Poland has built an excellent, modern, European-standard infrastructure that fully meets the basic needs of its citizens. Japan, however, is a global leader in this field—a place where infrastructure has been elevated to the level of art and an engineering cult.
For the past few decades, Japan’s economy has seen virtually no growth, hampered by an aging population, a shrinking workforce, and a sharp decline in the value of the yen in recent years.
So now, the living standards, quality of infrastructure, and purchasing power of an average citizen in Poland are now truly on par with those in Japan. Yet, in terms of accumulated household wealth, the number of global brands, and the overall scale of its financial markets, Japan remains a significantly more powerful and affluent nation.
IMO, Japan is almost 50 years ahead of everyone else on the demographic and economical curve.
The United States will be Japan in a few decades, ie barely any growth, aging population, and shrinking workforce.
We'll just artificially inflate the GDP with more immigration to combat it. A short term band aide fix that won't really make a dent once Millennials start coming to retiring age in 20-25 years.
Taco con truly the greatest Russian subversion/agent ever. Top 1. Literally sows disunity to destroy the "United" States while putting in policies that will hamper us at home AND destroying decades/centuries of geopolitical relationships & ground the US had.
If only we didn't start deporting our immigrants seemingly on sight, bet we could get a lot more growth if we actually treated immigrants with respect (not that the US ever actually has)
Yes and no - racism also runs heavily through the US. Think of Japenese migrants, now Mexican, but even in the early migration waves there's a lot of tension that still lingers. I mean ... ICE and detention centres right now are not really a new thing in US politics and society.
That's not strictly true, either. Having lived in various countries it is talked about in all of them, just in different cultural contexts and - less loud and up front as it happens in the US:
People born in the US are considered Americans first, that really doesn't happen anywhere else in the world. And yes the US has racism, but it's nowhere near what it is in other countries.
Depends on definition of Indigenous. But look at what happened to Sami, to Aboriginees, Inuiit, First Nations in Canada, Indigenous in South America. Same - same as in the US, at times even absolutely analgous.
Every nation on Earth looks at people differently than them, and has an innate interest in framing them as the other.
America is unique in that we are able to mesh different cultures into a global economic power while still accepting that we are going to have moments of deep racism.
Every wave of immigration were considered to be inferior during their time, with a lot of racism. We just conveniently forget about it, because it seems silly in a modern context, since older waves just seem part of the America fabric.
>America is unique in that we are able to mesh different cultures into a global economic power while still accepting that we are going to have moments of deep racism.
And I am telling you, that is NOT unique. Having lived in various countries.
What other country harnessed immigration to the degree America does? In America, every citizens history tends to go “when my ancestors immigrated from…”, which is a very unique situation.
Are you talking about Canada? It’s like 1/10th of the US’s population and has a far slower economy.
Sweden - always was open to migration (around 35% of people living in Sweden have non-Swedish heritage; and no that's not all Muslim refugees) - from many places including taking in more US soldiers deserting - and integrating them - than near any place.
The UK via Commonwealth and their imperium.
----
>In America, every citizens history tends to go “when my ancestors immigrated from…”, which is a very unique situation.
I know that is something that is done culturally a lot in the US ... but are you even aware how much different cultures mingled within Europe? I have ancestors from all over the place, too. Or: Australia - a melting pot of it's own, globally.
One of the most insufferable aspects of the US internal self-image is that you are unique - which of course comes through all the nationalism and protestant influence - of finding a Manifest Destiny and a holy land. But it doesn't hold up when you look in detail.
Those are stagnating economies with rampant anti-immigration sentiment, and zero companies that can be claimed as being born from immigrant talent. Germany in particular is the poster child of a native-heavy stagnating economy.
So I ask again: what economy is as powerful as the US, who has built its economic might from integrating immigration as its bedrock tool?
You have fucking Trump and ICE running arount and try to talk about anti-migration sentiment; have folks like Thiel and Musk who heavily fund those anti-migration and desinformation campaigns here; have an economy that is propped up by AI at the moment.
There's a lot that is great about your country, but it's not those things.
Non-of the countries in Europe are stuggling economically; the problem is demographics. And you just posting on article that shows Poland being on the way to catch up with Japan.
Germany as vastly smaller country than US is still pushing much above it's weight (there are a lot of ... hm ... not very savoury policies here that made that possible.).
The UK built it's whole empire on that - with all the awful sides of it, too - integrating other countries in its economy.
Canada is basically Indian and other ethnicities at this point. Ironically enough, that will also cause a major decline in hockey since they literally don't watch hockey or even American football at all.
Japan chose stability over immigration. They are in the middle of their low birth rate era. They will be way better off than those who chose immigration as a band aid solution.
People downvoting you have no idea lmao. Live in Canada. Half Million of new immigrants a year. Local population still don’t want kids and our fertility rate is only about 0.1 above japans.
It is truly pain now or pain later. Actually it’s pain now for normal folks while the rich gets richer with cheap labour and stagnate wages.
When you introduce immigration into an aging population, all it does it delay the inevitable economical decline.
Whereas, if you don't introduce immigration, you will get over the negative economical feedback faster/sooner than the pro-immigrant model, which is a cheap band aide / cheap solution to a long term problem.
It would be like cutting your arm off cleanly as opposed to cutting it in slices over time. Cleanly? You can care for it, be patient to let it heal and you'll come out better. In slices? Good luck with that...
That’s a far more logical explanation then I was honestly expecting
Edit: I don’t necessarily agree with you but your stance is based in a degree of logic. There are counter arguments to your point but your point is far from uneducated which is something I honestly didn’t expect. Hats off to you
It's only logical in what the outcomes will be when you consider your economic inputs.
When you introduce immigration, it causes a lot of short term issues that will have long term consequences.
This is why I think Japan will be the dominant economy in 50-100 years. They don't need immigration. They just need time and demographic shifts to occur, which is a very slow, glacial force.
You cannot force growth but when you do, its artificial, like quantitative easing or immigration.
And you guys really don’t think birth rate will start to increase eventually? Every generation will experience different socioeconomic standards.
Also, immigration can only do so much to delay the inevitable crisis. When all developed countries still face declining fertility rate even with immigrating millions a year.
How many more Indians and Chinese can you immigrate as your local population still refuse to have kid?
How exactly? This sounds more like a hope than a plan unless you can back it up with some data or theory.
Even today, Japanese young adults feel so pressured by hectic work hours and rising costs that they no longer feel the need to complicate their lives by adding a kid to it.
Firstly, all their old people will eventually die off. They are ahead of the curve on that front. They're also using temporary workers from SEA currently as well to alleviate their labour force from elderly care.
But yes. There is no concrete hard data. Cause it's absolutely a new frontier. But so far, work-life balance in Japan actually has been improving. I have no doubt eventually fertility rate will improve. It has currently stagnated from 2 decades of decline and have shown some slight moderate improvement.
I live in a country where it becomes increasingly obvious immigration is a mere stop-gap in solving the core issues of all these developed countries that aim for infinite growth. Is that in this currently socioeconomic environment people just don't want kids. Everything is expensive, we live in shoe boxes, both partners need to work to afford anything, wages stagnant and barely improves, etc. Probably why I'm so fascinated what would happen to Japan in the next decade or two. Who took a completely different approach towards the problem.
But I don't see any of the issues you mentioned - rising costs, shoebox homes, both having to work to afford a living, the proverbial village not longer being available to raise a kid - improving anytime soon. Why then are you bullish about Japan being able to turn a corner? I also don't see automation improving so much that we no longer need as many humans to run a society.
Which country do you live in btw where you are seeing ill-effects of immigration? I'm curious because I'm an immigrant myself in the US and based on your description it seems like you might be from Europe? Europe somehow managed to import bottom of the barrel even from my home country.
Yes its possible but eventually everyone has to get over the birth rate hump and begin at zero again.
It's cyclical. Just cause we're in the modern era doesn't mean your standard of living should go up too.
Honestly, my biggest gripe with economics today is GDP growth and what is considered normal. 4-7% is not normal. 1-2% is normal IMO but they think its a recession.
It's unnatural growth, boom and busts, grab em and bag em before they're gone. Everyone wants to make out.
If Hari Seldon were a real person, he'd say similar things.
i think you mean 50 years behind. Countries like france, germany, italy , englad solved the lack of workfoce 20 years ago by bringing in cheap labor from 3rd world countries. Japan is starting to do that only now.
Pretty much what I was thinking. Poland was one of the countries that won the most by joining the EU. Also German industry moved there to use the relatively cheap labor on one of the countries with the largest population. Several things happened at the same time.
I mean it has been paid for with EU money. By other member states that are net contributors. Poland has by far received most EU funding out of all member states.
Poland is 2nd lowest among net beneficiaries when it comes to EU funds per capita. It's really not that much. In absolute terms it looks big, but it's only because Poland is one of the biggest countries in the EU.
This needs repeating as often as possible. People genuinely think that Poland pays as much as it gets. While in truth it's the single largest net beneficiary of EU redistributive policies.
Japan and Germany’s modern wealth is the result of America rebuilding them after WWII, to a higher tune than Poland is receiving. I think its just another example of what happens when governments wisely invest in a country
> Japan and Germany’s modern wealth is the result of America rebuilding them after WWII, to a higher tune than Poland is receiving
Adjusted for inflation France received approximately $32 billion, and Germany received approximately $20 billion from the Marshall Plan. Poland has received a net benefit from the EU of $168 billion over the course of its membership. This is approximately the same amount as was given to all 17 beneficiaries of the Marshall Plan combined. Around 3/5ths of that benefit was designated and used to build the infrastructure that OP was extolling, so the idea that the EU built it is a broadly accurate statement.
I think the best thing that both France and Germany received post war is not Marshall plan but 50 more years of continous growth in an open market in a democracy. Kind of important leg up.
Poland is not even in top ten biggest beneficiaries per capita. It gets the most because it's the biggest and most populated of the receiving countries.
And it's not a fucking charity. Germany and France wanted Poland to join the EU to have an open market of milions of people next to them. They get back more than they pay in taxes and revenues.
