jonah_goldberg.html summed up a lot of truths about the place we are at in our society, especially in the U.S.. It's quite worth a listen.. Because ultimately, though the above is bad, we often forget that gives have historically persecuted people far worse, and though it's 2018 (as if somehow that means something), it's still happening ( IRS/FBI)etc..
Ultimately, These are problems govt cannot solve, and the answer the govt will give might not be an answer that's good, for average Joe at least.. But I do think, in the U.S., It's a road we are heading down..
I always find it astounding when a gun advocate goes to great lengths to list means other than guns for committing mass murder. Why would any American, having been ministered in the ways of the gun via American gun culture/religion, select IEDs from drones, knives, or trucks to do the deed? Guns, especially rifles, are superbly optimized killing machines. Any suggestion otherwise is a pure and simple diversion from reality & truth.
You cite the European Charlie Hebdo attack (where 12 people died) as 'one of the worst gun massacres in recent history' yet reveal your blind spot of the much more recent (American) Las Vegas Mandalay Bay shooting on 10/01/2017 where 58 were killed and a staggering 500+ were injured -- while attending a concert on the Vegas strip! This attack, from a 32nd floor hotel suite, truly stunned America in ways that have yet to be fathomed. Its just that these gun attacks keep coming and stealing away our attention. Witness the Sutherland Springs, TX church shooting where 27 people were killed, and then Parkland which has gained even more attention. And yet, American gun culture and politics will not permit even a Congressional debate for outlawing bump stocks, which to a large part, contributed to the loss of life at the Las Vegas shooting. No -- all you get are thoughts, prayers, a monument and don't forget the hospital bill on your way out.
You write "Let's see if she renounces her citizenship anytime soon and put her money where her mouth is."
There's a long tradition of people placing absurd requirements on Americans who criticize American culture.
During the Vietnam War, anti-war protesters who (correctly, with the retrospective understanding of history) criticized the US involvement in SE Asia, and were told "America, love it or leave it."
Now we have someone who did leave, and so the demand gets even more absurd. "American, love it or leave it and renounce citizenship."
Suppose she did spend the time and ~$3,000 to renounce US citizenship.
Would it really change your mind?
What I've seen in the forums which discuss renunciation is that there become new attacks, with the most common that it was done to cheat on paying taxes.
I say it's absurd because it's hard to move away from the country where one was born and grew up. She's almost certainly got more skin in the game than you do. Since you don't seem to have any skin in the game, and you thinking having skin is important, why should we listen to you?
1. She has dual French/US citizenship, says so in her Bio. Not sure what "Central America" has to do with anything. A lot of US citizens renounce their citizenship because of the insane tax requirements. But of course the US also makes renouncing very hard, for example taxing you on unrealized profits. It's a mess.
2. You find the article "naive"? How much experience do you have living outside the US, if I may enquire, for example in Europe?
3. Freedom of speech is actually quite comparable, and in many ways better, as for example corporations are prevented from denying your freedom of speech. The limitations the US corp. I worked for recently tried to put on employees were laughably illegal in Germany. Yes, we are a bit down on Nazi symbols. Can you guess why?
4. I would like to see what happens to you in the US if you give the middle finger to a police officer. Can you assert your 1st amendment rights from the grave?
5. "The first and second amendments of the U.S. are unlike very few In the world." Actually the first is pretty common, with very slight alterations. The second is uniquely US-American and, surprise, the US is a uniquely violent and deadly place.
6. Statistically, you are about 10x more likely to get shot in the US than you are in a Western European country. And at least 4x more likely to get killed in a homicide. So no, the violence in the US is not made up by the media, it is a statistical fact.
7. Whereas the much publicized terror attacks in Europe are exactly what you claim for the US, a statistical blip. They are only noticeable because (a) those countries are so much less violent overall and (b) media coverage of anything that can be counted as "terror" is of the charts.
8. Not sure what you mean with "one of the worst gun massacres". The Charles Hebdo attack? Sorry, that doesn't even crack the US top 10, and is not even a day's worth of gun homicides in the US.
1. I didn't see her dual citizenship status. I'll hazard a guess that she's using her U.S. passport though. I mentioned central America because she mentioned Honduras, among other places before settling in Europe at some point.. It's my understanding that one of the benefits of the new tax code abomination recently signed was making it less painful to renounce citizenship tax free. I'll wager that she won't though..
2. I've lived in Germany for 8 years, Czech republic for 3, and a few shorter stints in several other countries. That experience or lack thereof doesn't preclude one from being able to make sound judgments or understand people. I find that people who tend to sandbox someone in like that usually have a deference to authority or to the "experts".
3. The only speech that needs protecting is hate and offensive speech. If you don't protect that, why bother with anything else, your safe so long as you don't commit a thoughtcrime..
4. I do think police brutality is starting to become an issue in the U.S. and it's unfortunate because groups like antifa and BLM distract from a very real issue that for many years, exacerbated under Bush, put on steroids under Obama, and I can't imagine Cheeto Jesus actually helping this problem. When you train cops like marines, dress them as marines, give them MRAPS and other equipment from the wars in the middle East, I'm not sure how ppl can believe they won't act as marines. On top of that, add in things like civil asset forfeiture and there are problems. That being said, I can tell you I've seen what the Polezei do if your simply under suspicion, or if you make some mistake. I've literally seen them handcuff someone and wail on them with that baton before taking them to jail for very little. And unlike the U.S., you're generally not suing them to get fair recourse, you shut your face, literally. However, in general, compared to some places, you can and for the most part do live your day to day life without being taxed by the police.
