Why do they not want to go bankrupt from major health issues?
I was listening a podcast about cancer patient in France.
One talk was about the fact that the surgeon was planning on removing the breast tumor AND do the reconstruction directly after.
Except that by doing that the operation would have cost more than what the national social security covers, so it meant a big premium for the patient.
The “big” premium they were taking about was 600€ which is obviously outrageous. To make a cancer patient spend this much money on a life saving procedure.
The “big” premium they were taking about was 600€ which is obviously outrageous. To make a cancer patient spend this much money on a life saving procedure.
European here: I agree with this being outrageous. It’s not about the money, it’s about being a civilised society.
Now hospital parking on the other hand…
We do have some steep copayments for some treatments as well. For example, if I had to go to the hospital for a month I’d have to pay about 1000 EUR myself.
I was in the hospital for an outpatient procedure a couple of years ago here in the U.S. So not even overnight. I have good insurance. It cost me $2500.
I’m q
If I had to go into the hospital for a month, I truly would rather kill myself than have that shit looming over my for the rest of my life.
The trick is: Just don’t pay these fuckers, what are they going to do? Show up and kill you?
Maybe you get sued, but maybe they don’t even bother because it’s not worth the cost of lawyers.
Either way, money isn’t worth dying for, even in a fucked up dystopian system.
Except now you can’t buy a house or get a loan on a car because you have this massive outstanding debt…
Jokes on them I wouldn’t be able to buy a house or car that requires a loan anyways.
Beats dying.
Ouch, way to punch below the belt lol
I think that amount is way too high. Nowadays I could afford it without problems, but a few years back spending some time in hospital would’ve messed up my budget.
I might be fine with paying for elective procedures - but hospital stays for other reasons should be covered by healthcare.
I agree it should all be free for non-elective procedures, but that’s pretty much the cost of a few hours at an American hospital. The fact I thought you were being sarcastic and were not really reinforces how messed up our healthcare system is
Depends on the country. There are countries where everything is covered.
Why smoking remains so prevalent. I’m sure it’s not a majority that smokes, but it is massively more common anywhere I’ve been in Europe than here in the US. I live in a fairly large city and I will go many days in a row without seeing a single person smoking.
I just don’t really get it. It’s gross, it smells, it ruins your teeth and your lungs, and it’s expensive. Why do it?
It’s not necessarily that smoking is a larger percentage of the population. It varies, but stats show a similar percentage more or less… it is a bit higher in Europe on average than in the US on average — but both places are large with varied amounts of smokers. It’s more that people are outside near each other more in Europe.
https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/smoking-rates-by-country
In Europe they’re walking down the street, sitting outdoors at cafes, hanging out in the city center, etc. Whereas in the US, people are often driving from place to place to go to a destination, so you don’t notice the smoking as much. Plus, smoking sections are a concept that exists in the US (even outside), whereas they don’t in Europe. Thankfully, in much of the US and EU, most places are finally non-smoking indoors now.
This is a gross overgeneralization. It’s different in different parts of the US and different parts of Europe, of course.
(FWIW: I totally agree with you that it’s gross. And it’s far too common to run into in Europe.)
Why smoking remains so prevalent. I’m sure it’s not a majority that smokes, but it is massively more common anywhere I’ve been in Europe than here in the US. I live in a fairly large city and I will go many days in a row without seeing a single person smoking.
I just don’t really get it. It’s gross, it smells, it ruins your teeth and your lungs, and it’s expensive. Why do it?
this is the same in asia. sometimes people don’t even smoke, they just smoke because their boss does it and they do it to fit in at work. it’s really awful.
Not the case in northern Europe by the way. I’m just as shocked when visiting countries in mid/south Europe
It’s way too broad a comparison. In my North Eastern US state, encountering smokers isn’t that common because it’s illegal inside and anywhere near a door. So to smoke, you have to pretty much hide. And it’s become uncommon enough, smoking makes you a pariah so people seem to be breaking the official rules less often as time goes on due to social pressure more than fear of enforcement. We were out at a bar the other day and a guy smoked on the patio and it very much stood out. You could feel the vitriol for this guy in the atmosphere and after a minute he walked in to the parking lot looking embarrassed. Not that long ago a waitress would have brought him an ash tray.
But go to Kentucky, there’s no rules about smoking anywhere. Last time I was there, we went to a grocery store with an ashtray between isles. Every building we went in to smelled like the 80s.