Of course it benefits both sides. But to even suggest Poland would be anywhere near the current level of wealth and infrastructure without being inside the EU is borderline insanity. Or tremendous ill will.
Who's suggesting that? And btw that's the case for all EU MS. Yet we don't hear constantly how Germany or the Netherlands should be thankful to other MS for forming a single market with them.
What needs repeating to ignorant people like you is that EU funds are a small fraction of EU benefits. Net contributors to the EU budget do not send billions to poorer member states out of the kindness of their hearts. They get many more billions every year thanks to the EU single market, euro etc. Devoid of this context, all of this net contributors/beneficiaries "debate" is just a way for ignorant westerners to feel superior.
"EU money" is a smaller part of Poland's GDP than your country's gains from the EU single market. https://www.cpb.nl/en/trade-benefits-of-the-eu-and-the-internal-market
I guess that's what the other poster meant... The point is, while it's great that Poland has developed so strongly over the last 20 years, its business model will also be exhausted at some point, simply because the "workbench" function for other countries (especially Germany of course) will not work so well anymore.
had no choice but to accept if it wanted a modern western life. Ex communists had no clue had to run such private sector companies for a good decade or so.
But overall agree that Poland did not freeload with no benefits exchanged. Western European companies basically had a money printing machine in the formerly communist east.
While I agree that the EU has been responsible for driving a significant portion of Poland's development, to call them freeloaders is reductive and ignores several significant benefits Poland has offered the EU and will continue to offer. Human capital is meaningful; European economies have thrived with the benefit of Polish labor, and investments have kept this from becoming a simple matter of one-way exploitation. Cost-competitiveness of goods thanks to labor and modernized building has also let Germany and the rest of the EU buy necessary goods cheap without having their money leave the bloc. And you also can't overstate the benefit of having a wider buffer against Russian threats. That alone might have been worth having Poland in the EU.
>a place where infrastructure has been elevated to the level of art and an engineering cult.
Okay but anytime someone has something to say about Japan that is not positive, weebs bring this Japanese infrastructure trivia. So it's good, we get it, but how is that relevant to the context of Poland reaching out Japanese wealth level per capita?
Do you suggest that Poland is not having similar per capita level because infrastructure isn't state of the art? Or was it merely an attempt to suggest that Japan is better even with lower per capita because their infrastructure from their glory days is solid?
I just don't get the urge to always bring this infrastructure talk on the agenda. It's not related to the discussion.
GDP per capita is not an adequate metric for assessment. Although Ireland and Taiwan have higher GDP per capita figures than South Korea, the actual wages earned and the standard of living in those places are lower. Similarly, while Poland may have caught up significantly to Japan in terms of GDP per capita, its actual standard of living is likely lower.
As someone whos lived and is in both multiple times a year, anecdotally Id say Polands standard of living is higher as of maybe the last 2 to 3 years. Not only in the big cities. Its quite remarkable considering just 10-12 years ago it was not the case at all.
And even PPP is flawed because it doesn't account for differences in quality in goods normally used in each country (e.g. housing appliances in many European countries are more complex/luxurious than in the US but PPP isn't corrected for that - now when I look how different Japanese homes seem to be compared to Polish homes I guess there will be an even larger bias in PPP in this case).
I recall having a discussion with a redditor who insisted that a Sherpa guide earning $10k a year has the same standard of living as someone earning 100k in the US and as such the average daily Sherpa porter wages were very generous.
Absolutely, but it seems that GDP and PPP are still take way "too literal" often. The numbers surely have their meaning but one should consider their limitations.
>housing appliances in many European countries are more complex/luxurious than in the US
I thought things such as clothes dryers were rare in Europe, and ditto for central air conditioners (though probably not needed). Also, a household appliance being "more complex" isn't a flex. Lots of Americans lament the days when appliances such as fridges and washers were simple but solid and lasted decades. Now modern fridges have wi-fi, touchscreens and go dead after 5 years.
With my example I was more referring to built-in appliances in kitchens and "in-wall faucets" (don't even find the correct English word for that). Things quite uncommon even in multi-Million USD estates in the US but basically standard in newly built upper class houses and appartments in Europe. GDP and PPP don't catch such things because in their calculation a faucet is a faucet is a faucet - even though the average faucet can be significantly more complex in one region compared to another one.
And I'm sure there would be examples the other way around but those just were the first ones that came to my mind.
And your dryer example means something different: The average American can afford to buy more dryers than the average European (because GDP/PP is higher in the US), but again that doesn't say a lot about the quality of these dryers because the numbers again only refer to a generic dryer.
> GDP and PPP don't catch such things because in their calculation a faucet is a faucet is a faucet
I’m not sure exactly what you’re referring to here but are you suggesting these “complex/luxurious” appliances in Europe are just as cheap as normal appliances? How’s that possible?
No, but in a goods basket for PPP calculation you simply have a faucet and a sink, it doesn't take into account that this faucet and this sink might be of different quality/complexity when doing the calculations in different countries/regions. There is a similar issue with comparing the numbers between different years in the same place, in this case "hedonic regression" is (sometimes?) used to consider changes in quality.
Built-in appliances aren't anything special. If you're talking about things like clothes washers in kitchens it's because space is at a premium. I've seen them in every single apartment in East Asia. They make cutesy little tones and are touted as being "super efficient" but take an hour and half to wash a load of clothes. Give me a good old American-made Whirlpool or Kenmore washer and dryer with analog controls any day. I have a pair of 40 year old W/D in my house and they get the clothes washed and dried fast.
>And your dryer example means something different:
I don't know why you're poo pooing the dryer example, as if it was nothing. That's the whole point, a wealthier country has more clothes dryers per capita, wasn't that the argument? But now you're trying to dismiss it, claiming the dryers are shoddily built.
>Things quite uncommon even in multi-Million USD estates in the US
Dude, the wealthy in the US have some damn good household appliances. I've been inside homes at "merely" upper middle class price levels with Viking gas ranges and Sub-Zero fridges. Now that is high quality. Not some teeny little built-in Bosch clothes washer that has Wi-Fi.
You are ignoring culture. Every italian bathroom has a bidet which is nowhere to be found in an american bathroom, but italy is not wealthier than the us, just has a higher standard of hygiene. Dryers in Europe are more prevalent where being able to dry your clothes outside is more difficult (buildings with small apartments or countries with worse weather), but they are so bad for fabrics, I only use it for the very cheap part of my laundry
>but they are so bad for fabrics, I only use it for the very cheap part of my laundry
Dryers have "moderate heat" settings. Dryers ruining clothes is only a problem with shoddily made "fast fashion" clothes.
Anyway the poster I replying made the argument that the Europeans have "more complex/luxurious" household appliances than the US and now it's "culture" they don't have dryers? What is it?
It’s both? Given the same appliance, there are high standards in Europe (varies a lot from country to country though), but if you cherry pick some specific ones they might not be as prevalent in one place or the other. Are you somehow trying to imply there’s a contradiction there? Lol
Tumbling dryers are horrible on actual good quality fabric, especially good cottons or wool. It’s not a personal opinion it’s a well studied fact. Low heat settings are less bad but still worse than just hanging
You can argue all you want how terrible dryers are but given a choice, I think Europeans (especially those living in damp cold climates) would adopt dryers at a higher rate if their homes had more space, if electricity was cheaper, etc. I have a dryer but also hang up things like nice shirts on a line in a my basement. But I can't imagine hanging up 10 pairs of socks and 10 pairs of under wear and other daily wear clothes every single week or more.
And yet, the built-in Bosch appliance is more complex to install, and your fancy upper middle class US home usually doesn't have in wall faucets or a walk in shower or an induction stove - yes, such stuff is mostly driven by cultural differences, they might simply be more important to Europeans but it still makes those goods more "valuable" than the equivalent in the US is on average. And GDP/PPP are not capturing this.
To put it simpler: That youcan afford more dryers shows you are richer, but that you use archaic appliances biases (in this case the US) GDP even further.
I don’t know what the particular value of an in wall faucet is, but walk in shower and induction stove are very common in new build and remodel housing in California.
Well, I was just trying to find a few examples for as to why GDP/PPP can be biased/misleading a bit. And the examples I chose where based on my personal experience in the US and on me once in a while browsing real estate listings in different parts of the world - it might very well be the case that such stuff is (by now) also quite common in the US but my personal opinion (unfortunately there is no real numbers on this) simply is, that they are much rarer there compared to EU (at least central Europe). You will have a hard time finding a relatively new 1+ Mio. property without such amenities here, while there is a ton of them in the US.
>And yet, the built-in Bosch appliance is more complex to install,
Why are you so obsessed with "complexity"? Americans have big enough houses to have washer-dryer rooms (or use their basements) and use stand-alone washer/dryers. A built-in washer/dryer is a solution looking for a problem for a typical American house.
BTW there's an American-made brand of washer/dryer called Speed Queen that looks like it was designed 30 years ago and has a cult following (and premium pricing) precisely because it doesn't have needlessly complex electronics and will last forever.
>in wall faucets or a walk in shower or an induction stove -
Just curious, have you ever been to America? Or are your perceptions of American homes based on sit-coms and movies? I've been in homes that have in wall faucets built into the wall over the stovetop, so that you can fill a soup pot with water directly. When's the last time you saw that in Europe?
>walk in shower
This is laughable. You think American homes don't have walk in showers? I just took a shower yesterday in one, in my home.
>induction stove
That's not an "upgrade" (but yes, many American homes have induction stoves). A Viking stove that burns natural gas (if available) and can put out up to 23,000 BTUS of heat instantly is the premium choice for wealthy households.
> archaic appliances biases
Oh look, we Europeans have these teeny Bosch washers that chime and send text messages and take 2 hours to wash a load of clothes. We're soooooo advanced over the Americans with their crude household appliances. We're soooo much better off.
Not sure why you are so offended by me...I even wrote myself "I'm sure there would be examples the other way around but those just were the first ones that came to my mind."