5- again. It's not a problem for you, you seem to be ok with whatever speech they have assigned to you. You think US is a uniquely violent and deadly place, how many countries have you lived in, because I can assure you, you don't say that after actually spending time in someplace that's truly violent and deadly.. Ignorance is bliss I suppose, try living Mexico or Pakistan for a few months. You'll literally worry about the police as much as much as you do about being taken for ransom monies. Wonderful ppl though..
The truth of it is we should probably ban cars if we are really serious about saving innocent life
Data is data, it says whatever you make it say.. statistically what they want to say.. Analysts invoke ahh number of methods to statistically say what they want their intended audience wants to hear. Which I find most silly, because people tend to hear What they want regardless of what's actually said..
7- I'm not even sure what this means. But I can clearly see your doing the same thing that you're accusing me of. I used to love living in Germany, and still do (I'd give anything for a good doner kebop). But I always noticed a widespread disdain for the Turks among my German friends though. To me it seemed quite foolish and something I was never really able to wrap my head around. But as I traveled even more, I realized, that most of western Europe is quite homogenous in its race and ideas. I think this sets the U.S. apart even further, and you can see many issues that are coming to head in Europe denote the ethnic shifts in the countries. You can say what you like, I can read as well.
8- those are different instances, as I said. My point with the Hebdo attack was that it actually didn't happen.. The firearms allegedly used are banned there. How could it possibly occur if it isn't actually possible because they didn't have the firearms, it was literally fake news......... /sarc
The worst attack did occur in Europe, in recent history anyway. Feel free to look it up...
The U.S. is changing. for better and for worse. We might be far more ethnically diverse, but we have far less diversity of thought now, that is really to its detriment I believe. And, as they implied in that podcast, more and more politics and govt is becoming the religion and the god for those without any belief system, and that is a dangerous path, that's what I see historically anyway. Who knows. It's 2018, maybe that's all silly stuff from the past.
In 1. you wrote "I didn't see her dual citizenship status. I'll hazard a guess that she's using her U.S. passport though."
She got her French citizenship in 2015, and according to the article visited the US in 2017. US citizens are required to enter the US under a US passport. Therefore yes, you are almost certainly correct that she is using her US passport, at the very least to visit the US. Otherwise, there appears to be no need for her to use it.
But .. so what? Would you change your mind if she did renounce US citizenship? And if so, why, and by how much?
She mentioned Honduras because after visiting there for a work-related trip she decided she wanted to experience living in another culture. There was nothing otherwise special about Honduras - to use your phrasing, I'll hazard that had she instead been in Germany or the Czech Republic she would have had the same thoughts.
She chose to first go to Guadeloupe, which is part of the EU, and then "the Caribbean and Latin America."
In 3 you commented about US protections on government interference in free speech. In 2, however, markoman pointed out that US companies expect to be able to control employee speech which is "laughably illegal" German.
The threat of being fired, while not the same as being jailed, still has a chilling effect on free speech. The more so in a place like the US where the socialized "safety net" is rather weaker than in Germany.
5. "with whatever speech they have assigned to you" .. I believe the prohibitions on Nazi symbols in Germany was partially based on restrictions to free speech imposed by the Allied powers, including the US.
Note that some speech - I'm thinking of speech which is the US is classified as obscene - is more free in Germany than in the US.
7. I don't understand your transition from terror attacks to German discrimination against Turks. Yes, it's there. So what? How does that indicate something which sets the US apart, given the long history of 'disdain' in the US towards blacks, Native Americans, and Hispanics - discrimination which exists to this day, though no longer enshrined in the legal code.
You write most of Western Europe is "quite homogenous in its race and ideas"?
Could you define "race"? Does it mean something other than "has white skin"? Eg, the traditional US viewpoint was that southern Italians were a different race than northern Italians, the English were convinced of the superiority of the Anglo-Saxon race, and of course there's also the Teutonic race, as in "The realm of France, it is well known, was divided betwixt the Norman and Teutonic race" from Ivanhoe.
I don't understand why you think that Western Europe is more homogeneous in its ideas than the US. That is, don't Western European also think Americans are also homogeneous? Could you explain how you came to this conclusion?
Going back to your earlier comment concerning "tyranny of socialized govt", hasn't the US been a socialized government since the New Deal? I can easily find many people making that claim, and I think they are right. (I don't think that's a bad thing either.) Or are you saying that that the US is( socialized, but it isn't* tyrannical about its socialized government, while other European countries are?
It could be argued that shooting your classmates is not that different from backstabbing your office colleguages in order to live out the american dream of coming out on top of everyone else; or at least that is what this guy does in https://eand.co/why-were-underestimating-american-collapse-b....
Well, fair enough. The goal should be society mentally healthy enough so people don't want to hurt each other.
I understand that people think about that as a technical problem (people hurt through weapons, therefore decrease availability - problem solved) however this is not solving the problem at all:
You wouldn't want a society of violent people who just never got the chance to hurt others either.
The technicality of decreasing the availability of weapons (which, as said, might as well be valid) feels so out of place in the article since the rest of it is actually about culture.
It appears to me that the author points at a cultural problm and then interrupts everything to feature this US gun thing.
We're not going to let HN go down in the flames and fumes of nationalistic battles. We ban accounts that do that, so please don't do that. Do this instead: when someone provokes you with an egregious comment, flag it (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html) and/or email us at hn@ycombinator.com to be sure to get moderator attention. Don't reply, and especially don't reply aggressively.
In other words, call the fire department, don't pour fuel, and don't start fires of your own. Sounds easy, but it's not, because it requires tolerating the burn of annoyance inside oneself instead of taking it out on the commons. That's actually what tolerance means. It's a physical process, just like any structure can tolerate a certain load before snapping. Containing this energy does not feel good, but it's the capacity we all need to build if if we want this community to survive as a place for curiosity.