These are both the USA. And then in Europe, you do have countries like Bulgaria, Turkey, and Greece where more than 25% of the country smokes, which is higher than anywhere in the US. But then you have Sweden with only 6% and Norway with 7% which is a little bit better than anywhere in the US.
I just don’t really get it. It’s gross, it smells, it ruins your teeth and your lungs, and it’s expensive. Why do it?
All those things are true but are countered by the fact that it’s also fucking awesome.
That’s not a fact, Jack. Also, you stink.
Sorry, but it is indeed a fact. Also, OK :)
Sounds like you’re addicted to smoking yourself
It really depends on the area, in some places smoking isnt really normalized anymore, in some places its the norm
In the USA less than 9% of the population smokes now. It’s probably around ~7% at this point. It’s crazy that we keep putting out laws like it’s a massive issue. The reality is alcoholism is way worse than it’s ever been yet it’s still allowed to advertise on the TV and they can sell fruity flavors…but think of the children when it comes to tobacco…
I’m hesitant to spin valid concerns about alcohol into de-vilification of smoking. They are both vices, both unhealthy, both dangerous to the user and those around them for different reasons.
So yeah, it’s valid to say we ignore the dangers of alcohol. But also yes, we should “think of the children” when it comes to tobacco.
What kid is picking up coffin nails these days? They vape or drink. It’s probably why the FDA dropped deeming regulations when the cigar manufacturers went after them, no kid is smoking a $10 cigar.
That is threadbare justification for deregulation of something we know has basically entirely negative effects and absolutely is something that kids have historically done.
Kids’ habits are fickle and unpredictable. Removing barriers to destructive behavior simply because they don’t do that behavior as often anymore (the current regulations seem to work??) makes no sense.
The issue is they’re not just leaving them in place, they’re adding more regulations, while ignoring alcohol. More people are alcoholics now than ever, and everyone is completely fine with it, but smoking is taboo and “omg think of the children”.
But… It’s still not bad that those smoking regulations are being put in place.
It weakens the argument for additional alcohol regulation when you keep insisting that the regulations being put on another similar vice are pointless.
How do you figure? Those of us who enjoy cigars/pipe tobacco/snuff are basically seeing our vices disappear because “think of the children”. Small makers are being forced to close because of the regulations on cigs. All while alcohol is completely allowed to do what it wants.
Well, the U.S. consumes a significant amount less alcohol than most European countries. So with both vices, Europe is doing worse than the U.S.
Sure but both countries are pushing tobacco laws like mad, while not touching alcohol.
It’s literally prohibition all over again…
I’m one for letting people enjoy whatever vice they want, even if it’s hard drugs, but only because I know prohibition doesn’t work. We shouldn’t be telling adults what they can and cannot enjoy
To an extent, I see where you’re coming from, but if we keep cigarettes legal, most of the additives need to go. There’s no need to put tar and acytone in a cigarette.
They don’t put those things in cigs. It’s a by product of burning tobacco. Those lists of whats in a cigarette are bullshit, it’s just the chemical reaction of burning something.
Cigarettes are much worse for everyone around you than alcohol. Passive smoking is pretty dangerous and the main reason why so many laws exist against smoking in public places.
No it is not, the 2nd hand studies where flawed heavily. Smoking is bad for you period, but second hand smoke is as bad for you as sitting in traffic. Alcohol is bad for people around you as well, lots of DUIs were people are harmed and killed because of it.
deleted by creator
There are laws against smoking in public places and cigarettes are expensive. Those who smoke are in it for themselves, not a European thing.
It’s definitly a thing in some places. I travel a lot between Switzerland and Germany and the difference in how much public smoking there is, is quite extreme.
deleted by creator
I’m not at a level of expertise where I can say for sure how much of an effect they’ve had, but part of the resolution of that lawsuit in the US where it was determined that the tobacco industry knew tobacco was addictive and caused cancer was that the industry had to establish a fund that was earmarked for anti-smoking advertisements. Those commercials by the Truth Initiative warning kids about the dangers of nicotine? At least partially funded by big tobacco.
Monarchy. It’s the 21st Century and y’all still pay people to live a lavish lifestyle because they are distantly related to some warlord from the 9th century
Then again, the people in all countries pay for the lifestyle of the politicians… in addition to the bribes they get for deciding in favor of whichever corporate and/or rich person needs a specific law passed or vetoed.
At least the monarchs do what you pay them for … entertain you.
At least we can vote the politicians out. Fuck monarchies.
Politicians don’t do shit in America. Corporations govern the country and you can’t vote them out.