And as there unfortunately is no serious metric exactly measuring this topic my examples are based on comparing real estate listings on both sides of the atlantic, so yes, it's just my personal impression: On average household appliances and the way they are installed on average seem more "archaic" in the US - if you can find serious statistics concerning this, feel free to share them. (and BTW I have lived in the US - admittedly 20 years ago though).
We could expand the list also by other things even just considering housing (should we talk about windows used?). But that wasn't even my point anyways, my point was simply that GDP and PPP are not adjusted for different qualities used in different regions. A similar issue even exists with the change of PPP from one year to another year within the same region (because also there the quality of goods might change).
Can't commend on the bland part, but the rest, as a Korean this is just cope talk.
Yes, Samsung is big, but it is a conglomerate of different sub divisions that act as separate companies. There's Hyundai, SK, LG, Lotte etc. as well, and they all make up about 40% of the total GDP. Samsung would make up about 15% of the GDP.
Whataboutism here - What about Taiwan... TSMC makes up about 40% of their GDP, and 35% in their stock market cap weight.
Taiwan is more of a 'threadmill technocracy' than South Korea, yet everyone turn on a blind eye...
What about Australia - 70% of its exports revenue is based on mining resources.
What about the US, which is now essentially controlled by Trump, Elon and the oligarchies...
Yet the country of South Korea - essentially a tiny island surrounded by hostile giants - always seems to get singled out.
its cultural differences, it always is
some nations work hard because their culture is to work 20h a day without breaks, otherwise you bring shame to the family, some nations work way less and take frequent breaks
"You don't understand: GDP per capita or other economic metrics don't apply to Japan. Let me take one of the few exceptions where GDP doesn't really correlate with wealth. It's either that or admitting that Japan isn't the dreamland I imagine 🤩"
The US is a perfect demonstration of this. Extremely high GDP per capita but a lot of that GDP is fake and hoarded by billionaires and corporations.
In 2020, the US had a GDP of $21.3T with a per capita of $64,465. In 2026, the US GDP is $32.2T with a per capita of $93,335.
Ask any American and I guarantee they are not better off than they were 6 years ago, and the country certainly doesn’t feel like it’s $9 trillion dollars richer. All we see is billionaires are richer than ever due to price gouging and the AI bubble.
There's always a reason to dismiss some methodology. And I get it but it's still better than "I think so" and "trust me bro" from reddit. Just saying.
Absolute majority glazing here over Japan never went there and if, they went on short vacation. Then they preach all about "quality of life" they don't even understand. At the very least this is someone trying to quaintify tangible things.
According to OECD data, people in Poland work 200 hours more per year than those in Japan. It seems you may hold some romanticized notions about Poland and certain stereotypes about Japan; in reality, the Japanese work 200 hours less annually than the Poles. Furthermore, while Poland has experienced soaring inflation due to the war in Russia, Japan has remained largely unaffected. When you take into account essential infrastructure—such as transportation, healthcare, and education—as well as the broader welfare system, life in Japan is significantly better than in Poland.
Interesting comparison. Poland's catch-up is impressive, but the demographic adjustment is the key point: Japan has not necessarily become less productive; it has fewer working-age people supporting its total population. The same demographic headwind is now emerging in South Korea. Economic convergence and demographic sustainability are two very different challenges.
One could also make the point that Japan is in fact almost as poor as Poland now. And the rest of the text is to make it to one hundred and forty characters.
They have stagnant GDP growth for 20+ years, when the rest grows faster, that by definition makes you poorer. Maybe you need to support your claims when you call the ones from other people stupid for absolutely no reason.
I'm a little confused. The gist of the storie is that the average Pole is as well off as the average Japanese, because they all work while the Japanese are retired. Is this supposed to be better for the Poles or better for the Japanese?
The country produce as much wealth, but which country have the real returned to society and people in form of wage and social investments the most?
I don't know the answer, that is a honest question.
Because to me, personally, it doesn't if China, US or whatever country produce more wealth. In many cases, countries with less wealth production people are wealthier.
Some cities like Krakow look as good as any in the West now. Warsaw has a brand new metro since years.
They have unbelievable quality highways. The most modern ones in Europe built to the highest standards. Also building rail infrastructure and a planned new airport. They’ve a lot of legacy skills from the Soviet times in manufacturing which has plugged very effectively into the German industrial supply chains.
The Polish used the EU money wisely and they are integrated into their neighbours economies and they properly reformed when it wasn’t easy. This is a return of investment that took decades to bear fruit.
They pretty much are the textbook example for a country that transitioned from a communist economy to a market economy in the least traumatic way possible for the people.
A lot of Polish emigrants are returning with lots of useful skills learned in Western Europe and they are ramping up in productivity. The EU solved the “lack of good jobs for young mobile Polish people for a decade” and the remittances allowed capital to pool to facilitate private investment.
Many come back with a big bank account full of euros and plan to make their families or set up businesses.
The thing is the EU can be steroids for your economy but you have to engage with it and truly reform. You need honest civil servants to audit the allocations. The EU can’t check every single project it’s too vast. You need honesty. And the Polish made sure it was being spent legitimately.
Other EU countries just go the scam as much money out of it route. Croatia, Hungary and Romania have had anemic growth because they don’t respect the institutions. And just pissed the money away. It goes to local elites who skim what they can and not to actual projects that build wealth.
>Poland respecting its institutions? What happened with the institutions under PiS?
Poland has vast judiciary issues, however in the context of EU funds it's a prime example how to spend and invest those. Almost no corruption involved and little waste, with a very large number of approved projects.
Definitely not the case with couple other EU countries. However those couple other countries may have better judiciary situation but those are apples and oranges. And it's not Hungary anyway.
You cannot just put those 3 countries in the same bin (Croatia, Hungary and Romania). All 3 have very different issues and challenges which affected their development, like high level corruption. For example regarding Croatia, since 90's it went through war which destroyed roughly 1/3 of country, joined EU more than decade after Poland so it missed main wave of EU money injection and industry transfer during 2000's from west to east EU, went through great recession without EU (which significantly prolonged it), but in the end even with all Poland head start Croatia still has similar growth and GDP per capita like Poland since it joined EU.
Poland is only singled out every time as success because it is most visible due to it's population size compared to rest of eastern EU countries, but other eastern EU countries had similar growth and are far from "anemic" as you described them.
As a Pole, I don't know. All new highways in EU are built according to specific standard and I would say they are equally solid. We stick out because all of our highways are new, while western Europe has a lot of badly projected roads from the 70s.
However you still need to maintain those roads and we make regular repairs, so maybe that's what Hungary do even more often?
I guess you mean in terms of coverage or extent, maybe, I'm not sure, but definitely not road quality. Even Romania has us beat on that because they've built so much of their infrastructure more recently (same reason they have amazing Internet).
Yea, we are seeing literally polish people which came to Germany like 20 years ago for work now returning to Poland because quality of life improved so much there
It’s very exciting to see the EU have successes. Wealth builds wealth. By Poland flourishing it’s going to facilitate more growth. The only way to ensure a stable EU is to secure growth for people and a standard of living. Wealth creation pays for the social state and the pensions and all that.
On another level, seeing a country that suffered immensely in the 20th century, become strong, safe and doing better is a total vindication of the European project. A country having good relations with the country just besides it that inflicted so much misery just shows what the EU stands for is a force for good.
If Germany and Poland after all the horrors of the previous century can be friends and profitable business partners it just proves the European model has value and is worth protecting.
Germany isn't getting worse. Germany just isn't getting better or improving as fast as it should. Why? The culture wars of course! The billionaires have taken over every aspect of society, from our thoughts to the air we breathe. Every aspect of our lives is controlled by billionaires. Yet, Germans are fighting about minorities like it's 1930 again.
Germany is absolutely getting worse, and it’s not due to culture wars. An aging society is putting pressure on a lower proportion of the population to prop up the system. At the same time industry is getting shuttered due to high energy prices, and China is eating Germany’s lunch in the export market in core exports. Outside of France it probably has the bleakest future in Western Europe.
Germany has more serious problems, too, in its overly rigid beauracracy making public spending other than social services onerously difficult and procedurally expensive.
According to your second link, the median wealth in the US (ranked #15 at $107,739) is greater that of the median wealth in Japan (ranked #18 at $103,681). The numbers are different in your first link. A perfect example of Wikipedia not being a reliable source.
You're conflating two different metrics. The first one uses median wealth per adult, which is widely considered to be a better metric for evaluating the financial health of a typical household. When you have a nation like Japan that has had a low birth rate for decades, it's bound to skew higher.
I would prefer to have high income than high wealth, this is what increases your individual qol. Most of that wealth is locked in personal real estate (mostly in Tokyo where it is more expensive than LA) anyway and means absolutely nothing. You can not live off of it. You can at most sell it and buy different place.
EDIT: Also just a side note.
You are comparing median which means 38 year old American with 50 year old Japanese. Do you think that it is fair comparison in any way? That American has 12 years of peak career in front of him to accumulate wealth to catch up (including things like inheritance).
And "the joke". Even in median disposable income in PPP terms which accounts for "expensive items" US ranks second only to Luxembourgh. Japan ranks 27th. Poland ranks 24th:
I would definitely prefer a high wealth to a high income. Even the apartment you mentioned would save on rent, which in turn could be invested elsewhere or at least significantly reduce living expenses. A high income can disappear from one moment to the next. An apartment won’t.
You’re confusing income with financial security. A high salary is a yearly flow; wealth is what remains after debts and what you can rely on when you stop working. And home equity isn’t “meaningless” because it’s less liquid: it’s housing you own, lower future housing costs, and an asset you can sell or downsize.
The latest UBS figures put median wealth per adult at $135,745 in Japan versus $68,998 in the US. Nearly twice as much. Japan’s median is also much closer to its average, while the US average is pulled far above its median, showing how much more top-heavy American wealth is.
And “the American has 12 years to catch up” is a fantasy, not an argument. A younger national median age doesn’t guarantee anyone will save enough to close the gap.
Japan is ahead on the measure you’re trying to dismiss. Calling the numbers meaningless doesn’t make your argument look smarter.
Income is what matters the most because you can not really defer consumption. Having equity in housing means very little in aging societies. Not to mention that you would have to turn that equity into income regardless so Japanese who are downsizing the way you claim to fund their retirement are literally counted in those income statistics.
The wealth distribution is completely irrelevant here.
The way you dismiss the age difference is pathetic. Do you realise that Americans do not repay student debts into their early 40s? Do you not realise that mortgages act as negative net worth for decades in every country? Of course that the age difference is massive especially due to mortgages that as we all know you take when you are younger and do not repay until you are much older. Yes, median wealth increasing with median age is guaranteed in aggregate. Arguing otherwise makes your argument look incredibly dumb. Of course that it matters that the ages of comparison are ages of typical person with mortgage versus typical person with fully paid off home.
Also, I never used word meaningless. You did. It is measure of something and it can absolutely be used for comparisons. But you would always use more metrics for any kind of comparison and those metrics are far less important than others. And you always have to put them into context.
EDIT: Respond to me and then block so I can not answer. The absolute class.
You arent listening to them about their very real refutarions of your reading of that report, then being a complete toolbox and blocking them. You arent worth discussing with, even if you are right, which you arent.
Income matters for what you can spend now. It doesn’t make wealth irrelevant to lifetime security or living standards. And selling a house doesn’t turn the whole sale price into income. It converts one asset into cash; standard US personal-income accounts exclude capital gains.
You’re also counting the mortgage while pretending the house isn’t there. Net wealth counts both the home and the debt against it. Student loans count too, which is exactly why net wealth tells you something a salary figure leaves out.
Also “wealth rises with age” doesn’t prove that a 12-year median-age gap explains the Japan–US difference. Not even close. And median wealth isn’t irrelevant to distribution: it tells you where the typical adult stands, while the average can be skewed by the very rich.
In any case, you still haven’t shown that Japan’s wealth advantage disappears or that the typical American is better off. You’re just throwing out the scoreboard because the typical American is losing.
No, this makes no sense. Salaries are a lot higher in the US, and my company, we have offices in Japan and senior AI engineers with 10+ years of experience in Japan, are only getting ¥10 million, which if you use the current conversion rates, only like 80 K USD, and if you use the more traditional exchange rate of roughly ¥100 to the dollar, then it’s $100,000. But my company in the US, a senior AI engineer, could be making $180,000 a year, and I know that Japan has a lower cost of living, but I don’t think it makes up for an $80,000 gap
>and senior AI engineers with 10+ years of experience in Japan, are only getting ¥10 million, which if you use the current conversion rates, only like 80 K USD, and if you use the more traditional exchange rate of roughly ¥100 to the dollar, then it’s $100,000.
At the moment it's more like $60K. And the 100-1 hasn't been a good benchmark for 10 years. They've been sliding hard and people have been sleeping on it.
>In many cases, countries with less wealth production people are wealthier.
This is just not true. The correlation between GDP per capita and citizens well being is near perfect. Like sure, there might be countries with lower GDP per capita than US and higher QOL but the GDP per capita difference is not large and all the countries at the top of any of those indexes have high GDP per capita themselves. There is no "poor" country with "wealthy" population.
Also it very much depends what you mean by wealthier people. Is it income? Is it net worth? Is it good economic opportunity and good job? Is it safety or social cohesion? Because all those can be viewed as wealth of population and more. And it is heavily individual, even general metrics like qol will not give you an answer because it heavily depends on what you value the most as an individual.
I would much rather live in Poland these days than Japan. Countries experiencing economic growth are far better to live in than stagnating aging countries in my opinion. Not that Poland will not run into same issues Japan did but it is not there yet and will not be there for a while.
I never said it did measure any of that. It does not. However I said that correlation between high GDP per capita and all those things is nearly perfect. Not perfect but pretty good. So throwing it out of the window using these arguments makes very little sense.
India is the 6th biggest GDP in the world. Russia is 8th biggest GDP in the world. Brazil has the 10th biggest GDP in the world. Mexico 13th and Turkey 16th
Most Europeans Courier have lower GDP, including Switzerland, Netherlands, Sweden, Norway, Austria, etc.
But you said 1. It is not true and 2. GDP are nearly perfect correlated to people's wealth. Both you claim is false according to GDP and people's wealth statistics.
In the US, GDP per capita is about $94,430, ranking 8th, but its median wealth per adult is only about $69,000, even though average wealth per adult is the 2nd highest in the world.
The US is below Belgium with a median of about $277,000. Australia has a median of about $211,000. The Netherlands has a median of about $127,000. Malta has a median of about $114,000.
Ireland is ranking 3rd in GDP per capita, but that number is inflated by multinational company profits that don't reach ordinary residents that has a much less media income than GDP per capita figures.
In UAE 46.1% of adults have less than $10,000 and own absolutely none of the country's wealth.
So your claim that GDP per capita is nearly perfect to people wealth is far from true. And saying that these figures are not true you are arguing against statistic facts.
I think I saw that Mississippi or some other poor state had a higher GDP per capita than all of Canada. In no way could you ever convince me it’s a better place to live than everywhere in Canada. GDP is a great metric for measuring how much an economy creates, but it doesn’t accurately measure standard of living. One reason why the American GDP is higher? Because even though the average Canadian and average American pay a similar amount of government taxes to prop up their health care systems, in America you have to pay again to access it and the cost doubles because the health insurance industry is equal in size to the health industry. In Canada taxes alone already paid for it. So yeah Mississippi has a higher GDP per capita because Canada provides a service to its people for half the cost, but the outcomes in well being, bankruptcies, etc aren’t reflected in GDP nearly the same way
This is not how it works at all. There may be waste in US healthcare system (pretty convincingly when you look at spending data) but that does not mean it inflates GDP. It would simply just be produced elsewhere within the economy - simply because the production capacity, labor that provides it and money that pays for it would not disapear.
Also, I do not think you understand how little sense your comparison and specifically "all of Canada" means. Alberta in Canada f.e. has 50% higher GDP per capita than Mississippi. You can not just take Mississippi and expand it to all of Canada, that is not how it works. You have to work in aggregates.
Again, any well being index more or less follows GDP per capita. You do not have countries with low GDP per capita at the top and you do not have countries with more GDP capita at the bottom. That is simply just not happening.
I think GDP should be reported as a median perhaps. Or with a standard deviation or something.
GDP relates to the movement of money in an economy, right? Like I pay you 100 to move my lawn and you 100 to mow yours and we have generated 200 as domestic product. Meanwhile, schmucks mowing their own lawns are at 0 but this seem meaningless. The main protection against this is that people try really hard to not waste their money.
Yea but if you save money on mowing the lawn you invest and someone else takes that money to build something that does flow to GDP. It's not a perfect measure but it is still really good at measuring economic power and welfare.
> Canada provides a service to its people at half the cost.
This isn't really accurate. I mean Canadan could indeed be doing this but that would open up resources in other areas of the economy to compensate yet this doesn't happen. So GDP on healthcare is just as valid of an account as anything else. If US made healthcare cheaper for the same benefit it would increase its GDP lead even more. Economies aren't 0-sum so these kinds of misconceptions are easy to fall into.
Edit:
To convince yourself think of all the things we've made cheaper (in real terms of course) and more efficient over the last hundred years, has GDP gone down? No, on the contrary, it has skyrocketed.
I am aware of it. Statisticaly a lot of people with good living standard in France, with universal health care, good homes and healthy food, has less wealth than many people living in poverty in the US.
I know for a fact that life in South America can be much better than in Germany where I live, depending on many factors.
Costa Rica ranks 4 on worlds most happy countries. But then again - even "happiness" are subjective to a degree.
Like, combat soldiers who have been on the line in fierce fire fights, have difficulty adjusting to the boring civilian life afterwards and the lack of tight camaraderie.
I was not really talking about happiness but wealth.
In Germany less than 60% of people own property because it is not affordable. The homes in Germany, despite costing more, have lower quality than in many poor countries that have better materials and are more solid. The access to varieties of food and varieties of brands and products in supermarkets in many countries in South America is bugger than in Germany. In countries like Brazil, many types of preventive medicine are completely free to people while in Germany nothing is free to people regarding medicine and treatments. The access and availability of cultural, education and entertainment in many countries is higher than in countries like Germany. In Germany people also pay more tax, the government follow the politics of austerity for decades and pay more tax on income, dividends, etc.
Technically, people in Germany have more wealth but they do less with more (because the access to different types of wealth is more restricted. While in some countries where people have less wealth they do more with less, because wealth are more accessible. Like buying property.
I'm not sure about "rich" but Poland is the most european country to visit these days. Spotless, beautiful, great architecture old & new, still affordable. There was a time I took so many ryan air flights to, or transit in Poland and therefore visited Gdansk, Poznan, Krakow etc. They were already great back then compared to dumsters like Paris.
Poland has really made an insane comeback in the past 20 years. Got friends here in Berlin that actively think about moving to Poland for better QoL, which would have been an insane thing to think just a few years ago.
Its not so much of a comeback, its that all other countries are killing themselves with mass immigration, destruction of national identity and leftist ideas. Poland just avoided those and look at them now.
Wrong take.
Poland has always been like this. The architecture/food/people haven’t changed. It was always spotless, and since I encountered foreigners on a regular basis in Poland since the 90s that was their major comment.
Currently, all people glazing Poland do so, because it is safer than it used to be, there are tall buildings, and huge influx of FOREIGNERS that give an impression it is modern European city.
Poland was heavily impacted by the Soviet occupation and communist oppression and this obviously colored the country for years after the 90s liberalisation efforts.
Vatican City? I don’t know I haven’t been there. Full of is a subjective term though isn’t it. Is there a way we can quantify the number of racists in a given region?
Poland is less racist than other EU countries. I don't get where your strange prejudice against Poles came from.