The King in the UK was caught with briefcases full of money declared as a ‘donation’. He has also interfered in our politics including encouraging the government to buy ineffective homeopathic ‘medicines’. They have also stopped the conviction of serious sex crimes royals have committed. Because the police get the power granted by royalty and can’t persecute them.
Your right.
I don’t want my tax dollars paying for politicans either.
I would be fine with it, if they were not allowed any other incomes during the time they get payed by the people.
Oh and of course they should be forced to do their jobs. If they don’t fully attend sessions, cut their pay.
Deswegen sind die ja auch nicht in der EU
Lustig, wie jetzt im Bezug auf das Mem sowohl Norwegen als auch Großbritannien nicht in der EU sind.
Edit: Context for those who merely translated, but didn’t understand. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UGlPbphlpBg
Nowhere in the question does it specify EU countries. It simply says European.
You’re taking this too serious.
I’m referencing crane driver Ronny in Norway (“Kranplätze müssen verdichtet sein!” : crane parking needs to be condensed (ground)), a reality TV icon in German language online communities and because the quote and context applies to both Norway and the UK which are both European, but not EU countries (that’s relevant because that’s part of the referenced joke), I posted that comment.
Neither does your comment. So pointing out that “y’all” in this instance is not actually meant to be taken literally is worth pointing out.
SPEAK ANGLO-SAXON YOU SON OF A BITCH!
Specific to Germany, but when a second cashier opens up, it’s a first come first serve rush for it, rather than letting the person next inline at the original cashier take the first spot in the new one.
Completely agree. I am German and it’s utterly ridiculous.
Demanding to have another cashier is so rude yet so many do it all the time.
Oh my god I love this. Let the chaos begin
The Brits would never.
Queuing is a national pastime.
When I visit, I looooooove the civilized queues, but I can’t for the life of me understand why the slow lane on escalators is on the right (like you might find in big American cities) instead of the left (like you might find on a British highway).
Hun barbarism! Do Germans not know how to queue?
They do not
From what I heard about queueing practices in Eastern Europe and Northern Asia, no, not at all. For example, a long-time queue doesn’t need people, it just needs some belongings queued.
German here, it’s slowly getting better. Slowly.
I belong to neither of these groups. But here goes it.
Europe: when ordering water, I have to specify for it not to have gas (non-carbonated). Also in places like Germany, people drink those before playing football. I don’t understand how you do it or even like it that way.
People in electric scooters are out of control. Specially in Spain. They’re the most egregious when it comes to disrespecting pedestrian crosswalks, dangerous overtaking in bike lanes and all around assholeness. You shouldn’t ride your fucking patinete in a train station crowded with people.
— —-
People from the US: Your tipping culture is out of control. It’s good for outstanding service on certain scenarios. But not for handing me takeout or pulling out a foamy beer from a cooler.
Also , don’t tell newly-aquatinted people from the south that you’re not religious. They’ll try to tell you it’s their duty to save your soul and try to make you go to their religious services, which antagonizes them if you try to set boundaries on your personal beliefs.
Btw. I still like you both.
Europe: when ordering water, I have to specify for it not to have gas (non-carbonated). Also in places like Germany, people drink those before playing football. I don’t understand how you do it or even like it that way.
I like the taste of TV static. Sue me!
Dude I love seltzer. Especially fruit-flavored seltzer…but club soda is pretty good too. I don’t really like unflavored seltzer though, but it depends on a lot…the brand, the bottle, whether or not there’s a straw…a lot of variance in the bubbles.
Definitely! The water flavor by itself is very important, though I’ve noticed that the carbonation process masks slightly bad flavors pretty well. I make my own seltzer with tap water which is pretty good here luckily :)
One I love is Apfelschorle - apple juice with seltzer. A little juice goes a long way!
How do you make your seltzer? Soda stream or some other contraption?
Do you use “apple juice” or do you like…make ice cubes out of a can of concentrate and throw a cube into a homemade bottle of seltzer?
Soda stream, yep!
And it’s literally just one part apple juice to like three parts seltzer, both mixed in a glass of jug. No ice cubes or anything :)
American here, I saw a tip jar for the cashiers in a flea market yesterday. I completely agree, it’s out of control. It would be great if employers would just pay their employees properly instead of asking customers to subsidize wages.
- No ice in their water or soda
- No refills on fountain drinks
These are the things that stood out to me whenever I have visited.
I spent a good while in Berlin once and one of my favorite restaurants was this Australian themed place by the IMAX theater just because I could get a nice big Diet Coke with ice in it. Their kangaroo sandwich also wasn’t half bad.
We’re not getting refills anyway, I’d rather not have 80% ice with a bit of soda
The process of a soda fountain makes already it cold.
Ice is completely pointless and without it you don’t need refills
Ice keeps the soda cold throughout your meal.
In Europe my soda was often pretty close to room temperature by the time my food arrived. Not great if you like your beverages “ice cold”. But I get the impression Europeans don’t like their drinks as cold as we do in the US to begin with.
We also use larger glassware in the US, which offsets much of the volume displaced by ice.
So no, ice is not “completely pointless”, it’s just a cultural difference 🙂
larger glassware
Thinking of a typical US fast food soda cup: understatement. For comparison, a German McDonald’s “Large” (the largest available) is 0.5 liters (17 oz). In the US, a “Medium” is 18 oz (0.53 l) or 21 oz (0.62 l) depending on who you ask, and, it goes to 30 (0.89 l) or 32 oz (0.95 l). And I’ve seen complaints that Wendy’s shrank their large from 40 oz (1.18 l) to 35 oz (1.04 l). That’s not a cup, that’s a bucket!
A sit down restaurant in Europe will typically have soft drink serving sizes from 0.2 to 0.4 liters. The 0.2 is… unsatisfactory.
I just usually order 2 or 3 right away when I see that shit. What am I, an ant?
Ice holds it at 0°C though. For drinks that are delicious at 0°C but aren’t as good at 5°C, that ice makes a big difference, especially if you’ve got a cup that’s supposed to last 10+ minutes outdoors.
I drink 2 pitchers of tea with a meal. I will need refills with or with out ice in my glass.
Have you considered that that may be a lot of tea?
According to Google, 1 pitcher has a volume of 1.89 liters. If we assume they’re mostly full (1.8l), that would be 3.6l of tea. It’s recommended that you don’t drink more than roughly 1l per hour.
You either eat very slowly, or you’re doing bad things to your body.
Fountain drink: Depends on the restaurant. Some Burger Kings and McDs did have it, some removed it (probably exploited)
I don’t want ice in my damn soda or ice.
If you like it, ask the staff for some. They will usually give it to you.So dang euro you don’t even want ice in your ice.
lmao. I meant to writer water but accidentally wrote something way better. Keeping that now.
It’s a thing cause its not really as normalized, people don’t really drink enough to get free refills in some places (although many places have free refills) and people here are generally used to warmer colas, although many people and places do add ice
I’m a fucking fiend for ice in my water, like I literally will fill the cup full of ice first, then put water in the space that’s left. When I visited Europe it was fucking rough getting used to never having ice. And if you asked for it (which I tried not to do, but I caved a few times) they’d give you like 3 cubes
I absolutely hate ice in my drinks and have to always request it without or it gets added, this is in the UK
I see I’ve met my opposite
Ice cubes kinda suck.
But some places in the US have crushed ice and it’s seriously the nicest thing ever.
Idk about Berlin, but I’m from the french riviera and we do put ice cubes everywhere.
Fait trop chaud dans le sud, c’est pr ça.
And by “everywhere” you mean in the pastis.
Indeed. The
is the best seller when it comes to beverages in France. More than the bottled water Cristaline. Isn’t that surprising
McDonalds did refills for a while but then stopped again, idk why ¯\(ツ)/¯
I don’t know for Germany but free soda refills are illegal in France
Why?
Why does France seemingly propose/executes the worst and/or weirdest things.
This is almost on this level: https://blog.mozilla.org/netpolicy/2023/06/26/france-browser-website-blocking/
Because sugary drink are one of the leading cause of obesity, so rather than inciting people and children to drink more soda it’s much healthier to offer free water and paid drinks.
With the same idea vending machines with soda or sugary snacks are not allowed in schools anymore.
On the other hand everything that France government is doing around internet and privacy law is pure nonsense, I agree with that.
Or the fact that you have to pay for fucking water. It’s a God damned human right but you have to pay the same for water as any other drink at restaurants in Europe. By the glass. And the glasses hold exactly one to two mouthfulls of water.
I mean, it might just be a rumor but I hear that instead of being born with arms, Europeans are born with baguette extremities. They nibble on their baguette arms throughout the day, and they grow back while they’re sleeping.
Nah that’s just the french, they’re a little weird. Us germans got normal pretzel arms
Do the Swiss have cheese arms?