Just check this EU study conducted in 2023 about the experience of Black people living in Europe. Black people living in Poland faced much less racial discrimination than Black people living in other parts of Europe. You can read more about it here: https://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2023/being-black-eu
Throughout history, Poland has had a long tradition of religious tolerance and openness, which was quite remarkable for its time. Of course, our history is far from perfect, and communism and modern Russian propaganda have both played a role in shaping political attitudes. But I don’t think it’s fair to label Poland as a racist country.
Racism certainly exists in Poland, just as it does everywhere else. However, EU research has found that Poland is among the European countries where people of African descent report some of the lowest rates of racial discrimination. That doesn’t mean racism isn’t a problem, but it does mean the picture is more nuanced than some people suggest.
you mean not allowing immigrants that bring huge cultural divide to flood the country? Because thats also one of the reasons the country is flourishing
The country is not replacing its workforce fast enough to maintain economic growth into the 2030s. The restriction on migration is hurting that. There's no free lunch.
if only there was something that could incentivize people moving from one country to another country inside the same without dealing with visas and passports...
they should make one and call it schengen area or something like that
The most European country? Poland was once the most multicultural and multiconfessional country in all of Europe. Glorifying the way it is now huh? I’m sorry but I definitely reported you. 😊
Lmao you know it costs like 20 pounds to fly to Poland right? Even sometimes just 9 quid. Lemme guess you think everyone is an American online. Believe it or not a world outside the Us exists. In the Uk we go on weekend benders for just 20 pounds to Poland or Croatia or wherever and stay in 10 pound hostels.
The train ticket to the airport costs more than the flights. Hell going out locally costs more than flying to Croatia or Spain or Poland and going out there.
And Paris is widely trashed by most people I’ve meet who’ve gone there. Just look up Paris syndrome , Japanese tourists literally get medical shock when seeing what a dump Paris is today.
One of the few European countries that is safe and improving in that area every year, having great GDP growth, and actually working to improve the lives of its own citizens instead of people from the other side of the world.. How horrible!
Why then Poland doesn't pay into the EU budget but instead still the biggest recipient of the EU funds ? If they are as rich as Japan they can be asked to contribute now into the United Europe idea.
Poland is not even in the top ten biggest beneficiaries per capita. Actually, it's one of the lowest.
EU funds are not a charity. Countries like Germany or France advocated for Poland (and other countries in the east) to join the EU to open a market of milions of people next to them. They get back more than they ever paid.
Rich?
National debt skyrockets, more and more loans from EU. We are not rich, elites are ;) and foreign corporations because they are not paying taxes in Poland - in fact small and medium businesses are paying more taxes than foreign corps.
Confusing GDP with wealth is a fundamental mistake. GDP measures annual economic output, not accumulated national wealth. Poland may have a higher GDP per capita by certain measures, but Japan remains one of the world's largest net creditor nations, with vastly greater accumulated foreign assets.
The constitutional crisis is literally casued by a push from our pro-EU government to fix a system that was broken by the isolationists, the fuck do you want?
If a few people do something destructive and you see the folly, they’re dumb. If every rich country in the west is being swept by the same mindset and political outcomes on a scale of millions and growing, and you can’t find an explanation or anticipate where it is inevitably headed without major intervention, you are the dumb one.
There are reasons, consistent reasons that more and more smart people find compelling. If you have no good explanation and can’t evaluate or understand that reality, the dumb people are not them but you.
I mean, no, electing weird fascists is dumb and anyone who votes for them is a dupe. Not being smart enough to do actual analysis on why people make that choice may make one dumb, but it does nothing to make the thing we try crtiqueing smart.
>And as a thank you for receiving their very own Marshall Plan from the EU,
Portugal is receiving that "Marshall Plan 2" from EU for 20 more years. What was their WW2 destruction again?
Maybe stop calling EU funds that everyone receive "Marshall Plan" or repaymant and we will be good. Otherwise you're just singling out countries out of the whim.
Oh really?? I earn only 1200 euro after taxes ,thanks to my rigoristic way of spending ,i am able to save around 500 euros. Over 33% of what i earn,is taken by tax
word count word count word count word count word count word count word count word count word count word count word count word count word count word count word count word count
It's a mix of two things: Poland's incredible growth since the fall of socialism, and Japan's decline. Whenever global inflation and interest rates are high, the yen just gets hammered.
What's wild is the demographics they have and the various decisions they made to reject the "diversity is our strength" hypothesis that western European countries decided to test on themselves.
Western European countries aren't nearly as big or explicit of proponents of "diversity is our strength" as the US. And you happen to be an American, so why don't you use your own country as example here?
Also, you probably have no idea about challenges Poland faces (like its extremely low birthrates and fastest aging population in Europe), or how its improvement was in great deal enabled by Western European investments, subsidies and common market...
Diversity and controlled immigration is great for a country. Immigrants come and integrate into society over time. While first Gen are typically a net loss, 2nd Gen are typical net positive.
What isn't great is accepting mass migrants. This causes immigrants to congregate instead of intergrate. They build their own semi-isolated communities and over time with enough of a population it will cause cultural clashes, especially if they are from countries with fundamentally opposing culture (compared to progressive western society). For a melting pot to work there needs to be a melt.
Poland made the controversial choice but the correct choice. Controlled immigration and majority from countries that hold similar cultural beliefs to their own, such as Ukraine. These groups will integrate into Polish culture over time without much issue.
Poland is looking at the rest of Europe right now and whispering "I told you so".
Only so many ways to counter a population decline without state mandated child birth or throwing piles of cash at young adults to hopefully have children. Immigration is a counter to this, even though it's not perfect nor ideal. Fixing deep seeded economic issues causing population declines is astronomically harder than just importing bodies.
Look at the US through history, many of the greatest leaps in technical innovation were from immigrants. I'm not talking new world settler offspring either. Bringing in perspectives and talents from across the globe is a good thing, when controlled.
There was roughly a 30% population decline in Europe after the plague.
What was the result for the survivors?
Population reduction is a threat to the ruling elites because a decrease in the tax cattle they own brings them closer in wealth to the cattle.
But yes, if immigration is structured in such a way as to brain-drain other nations and only import the top performers, of course this would result in the resulting pool of people becoming high performers...assuming cultural compatibility.
>What isn't great is accepting mass migrants. This causes immigrants to congregate instead of intergrate.
This is literally, almost word for word the complaint that was leveled in the US against the Irish, Italians, and even ironically enough, Poles. Like, I can show you a pamphlet printed by the KKK in the early 1920s that makes exactly this argument. It pops up constantly over time, nearly always asserted by someone who puts it forward as if it's some self-evident truth that requires no support. But we have numerous examples of populations integrating with practically no attempt made to force the issue. Hell, it happens so naturally that making sure it didn't happen after the Civil War required a decadeslong campaign of terror codified into the law. And it still didn't work.
The evidence you're wrong is all around you. It's just so normalized to you that you can't even see it.
The key difference between the historical examples and now is cultural. Euro immigrants back then were culturally close compared to the existing Americans. Take a progressive French and compare them to a north African fundamentalist Muslim. It's two entirely different cultures that clash at a fundamental level. It's not a problem when they are being drip fed into the culture, but just opening the proverbial flood gates is straight bad.
Let's not forget that global perception has changed on the west (including Europe). People back then were immigrating with the sole purpose to integrate into the west for a better life. There wasn't decades of anti-western sentiment spread through communication channels (which aren't even close to the modern internet). Many of these people coming over hate the west and what it stands for, they are simply using the west for the economic opportunities they don't have at their home nation. They have no plan to ever integrate into the culture. This is the issue with mass migration in modern day.
> Many of these people coming over hate the west and what it stands for, they are simply using the west for the economic opportunities they don't have at their home nation.
Yes, and 100 years ago, Italians and Irish were "servants of the Holy See" who were being sent here to subvert and destroy our way of life. There's not a single argument you're making that wasn't deployed against Europeans at some point. Here, read all about it. All the same arguments you're making, about people who were already integrating even as they were making them. If you want to claim things are different now, you're going to have to do better than "that was then and this is now," because your rhetoric suggests otherwise.
Do you have data that suggests it wasn't a mistake even back then?
Just because the US survived after doesn't automatically mean it was a good decision.
Also if I just look around at all of the places in the US where I don't want to live, it happens to be the same places that were the landing zones for those historic huddled masses.
It stops very soon, on the other hand if you take a look why Poland needed all that money and you rewind back to 1939 then you wouldn’t be so salty about it.
1939 - 1989 would be way more accurate. Poland isn't even taking the most money per capita but the other guy doesnt want to actually know the truth. He just want to shit on Poles.
It was a promise. First democratic president of Poland after soviet union fall. Promised the Poland will be second Japan. Now we have that realization. Although Lech Wałęsa, peace nobel prize winner, promised that in early 90's. When Japan economy was bigger then currently. However stagnation and recession cycles there allowed Poland to catch up, but that also required a lot of work and help like from EU.
Yet they are very unhappy with Ukraine exporting their grain to EU through Poland. In fact they completely blocked it some time ago. They might be rich in money terms, but not that rich in morale/virtues.
FunForm1981 | 23 hours ago
Poland has built an excellent, modern, European-standard infrastructure that fully meets the basic needs of its citizens. Japan, however, is a global leader in this field—a place where infrastructure has been elevated to the level of art and an engineering cult.
For the past few decades, Japan’s economy has seen virtually no growth, hampered by an aging population, a shrinking workforce, and a sharp decline in the value of the yen in recent years.
So now, the living standards, quality of infrastructure, and purchasing power of an average citizen in Poland are now truly on par with those in Japan. Yet, in terms of accumulated household wealth, the number of global brands, and the overall scale of its financial markets, Japan remains a significantly more powerful and affluent nation.
TheTimberFactory | 20 hours ago
IMO, Japan is almost 50 years ahead of everyone else on the demographic and economical curve.
The United States will be Japan in a few decades, ie barely any growth, aging population, and shrinking workforce.
We'll just artificially inflate the GDP with more immigration to combat it. A short term band aide fix that won't really make a dent once Millennials start coming to retiring age in 20-25 years.