Yes and quite predictably Italians have pasta fingers.
Do Belgians have waffle ears?
Not a doctor and not familiar with Belgians sorry.
Lutefisk I heard…
Chocolate
I thought they were steins filled with Paulaner.
deleted by creator
We are not ruled by our monarchy. Their role is purely ceremonial. But yes they are of German descent.
It’s ceremonial only by convention. Most of the monarchy’s power still legally exists, which to me is ridiculous
Guess what would happen if they tried to use that power
Nothing! Because they already use that power, just not in public. They blatantly exercise their powers to extort judges/politicians/media to their benefit.
They’d be deposed, obviously. Thing is, the very act of deposing them would be an extralegal action, as all laws in the UK are established under the crowns authority. Legally speaking it would be the equivalent of a non-violent coup. Hence ceremonial by convention(de facto), rather than by law(de jure).
There would definitely be a huge backlash. But also a very vocal minority who would probably support them. The end result would be some long overdue changes to our constitutional setup, but given the current state of UK politics, this would be delivered at the end of a highly polarising and disruptive period (I’m thinking Brexit vote level of rancour).
Would be better if we just nipped this in the bud now. Remove the monarchy’s constitutional power, and make them fund themselves with their huge existing wealth. They can keep the titles and ceremonies for all I care, just pay for it themselves
Define “Most”.
Every new law passed is signed off by the monarch, a new PM still has to ask royal permission to form a government etc. In practice, these are purely formalities and are treated as such, but still legally there
The monarchies of Europe were one big family anyway up to WW1.
we know we have made memes about it
some of us hate it but unfortunately we’re in the minority
Not that uncommon tbh, in Norway our monarchs are of Danish descent.
We (NL) have distantly German monarchs. Currently half our Royal Pair is from 🇦🇷 Argentina, which is neat.
I mean, the Saudi monarchy has significant pull in every world government.
Explain that
They belong(ed) to the german royal house “Sachsen-Coburg und Gotha” and changed their name to “Windsor” after WW1 to not be affiliated with germany anymore. I don’t know if that’s enough to call them foreign though.
A “house name” represents only one of a person’s many ancestors.
If I’m not mistaken, the royals are German or something.
How do they put up with the lack of mass shootings ?
Growing up without the adrenaline rush when crossing school’s gates is indeed a tragedy. Heckin boring
Yeah wheres the excitement
It’s like the abortion lottery with the most corrupted poor States working hard to enslave women’s bodies to their institutionalized meat lottery of school shootings and miserable impoverished existence all to feed the insatiable appetite of the parasitic billionaires. How can those Europeans really live without getting to experience the Grand Republican Hunger Games.
I know that a short visit doesnt give great insight into a place, but the following 2 things were very striking to me when visiting:
1 - the smoking… i found it disturbing just how many people were smoking 2 - the graffiti. I was surprised by just how much graffiti there was. Do people not take pride in their property enough to wash it off? I know Graffiti is common everywhere, but it seemed to be on a whole other level in europe… like it wasnt just on the back alleys, but on the front facades of buildings too. The front door of one of my airbnbs was covered in graffiti.
There was 1 thing though that was totally the opposite though & made total sense… the dual function windows (where you turn the handle 1 way to open them like a door & another way to lean them in to provide ventilation. These were everywhere & i found them to be the most functional thing ever! I wish they would catch on in the usa… with that said, the first time i discovered this functionality, it was accidental. I panicked as i thought i broke the window lol.
The graffiti thing kills me. Washing it off is a waste, it will be vandalised again quickly. Think this way, repaint properly a wall takes time and money, to draw a cartoonishly large cock takes seconds and costs pennies. So many places chose to allow selected artists do some good stuff as it’s a better deterrent.
Psst there is a third way to just provide ventilation, where you put the handle in a 45 degree angle upwards.
You monster
You know that meme with Jesus about how they hated him for speaking the truth?
Imagine that please.
The smoking absolutely kills me, as someone with asthma who has gotten very used to the fact that most things in the US are non-smoking now. It felt like there was a cloud of smoke basically everywhere I went in France and, to a lesser extent, England.
I met up for lunch with a buddy and his partner who was visiting from Europe. I mentioned that I drink a lot of water and asked for a refill, they asked if water was free.
Typically they ask you for still or sparkling while dining and they charge in Europe. In London, I typically just say, “tap”. They had to legally serve it.
Yeah, tap water is something you can ask for basically everywhere and its free, bonus if it’s in a place with amazing tap water
Now that’s an intriguing idea: who has amazing tap water?
Scotland.
well I don’t know but fun fact: Tallinn and the district of nõmme in Tallinn have separate tap water systems
It depends on the country, in Greece it’s usually free, maybe in touristy places or if you order bottled water you will be charged, but otherwise most places will give you cold tap water for free.
I think it’s legally required to give tap water for free mostly everywhere, but if you don’t specify it they might sneak in an outrageously expensive bottle of mineral water, it’s basically a way to scam tourists.
In Italy they don’t, Italians are weird like that. It’s also a country where nearly everyone doesn’t trust their tap water and buy water in plastic bottles…
deleted by creator
We usually don’t give out tap water but something pricey like San Pellegrino water.
Tiny things, like tiny doorknobs, tiny stairs cases, tiny doors, tiny houses, tiny cars, and a tiny say in government legislation, etc.
And all the smoking! Eek. And we thought we had a drug problem in the USA. I’ve never seen so many people addicted to nicotine in my life when I’ve been there. It’s everywhere. No thank you, I don’t want to inhale nasty odor while eating my lunch. Jeez, WTF?
The rest I understand, but tiny doorknobs and tiny say in legislation? Can you elaborate? I thought door knobs were a US thing and Europe had mostly handles. And what is different in terms of say in government? Do you mean the states’ direct democratic votes?
Tbh I’d rather have a nicotine problem than a crack problem. Never seen so many crackheads than in the US. It seems to be also quite a problem in the UK/Ireland, but in France it’s really uncommon. There are a few places in Paris but that’s about it.
a tiny say in government legislation, etc.
wat
And we thought we had a drug problem in the USA.
I’d rather have smokers than opioid addicts, but to each their own
I can’t think of anywhere in Europe where it is legal to smoke in restaurants.
Also the rest of your descriptions sound not based on actual personal experience but on memes from the internet.
How much they personally hate/dislike us.
- They’ve seen too many movies and make unfair assumptions about us and then judge us? Idk.
How racist they are but have no idea they are.
- They ridicule the US for our own brand of terrible racism but seem to be clueless that they and their government have their own vicious and oppressive racism.
How stuck in tradition they are.
- I feel like I don’t see a lot of progress in construction, culinary arts, or caste systems (to name a few).
I have to kind of disagree with the last point. We have no caste systems, culinary arts are pretty non important, and usually if people want something new they will go to a specialized restaurant. How did the USA change their culinary arts in the past 30 years?
Construction, it did change, and it is constantly changing. We used to use just bricks, now we use porous concrete, and wooden is becoming interesting aswell. We are not building skyscrapers because they are ugly.
Or am I wrong? I am from Czechia.
I’ve literally never once met any single person that “hated” Americans, and everyone who’s ever met an American says they’re lovely, just like us
The best theory we can come up with is that Americans are taught from a young age that their country is the best, and no-one should be allowed to say otherwise. Hence, even the slightest criticism is seen as hate.
Europeans, however, are raised on the belief that self-deprecation is a fuckin art
Not so much here, but you couldn’t go more than a couple minutes on reddit without reading some comment on how America is a third world shithole.
English speaking reddit, yes.
If you visit /r/de for example, you’ll find that everyone is complaining about Germany being a shit hole country. It’s simply unfortunate, if you don’t speak a second language, you never get good insight into how people view their own country.
I’m not American but i’ve worked in Western Europe. I don’t know why but there seems to be a lot of taxes for everything. You have to get govt permission for everything. People seem to rely on the govt to provide things rather than have some agencies fill niches that aren’t filled by the govt (for example I saw signs like don’t help homeless people, the govt is helping them).
I’m from an Asian country, we don’t have much tax, we don’t rely on the govt for anything (we can’t), and we have many NGOs. I think it’s similar in America.
As an Asian, there are a few things I can note about Europeans.
-
Europeans seem to have lost their sense of traditions, to me as an Asian it doesn’t make sense since keeping our traditions and values is a huge part of our culture and society.
-
Europeans also accept blame for bad things they did in the past (which is a good thing) but I think they can go overboard to compensate for that (to their detriment). I don’t think accepting blame for things in the past is a thing that’s done in Asia; we rewrite history instead. It would help if we acknowledged what we did and can have better relations with others moving forward.
-
Europeans identify more with nationality than ethnicity. For example, someone from Czech Republic moving to France is considered French. In North America I think they would be considered Czech-French. In Asia they would be considered to be a Czech expat living in France. Our ethnicity matters a lot.