DarkExecutor | 19 hours ago
Immigration is literally built into US culture, unlike any other country in the world, it's not artificial.
However, immigration will slow down because every country in the world will be decreasing in birth rates.
Ferblantierr | 14 hours ago
Absolutely the US is an outlier and has always attracted the best talent.
zxc123zxc123 | 14 hours ago
Taco con truly the greatest Russian subversion/agent ever. Top 1. Literally sows disunity to destroy the "United" States while putting in policies that will hamper us at home AND destroying decades/centuries of geopolitical relationships & ground the US had.
soul-king420 | 14 hours ago
If only we didn't start deporting our immigrants seemingly on sight, bet we could get a lot more growth if we actually treated immigrants with respect (not that the US ever actually has)
Swarna_Keanu | 19 hours ago
Yes and no - racism also runs heavily through the US. Think of Japenese migrants, now Mexican, but even in the early migration waves there's a lot of tension that still lingers. I mean ... ICE and detention centres right now are not really a new thing in US politics and society.
DevilishlyAdvocating | 18 hours ago
Racism runs through every single country. The US just talks about it the most.
Swarna_Keanu | 17 hours ago
That's not strictly true, either. Having lived in various countries it is talked about in all of them, just in different cultural contexts and - less loud and up front as it happens in the US:
BigAtTheBack | 8 hours ago
US also has the biggest media market, so that talk is loudest. Everyone in the world heard about the Black Lives Matter movement.
DarkExecutor | 18 hours ago
People born in the US are considered Americans first, that really doesn't happen anywhere else in the world. And yes the US has racism, but it's nowhere near what it is in other countries.
Swarna_Keanu | 18 hours ago
Hm. Most countries don't have ICE / detention centre equivalent. Nor the racial conflicts, in the way they exist in the US.
Indigenous are treated badly everywhere - but even on that end People are born in the US being considered Americans first doesn't really hold true.
JanLevinson_irl | 16 hours ago
Most countries ARE (in majority)comprised of peoples indigenous to those areas
Swarna_Keanu | 16 hours ago
Depends on definition of Indigenous. But look at what happened to Sami, to Aboriginees, Inuiit, First Nations in Canada, Indigenous in South America. Same - same as in the US, at times even absolutely analgous.
shaon0000 | 12 hours ago
Every nation on Earth looks at people differently than them, and has an innate interest in framing them as the other.
America is unique in that we are able to mesh different cultures into a global economic power while still accepting that we are going to have moments of deep racism.
Every wave of immigration were considered to be inferior during their time, with a lot of racism. We just conveniently forget about it, because it seems silly in a modern context, since older waves just seem part of the America fabric.
Swarna_Keanu | 12 hours ago
>America is unique in that we are able to mesh different cultures into a global economic power while still accepting that we are going to have moments of deep racism.
And I am telling you, that is NOT unique. Having lived in various countries.
shaon0000 | 12 hours ago
What other country harnessed immigration to the degree America does? In America, every citizens history tends to go “when my ancestors immigrated from…”, which is a very unique situation.
Are you talking about Canada? It’s like 1/10th of the US’s population and has a far slower economy.
Swarna_Keanu | 12 hours ago
Germany - Greek, Spanish, Turkish workers.
Sweden - always was open to migration (around 35% of people living in Sweden have non-Swedish heritage; and no that's not all Muslim refugees) - from many places including taking in more US soldiers deserting - and integrating them - than near any place.
The UK via Commonwealth and their imperium.
----
>In America, every citizens history tends to go “when my ancestors immigrated from…”, which is a very unique situation.
I know that is something that is done culturally a lot in the US ... but are you even aware how much different cultures mingled within Europe? I have ancestors from all over the place, too. Or: Australia - a melting pot of it's own, globally.
One of the most insufferable aspects of the US internal self-image is that you are unique - which of course comes through all the nationalism and protestant influence - of finding a Manifest Destiny and a holy land. But it doesn't hold up when you look in detail.
shaon0000 | 12 hours ago
Those are stagnating economies with rampant anti-immigration sentiment, and zero companies that can be claimed as being born from immigrant talent. Germany in particular is the poster child of a native-heavy stagnating economy.
So I ask again: what economy is as powerful as the US, who has built its economic might from integrating immigration as its bedrock tool?
Swarna_Keanu | 12 hours ago
LOL.
You have fucking Trump and ICE running arount and try to talk about anti-migration sentiment; have folks like Thiel and Musk who heavily fund those anti-migration and desinformation campaigns here; have an economy that is propped up by AI at the moment.
There's a lot that is great about your country, but it's not those things.
Non-of the countries in Europe are stuggling economically; the problem is demographics. And you just posting on article that shows Poland being on the way to catch up with Japan.
Germany as vastly smaller country than US is still pushing much above it's weight (there are a lot of ... hm ... not very savoury policies here that made that possible.).
The UK built it's whole empire on that - with all the awful sides of it, too - integrating other countries in its economy.
coke_and_coffee | 11 hours ago
Immigration doesn’t “artificially” raise the GDP. It actually raises it.
Better_Wafer_6381 | 10 hours ago
The distinction would be about if it also raises GDP per capita. And if you're actually improving things for the original citizens in the long run.
coke_and_coffee | 9 hours ago
Immigration does both.
TheTimberFactory | 11 hours ago
Actually it raises it artificially because its not a permanent input.
coke_and_coffee | 10 hours ago
It is very much a permanent input and even if it weren’t, that’s still not artificial.
TheTimberFactory | 10 hours ago
I disagree.
YourMomandherpies | 16 hours ago
That's basically what Canada is doing and it's been devastating for young Canadians.
CapitalElk1169 | 15 hours ago
Economics comes down to 2 choices, ultimately; pain now, or pain later.
TheTimberFactory | 12 hours ago
That's basically what I'm saying.
coke_and_coffee | 11 hours ago
It’s only “devastating” if you artificially cap the supply of housing, which is exactly what Canada has done.
TheTimberFactory | 6 hours ago
That's a governmental issue and the cap on supply of housing was going to be there regardless.
Its quite terrible to put upward pressure on housing with more immigration.
TheTimberFactory | 12 hours ago
Canada is basically Indian and other ethnicities at this point. Ironically enough, that will also cause a major decline in hockey since they literally don't watch hockey or even American football at all.
BluePrintSpec | 19 hours ago
Unless the US allows more immigration to stimulate growth. Same choice as Japan, and they chose no-growth over immigration.
TheTimberFactory | 6 hours ago
Cheap band aid solution.
Have fun with the long term consequences.
Japan chose stability over immigration. They are in the middle of their low birth rate era. They will be way better off than those who chose immigration as a band aid solution.
TheTimberFactory | 19 hours ago
I think Japan will come out ahead, at the end, over no immigration.
They will get over the negative economical feedback loop faster as opposed to others, will will be much slower and more painful.
PumpProphet | 14 hours ago
People downvoting you have no idea lmao. Live in Canada. Half Million of new immigrants a year. Local population still don’t want kids and our fertility rate is only about 0.1 above japans.
It is truly pain now or pain later. Actually it’s pain now for normal folks while the rich gets richer with cheap labour and stagnate wages.
TheTimberFactory | 12 hours ago
Pretty much.
These people who downvoted me vote too lmao
MiI0rd | 14 hours ago
Having lived in Japan and having Japanese children, please do elaborate. Let us know what we clearly are missing
TheTimberFactory | 12 hours ago
When you introduce immigration into an aging population, all it does it delay the inevitable economical decline.
Whereas, if you don't introduce immigration, you will get over the negative economical feedback faster/sooner than the pro-immigrant model, which is a cheap band aide / cheap solution to a long term problem.
It would be like cutting your arm off cleanly as opposed to cutting it in slices over time. Cleanly? You can care for it, be patient to let it heal and you'll come out better. In slices? Good luck with that...
coke_and_coffee | 11 hours ago
You didn’t explain what “get over” means…
MiI0rd | 12 hours ago
That’s a far more logical explanation then I was honestly expecting
Edit: I don’t necessarily agree with you but your stance is based in a degree of logic. There are counter arguments to your point but your point is far from uneducated which is something I honestly didn’t expect. Hats off to you
TheTimberFactory | 11 hours ago
I'm going by logic.
It's only logical in what the outcomes will be when you consider your economic inputs.
When you introduce immigration, it causes a lot of short term issues that will have long term consequences.
This is why I think Japan will be the dominant economy in 50-100 years. They don't need immigration. They just need time and demographic shifts to occur, which is a very slow, glacial force.
You cannot force growth but when you do, its artificial, like quantitative easing or immigration.
Lenovo_Driver | 9 hours ago
Lmao in 50 to 100 years Japan will be a joke
TheTimberFactory | 7 hours ago
I highly disagree. Japan has survived and adapted for centuries. Japan is halfway through their birth rate problem, China is just getting started.
Japan will still remain, per capita, more stable, highly educated, and organized than most states on Earth.
TheTimberFactory | 7 hours ago
Don't let Reddit influence your thinking, on the upvotes/downvotes.
Be logical in arguments and let the logic win the day.
DamnBored1 | 16 hours ago
How so?
PumpProphet | 14 hours ago
Eventually their aging population will reverse.
And you guys really don’t think birth rate will start to increase eventually? Every generation will experience different socioeconomic standards.
Also, immigration can only do so much to delay the inevitable crisis. When all developed countries still face declining fertility rate even with immigrating millions a year.
How many more Indians and Chinese can you immigrate as your local population still refuse to have kid?
DamnBored1 | 14 hours ago
> Eventually their aging population will reverse
How exactly? This sounds more like a hope than a plan unless you can back it up with some data or theory.
Even today, Japanese young adults feel so pressured by hectic work hours and rising costs that they no longer feel the need to complicate their lives by adding a kid to it.
PumpProphet | 13 hours ago
Firstly, all their old people will eventually die off. They are ahead of the curve on that front. They're also using temporary workers from SEA currently as well to alleviate their labour force from elderly care.
But yes. There is no concrete hard data. Cause it's absolutely a new frontier. But so far, work-life balance in Japan actually has been improving. I have no doubt eventually fertility rate will improve. It has currently stagnated from 2 decades of decline and have shown some slight moderate improvement.
I live in a country where it becomes increasingly obvious immigration is a mere stop-gap in solving the core issues of all these developed countries that aim for infinite growth. Is that in this currently socioeconomic environment people just don't want kids. Everything is expensive, we live in shoe boxes, both partners need to work to afford anything, wages stagnant and barely improves, etc. Probably why I'm so fascinated what would happen to Japan in the next decade or two. Who took a completely different approach towards the problem.
DamnBored1 | 12 hours ago
But I don't see any of the issues you mentioned - rising costs, shoebox homes, both having to work to afford a living, the proverbial village not longer being available to raise a kid - improving anytime soon. Why then are you bullish about Japan being able to turn a corner? I also don't see automation improving so much that we no longer need as many humans to run a society.
Which country do you live in btw where you are seeing ill-effects of immigration? I'm curious because I'm an immigrant myself in the US and based on your description it seems like you might be from Europe? Europe somehow managed to import bottom of the barrel even from my home country.
TheTimberFactory | 12 hours ago
You do realize that the issues you mentioned are only going to be temporary until things normalize in Japan, right?
You need to be thinking LONG TERM. Not 10-20-30 years. Think 50-100 years.
TheTimberFactory | 12 hours ago
Are you really this obtuse?
How exactly? TIME
coke_and_coffee | 11 hours ago
> And you guys really don’t think birth rate will start to increase eventually? Every generation will experience different socioeconomic standards.
I think it’s very possible that falling birth rates last for many generations. “Eventually” could mean at least 150 years from now.
TheTimberFactory | 6 hours ago
Yes its possible but eventually everyone has to get over the birth rate hump and begin at zero again.
It's cyclical. Just cause we're in the modern era doesn't mean your standard of living should go up too.
Honestly, my biggest gripe with economics today is GDP growth and what is considered normal. 4-7% is not normal. 1-2% is normal IMO but they think its a recession.
It's unnatural growth, boom and busts, grab em and bag em before they're gone. Everyone wants to make out.
If Hari Seldon were a real person, he'd say similar things.
Intercostal-clavicle | 4 hours ago
i think you mean 50 years behind. Countries like france, germany, italy , englad solved the lack of workfoce 20 years ago by bringing in cheap labor from 3rd world countries. Japan is starting to do that only now.
tweemetervijf | 21 hours ago
EU has built*
defecto | 21 hours ago
Japan should get EU membership to compete with Poland.. its only fair.
machine4891 | 15 hours ago
Maybe Japan as well should be forced to 45 years of communism on a brink of starvation to truly even the field?
defecto | 13 hours ago
Faster to just nuke them twice right?
machine4891 | 12 hours ago
You should've seen what Poland looked like in 1945.
Luftritter | 16 hours ago
Pretty much what I was thinking. Poland was one of the countries that won the most by joining the EU. Also German industry moved there to use the relatively cheap labor on one of the countries with the largest population. Several things happened at the same time.
poskantorg | 21 hours ago
Poland is in the EU
tweemetervijf | 20 hours ago
I mean it has been paid for with EU money. By other member states that are net contributors. Poland has by far received most EU funding out of all member states.
_urat_ | 13 hours ago
Poland is 2nd lowest among net beneficiaries when it comes to EU funds per capita. It's really not that much. In absolute terms it looks big, but it's only because Poland is one of the biggest countries in the EU.
silent-schmick | 20 hours ago
This needs repeating as often as possible. People genuinely think that Poland pays as much as it gets. While in truth it's the single largest net beneficiary of EU redistributive policies.
InvestigatorLast3594 | 19 hours ago
I think you might have mixed up benefactor and beneficiary
silent-schmick | 15 hours ago
I did. My bad, was writing it on the run.
thedisciple516 | 13 hours ago
> largest net beneficiary of EU redistributive policies
does this account for the massive profits made by Western European companies in Poland that were brought back to and spent in their home countries?
O5KAR | 10 hours ago
>net beneficiary
Because its population is equal to the whole eastern EU combined.
Per capita it's a different story.
melleb | 19 hours ago
Japan and Germany’s modern wealth is the result of America rebuilding them after WWII, to a higher tune than Poland is receiving. I think its just another example of what happens when governments wisely invest in a country
Sherm | 16 hours ago
> Japan and Germany’s modern wealth is the result of America rebuilding them after WWII, to a higher tune than Poland is receiving
Adjusted for inflation France received approximately $32 billion, and Germany received approximately $20 billion from the Marshall Plan. Poland has received a net benefit from the EU of $168 billion over the course of its membership. This is approximately the same amount as was given to all 17 beneficiaries of the Marshall Plan combined. Around 3/5ths of that benefit was designated and used to build the infrastructure that OP was extolling, so the idea that the EU built it is a broadly accurate statement.
machine4891 | 15 hours ago
I think the best thing that both France and Germany received post war is not Marshall plan but 50 more years of continous growth in an open market in a democracy. Kind of important leg up.
Better_Wafer_6381 | 10 hours ago
Poland doesn't need to pay any of that back either.
kompocik99 | 2 hours ago
Poland is not even in top ten biggest beneficiaries per capita. It gets the most because it's the biggest and most populated of the receiving countries.
And it's not a fucking charity. Germany and France wanted Poland to join the EU to have an open market of milions of people next to them. They get back more than they pay in taxes and revenues.
silent-schmick | an hour ago
Of course it benefits both sides. But to even suggest Poland would be anywhere near the current level of wealth and infrastructure without being inside the EU is borderline insanity. Or tremendous ill will.
Bonus-BGC | 30 minutes ago
Who's suggesting that? And btw that's the case for all EU MS. Yet we don't hear constantly how Germany or the Netherlands should be thankful to other MS for forming a single market with them.
silent-schmick | 17 minutes ago
There's plenty of people who claim that Poland built their own success despite EU and not thanks to it.
Bonus-BGC | 16 hours ago
What needs repeating to ignorant people like you is that EU funds are a small fraction of EU benefits. Net contributors to the EU budget do not send billions to poorer member states out of the kindness of their hearts. They get many more billions every year thanks to the EU single market, euro etc. Devoid of this context, all of this net contributors/beneficiaries "debate" is just a way for ignorant westerners to feel superior.
Bonus-BGC | 16 hours ago
"EU money" is a smaller part of Poland's GDP than your country's gains from the EU single market. https://www.cpb.nl/en/trade-benefits-of-the-eu-and-the-internal-market
Negative-Bag-653 | 20 hours ago
I guess that's what the other poster meant... The point is, while it's great that Poland has developed so strongly over the last 20 years, its business model will also be exhausted at some point, simply because the "workbench" function for other countries (especially Germany of course) will not work so well anymore.
IssueRidden | 19 hours ago
yeah, we've been freeloading the EU for years now
Nano_needle | 18 hours ago
this dumbass statement again? Poland allowed western companies to dominate it's market in exchange for those funds. It wasn't by no means free money.
machine4891 | 15 hours ago
And was severely brain-drained the moment EU opened its borders.
thedisciple516 | 13 hours ago
> allowed
had no choice but to accept if it wanted a modern western life. Ex communists had no clue had to run such private sector companies for a good decade or so.
But overall agree that Poland did not freeload with no benefits exchanged. Western European companies basically had a money printing machine in the formerly communist east.
Sherm | 16 hours ago
While I agree that the EU has been responsible for driving a significant portion of Poland's development, to call them freeloaders is reductive and ignores several significant benefits Poland has offered the EU and will continue to offer. Human capital is meaningful; European economies have thrived with the benefit of Polish labor, and investments have kept this from becoming a simple matter of one-way exploitation. Cost-competitiveness of goods thanks to labor and modernized building has also let Germany and the rest of the EU buy necessary goods cheap without having their money leave the bloc. And you also can't overstate the benefit of having a wider buffer against Russian threats. That alone might have been worth having Poland in the EU.
Spiritual_Egg3900 | 18 hours ago
And why does Poland need to “freeload” money? I wonder if there’s any historical event or actually, multiple EVENTS that could explain that…
machine4891 | 15 hours ago
>a place where infrastructure has been elevated to the level of art and an engineering cult.
Okay but anytime someone has something to say about Japan that is not positive, weebs bring this Japanese infrastructure trivia. So it's good, we get it, but how is that relevant to the context of Poland reaching out Japanese wealth level per capita?
Do you suggest that Poland is not having similar per capita level because infrastructure isn't state of the art? Or was it merely an attempt to suggest that Japan is better even with lower per capita because their infrastructure from their glory days is solid?
I just don't get the urge to always bring this infrastructure talk on the agenda. It's not related to the discussion.
Apprehensive-Fox5801 | 20 hours ago
GDP per capita is not an adequate metric for assessment. Although Ireland and Taiwan have higher GDP per capita figures than South Korea, the actual wages earned and the standard of living in those places are lower. Similarly, while Poland may have caught up significantly to Japan in terms of GDP per capita, its actual standard of living is likely lower.
InfiniteFudge1973 | 20 hours ago
East Asian countries keep their currencies undervalued and exports competitive. It has worked out in their favor.
Nano_needle | 18 hours ago
It is literally what Poland is doing too lol
Chlearcus | 11 hours ago
The US strongarmed Japan to stop this 40 years ago with the Plaza Accords.
DrFilth | 19 hours ago
As someone whos lived and is in both multiple times a year, anecdotally Id say Polands standard of living is higher as of maybe the last 2 to 3 years. Not only in the big cities. Its quite remarkable considering just 10-12 years ago it was not the case at all.
dlovestoski | 18 hours ago
I remember when invest in East Poland was a mid-2010s meme, now everyone that did is wealthy asf
EternalShadowBan | 15 hours ago
Does having to breathe toxic air 6 months per year not factor into your standard of living calculations?
jorel43 | 20 hours ago
Ppp is a better measurement for everything really
Negative-Bag-653 | 20 hours ago
And even PPP is flawed because it doesn't account for differences in quality in goods normally used in each country (e.g. housing appliances in many European countries are more complex/luxurious than in the US but PPP isn't corrected for that - now when I look how different Japanese homes seem to be compared to Polish homes I guess there will be an even larger bias in PPP in this case).
diovanedvx | 20 hours ago
I recall having a discussion with a redditor who insisted that a Sherpa guide earning $10k a year has the same standard of living as someone earning 100k in the US and as such the average daily Sherpa porter wages were very generous.