People seem to rely on the govt to provide things rather than have some agencies fill niches that aren’t filled by the govt (for example I saw signs like don’t help homeless people, the govt is helping them). I’m from an Asian country, we don’t have much tax, we don’t rely on the govt for anything (we can’t), and we have many NGOs.
Most (but not all!) Europeans consider NGOs to be undemocratic, whereas the government is (theoretically at least) under democratic control.
Europeans identify more with nationality than ethnicity. For example, someone from Czech Republic moving to France is considered French. In North America I think they would be considered Czech-French. In Asia they would be considered to be a Czech expat living in France. Our ethnicity matters a lot.
But at what point would you stop doing so? I’m Dutch yet can trace back my ancestry to the 16th century in Belgium and northern France, what ethnicity do I have? And some have an even longer and more dispersed pedigree.
Also, you gave the example of French but what is now called France was made up from a large variety of ethnicities. Being French then is not defined as being a particular ethnicity but as belonging to the French Republic. It’s a cultural thing that matters a lot to them.
what does it mean that europeans consider NGOs to be undemocratic?
if your ancestry is from belgium/north france then you would be belgian/french with dutch nationality. I suppose when we refer to France we mean French before the 19th century immigration.
It differs a bit where I’m from. I have a friend from Malaysia who identifies as “Tamil-Malaysian” (Tamil being the ethnic group and Malaysian being the country). In HK we have a lot of ethnic minorities. Speaking frankly, if you look chinese, you would be considered HKer right off the bat, if you look any other skin colour (white, other asian, etc) you will be considered a foreigner living in HK even if your family has been there for generations. Here is a video i found as an example where some Indians who were born and raised in HK struggle to be seen as HKer
what does it mean that europeans consider NGOs to be undemocratic?
An NGO has its own policies and its own governance, which may or may not align with the wishes of the wider populace (for instance, a religious NGO in a secular society, or an NGO treating particular groups preferentially). A majority disagreeing with the policies of that NGO would achieve nothing, whereas with a governmental body they could exert democratic control.
if your ancestry is from belgium/north france then you would be belgian/french with dutch nationality.
Why? Good grief, do you have any idea how complicated that would be? Secondly, I don’t identify with that ethnicity you’re foisting upon me at all!
I suppose when we refer to France we mean French before the 19th century immigration.
Why? As I said: France was always a mixture of ethnicities, the 19th century didn’t change anything other than the skin colour of some of the French citizens (or is that what you’re hinting at?).
For me personally, someone being Dutch is based more on their attitude towards the Netherlands and other Dutch people: anyone who is loath to run into other Dutch people when abroad and who loves to complain about specific stupid policies of the Dutch government counts as Dutch to me.
Speaking frankly, if you look chinese, you would be considered HKer right off the bat, if you look any other skin colour (white, other asian, etc) you will be considered a foreigner living in HK even if your family has been there for generations.
Excluding people based on how they look, irregardless of what else (intelligence, special talents) they bring to the table, is widely considered to be racism and not acceptable in European society. I’m sure there are Europeans who think like you do, however, it’s not something that wider society considers acceptable (not to mention can be illegal).
Why? As I said: France was always a mixture of ethnicities, the 19th century didn’t change anything other than the skin colour of some of the French citizens (or is that what you’re hinting at?).
"France’s population dynamics began to change in the middle of the 19th century, as France joined the Industrial Revolution. The pace of industrial growth attracted millions of European immigrants over the next century, with especially large numbers arriving from Poland, Belgium, Portugal, Italy, and Spain.[10] In the wake of the First World War, in which France suffered six million casualties, significant numbers of workers from French colonies came. By 1930, the Paris region alone had a North African Muslim population of 70,000. Right after the Second World War, immigration to France significantly increased. During the period of reconstruction, France lacked labor, and as a result, the French government was eager to recruit immigrants coming from all over Europe, the Americas, Africa and Asia. "
This is what i’m referring to (the quote is from wikipedia). People from Poland, Belgium, Portugal, Italy, Spain, North Africa, Asia, and Africa would be considered French to a French person right? but to us they are expats who’ve moved to France. We wouldn’t consider them French necessarily.
For me personally, someone being Dutch is based more on their attitude towards the Netherlands and other Dutch people: anyone who is loath to run into other Dutch people when abroad and who loves to complain about specific stupid policies of the Dutch government counts as Dutch to me.
Yes, this is the kind of thing that seems distinctly European to me.
Excluding people based on how they look, irregardless of what else (intelligence, special talents) they bring to the table, is widely considered to be racism
ethnic minorities being segregated/excluded is a separate issue (this ties with being able to speak Cantonese, govt policies for education, etc.). I wouldn’t say that ethnic minorities/skin colour minorities are excluded from things in society per se, it’s that they are viewed as foreigners and not “real HKers”. Racism is very much a thing in Asia, i would say more so from older generations, i think younger generations are more open minded and understanding.
Thanks for the other explanations as well
what does it mean that europeans consider NGOs to be undemocratic?
In a democracy power should allways be held by the people. If you have a NGO -even when it does very good things- there allways is a danger that it could go against the peoples ideals or even their interests. You (as in the people as a whole) are also not as soverign when relying on NGOs for basic societal needs like a social saftey net as the voluntary donations founding them could stop any time. Thereby the power is transfered the donors (althought luckily most small-mid sized donors do not really exercize that power) who are mostly the wealthy as they just have more money to spend. A better solution is taxing fairly and using the common found gained throught that in a way the majority decides.
I recently watched an interesting video from Adam Conover on that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Cu6EbELZ6I. Altgought I do not agree with everything said (I don’t think the Patagonia nonprofit in particular is problematic in my opinion the focus should have been set even more on the issue of something like that beeing possible) I agree with the key message for the reason provided above.
there allways is a danger that it could go against the peoples ideals or even their interests.
isn’t this the same reasoning for govt though? politicians will say one thing for votes and do another thing. If anything it’s worse to trust a govt who will more likely go against people’s interests. At least an NGO has a stated aim.
not really. In an ideal democracy you could simply vote those people out in the next election . In a well working democracy there is only so much they can do before they are not reelected.
The difference to NGOs is that in a democracy one person (ideally) has exactly one vote while your influence on non profits -especially when you are wealthy enought to afford your own- is mkreso connected to what you (can) donate, so how wealthy you are. In my opinion that makes relying on government more egalitarian whereas a system built on charities is more seceptable to oligarchigal structures.
(I understand that in many places Governments are (very) currupt or not democratic to begin with and there are many NGOs that are democratic (or meybe just plain better for the interests of the people) compared to those governments. And in those cases these NGOs are -for now- obviously better then the government. But imo with a stable democracy the government is a fairer morer stable and more equal solution.
- Most European countries are EXTREMELY conservative culturally. They are very concerned about preserving “tradition”. Specially in Southern and Easter Europe. Even Germans listen mostly to German music, French to French music etc.
- Talk to an avarage Portuguese or Dutch about colonialism… see how much they “regret” or “accept the blame” for the shit they did.
- Most countries in Europe are not mono-ethnical, and haven’t been for a long time, like hundreds and hundreds of years. This is also true of Asia in some parts, but mostly Asia has a lot of mono-ethnicity countries. Your example of France, it’s had the Bretons, Basque, Occitan, “French”, Belgians, Flemish and Germans since it’s inception as a country. It was born as a nation by subduing those identities for French maximalism. The same for Italy, Spain, Germany etc etc.
Talk to an avarage Portuguese or Dutch about colonialism… see how much they “regret” or “accept the blame” for the shit they did.
Dutch here. Yeah, nah, we don’t. Maybe some lip service is being made towards the descendants of enslaved peoples in Surinam, but otherwise not really.
When I was young the period when the Dutch VOC flowered was taught as having been a really good thing, something that we could be proud of; the fact that this was accompanied by more than one episode of mass murder was entirely glossed over. I’m pretty sure it’s still mostly like that.
deleted by creator
Nope.
deleted by creator
The wealth of your nation is the fruit of colonisation. Your healthcare, public education, safety nets, your entire middle class, are the fruits of the overexploitation of the periphery, through colonialism and neo-colonialism.
deleted by creator
You awful, awful person.
- Most European countries are EXTREMELY conservative culturally. They are very concerned about preserving “tradition”. Specially in Southern and Easter Europe. Even Germans listen mostly to German music, French to French music etc.
Definitely not true for Germany.
-
Why some of them seem downright gleeful about every American shortcoming or perceived shortcoming.
As if we don’t do the same between the states.
You’re allowed to pick on your siblings.
I consider Americans like distant cousins. Not as closely related as neighbouring countries but still part of the family.
-
Because its funny
-
Gives a sense of superiority
-