Still_Kitchen_1650 | 9 hours ago
everything is flawed if you really dig into it.
BUT it is the closest thing we have for comparison.
Negative-Bag-653 | an hour ago
Absolutely, but it seems that GDP and PPP are still take way "too literal" often. The numbers surely have their meaning but one should consider their limitations.
Still_Kitchen_1650 | 39 minutes ago
Yes of course. But it is all we have.
Otherwise we are relying on what... Our own biases.
Outside_Reserve_2407 | 19 hours ago
>housing appliances in many European countries are more complex/luxurious than in the US
I thought things such as clothes dryers were rare in Europe, and ditto for central air conditioners (though probably not needed). Also, a household appliance being "more complex" isn't a flex. Lots of Americans lament the days when appliances such as fridges and washers were simple but solid and lasted decades. Now modern fridges have wi-fi, touchscreens and go dead after 5 years.
Negative-Bag-653 | 18 hours ago
With my example I was more referring to built-in appliances in kitchens and "in-wall faucets" (don't even find the correct English word for that). Things quite uncommon even in multi-Million USD estates in the US but basically standard in newly built upper class houses and appartments in Europe. GDP and PPP don't catch such things because in their calculation a faucet is a faucet is a faucet - even though the average faucet can be significantly more complex in one region compared to another one.
And I'm sure there would be examples the other way around but those just were the first ones that came to my mind.
And your dryer example means something different: The average American can afford to buy more dryers than the average European (because GDP/PP is higher in the US), but again that doesn't say a lot about the quality of these dryers because the numbers again only refer to a generic dryer.
coke_and_coffee | 11 hours ago
> GDP and PPP don't catch such things because in their calculation a faucet is a faucet is a faucet
I’m not sure exactly what you’re referring to here but are you suggesting these “complex/luxurious” appliances in Europe are just as cheap as normal appliances? How’s that possible?
Negative-Bag-653 | an hour ago
No, but in a goods basket for PPP calculation you simply have a faucet and a sink, it doesn't take into account that this faucet and this sink might be of different quality/complexity when doing the calculations in different countries/regions. There is a similar issue with comparing the numbers between different years in the same place, in this case "hedonic regression" is (sometimes?) used to consider changes in quality.
Outside_Reserve_2407 | 18 hours ago
Built-in appliances aren't anything special. If you're talking about things like clothes washers in kitchens it's because space is at a premium. I've seen them in every single apartment in East Asia. They make cutesy little tones and are touted as being "super efficient" but take an hour and half to wash a load of clothes. Give me a good old American-made Whirlpool or Kenmore washer and dryer with analog controls any day. I have a pair of 40 year old W/D in my house and they get the clothes washed and dried fast.
>And your dryer example means something different:
I don't know why you're poo pooing the dryer example, as if it was nothing. That's the whole point, a wealthier country has more clothes dryers per capita, wasn't that the argument? But now you're trying to dismiss it, claiming the dryers are shoddily built.
>Things quite uncommon even in multi-Million USD estates in the US
Dude, the wealthy in the US have some damn good household appliances. I've been inside homes at "merely" upper middle class price levels with Viking gas ranges and Sub-Zero fridges. Now that is high quality. Not some teeny little built-in Bosch clothes washer that has Wi-Fi.
Firecoso | 17 hours ago
You are ignoring culture. Every italian bathroom has a bidet which is nowhere to be found in an american bathroom, but italy is not wealthier than the us, just has a higher standard of hygiene. Dryers in Europe are more prevalent where being able to dry your clothes outside is more difficult (buildings with small apartments or countries with worse weather), but they are so bad for fabrics, I only use it for the very cheap part of my laundry
Outside_Reserve_2407 | 17 hours ago
>but they are so bad for fabrics, I only use it for the very cheap part of my laundry
Dryers have "moderate heat" settings. Dryers ruining clothes is only a problem with shoddily made "fast fashion" clothes.
Anyway the poster I replying made the argument that the Europeans have "more complex/luxurious" household appliances than the US and now it's "culture" they don't have dryers? What is it?
Firecoso | 16 hours ago
It’s both? Given the same appliance, there are high standards in Europe (varies a lot from country to country though), but if you cherry pick some specific ones they might not be as prevalent in one place or the other. Are you somehow trying to imply there’s a contradiction there? Lol
Tumbling dryers are horrible on actual good quality fabric, especially good cottons or wool. It’s not a personal opinion it’s a well studied fact. Low heat settings are less bad but still worse than just hanging
Outside_Reserve_2407 | 15 hours ago
You can argue all you want how terrible dryers are but given a choice, I think Europeans (especially those living in damp cold climates) would adopt dryers at a higher rate if their homes had more space, if electricity was cheaper, etc. I have a dryer but also hang up things like nice shirts on a line in a my basement. But I can't imagine hanging up 10 pairs of socks and 10 pairs of under wear and other daily wear clothes every single week or more.
Negative-Bag-653 | 16 hours ago
And yet, the built-in Bosch appliance is more complex to install, and your fancy upper middle class US home usually doesn't have in wall faucets or a walk in shower or an induction stove - yes, such stuff is mostly driven by cultural differences, they might simply be more important to Europeans but it still makes those goods more "valuable" than the equivalent in the US is on average. And GDP/PPP are not capturing this.
To put it simpler: That youcan afford more dryers shows you are richer, but that you use archaic appliances biases (in this case the US) GDP even further.
DrXaos | 15 hours ago
I don’t know what the particular value of an in wall faucet is, but walk in shower and induction stove are very common in new build and remodel housing in California.
theriskybusinesscar | 14 hours ago
> your fancy upper middle class US home usually doesn't have in wall faucets or a walk in shower or an induction stove
WTF? These are all quite common.
Negative-Bag-653 | 50 minutes ago
Well, I was just trying to find a few examples for as to why GDP/PPP can be biased/misleading a bit. And the examples I chose where based on my personal experience in the US and on me once in a while browsing real estate listings in different parts of the world - it might very well be the case that such stuff is (by now) also quite common in the US but my personal opinion (unfortunately there is no real numbers on this) simply is, that they are much rarer there compared to EU (at least central Europe). You will have a hard time finding a relatively new 1+ Mio. property without such amenities here, while there is a ton of them in the US.
Outside_Reserve_2407 | 16 hours ago
>And yet, the built-in Bosch appliance is more complex to install,
Why are you so obsessed with "complexity"? Americans have big enough houses to have washer-dryer rooms (or use their basements) and use stand-alone washer/dryers. A built-in washer/dryer is a solution looking for a problem for a typical American house.
BTW there's an American-made brand of washer/dryer called Speed Queen that looks like it was designed 30 years ago and has a cult following (and premium pricing) precisely because it doesn't have needlessly complex electronics and will last forever.
>in wall faucets or a walk in shower or an induction stove -
Just curious, have you ever been to America? Or are your perceptions of American homes based on sit-coms and movies? I've been in homes that have in wall faucets built into the wall over the stovetop, so that you can fill a soup pot with water directly. When's the last time you saw that in Europe?
>walk in shower
This is laughable. You think American homes don't have walk in showers? I just took a shower yesterday in one, in my home.
>induction stove
That's not an "upgrade" (but yes, many American homes have induction stoves). A Viking stove that burns natural gas (if available) and can put out up to 23,000 BTUS of heat instantly is the premium choice for wealthy households.
> archaic appliances biases
Oh look, we Europeans have these teeny Bosch washers that chime and send text messages and take 2 hours to wash a load of clothes. We're soooooo advanced over the Americans with their crude household appliances. We're soooo much better off.
crasheerice4 | 15 hours ago
And if anything breaks we don’t have to rip our house apart to fix it
Negative-Bag-653 | 12 hours ago
Not sure why you are so offended by me...I even wrote myself "I'm sure there would be examples the other way around but those just were the first ones that came to my mind."
And as there unfortunately is no serious metric exactly measuring this topic my examples are based on comparing real estate listings on both sides of the atlantic, so yes, it's just my personal impression: On average household appliances and the way they are installed on average seem more "archaic" in the US - if you can find serious statistics concerning this, feel free to share them. (and BTW I have lived in the US - admittedly 20 years ago though).
We could expand the list also by other things even just considering housing (should we talk about windows used?). But that wasn't even my point anyways, my point was simply that GDP and PPP are not adjusted for different qualities used in different regions. A similar issue even exists with the change of PPP from one year to another year within the same region (because also there the quality of goods might change).
machine4891 | 15 hours ago
In PPP Japan is already couple of places behind Poland.
InjuryEmbarrassed532 | 17 hours ago
This is funny…Ireland and Poland are both way better and less dystopian places to live than a bland threadmill technocracy like S Korea.
mnugget1 | 10 hours ago
Dystopian yet safer and more developed 😂
damNSon189 | 8 hours ago
Poland is extremely safe. Comparing them in this aspect is just splitting hairs.
mnugget1 | 7 hours ago
Not as high trust though
damNSon189 | 7 hours ago
Not the aspect that you mentioned in your OC and thus not the one I’m counter arguing.
mnugget1 | 7 hours ago
I'd argue that falls under the general umbrella of safety (theft, etc)
damNSon189 | an hour ago
That would be doing a more granular analysis. Which, once again, is not what was your original comment, and thus not the topic of mine.
Still_Kitchen_1650 | 9 hours ago
>bland threadmill technocracy like S Korea.
Can't commend on the bland part, but the rest, as a Korean this is just cope talk.
Yes, Samsung is big, but it is a conglomerate of different sub divisions that act as separate companies. There's Hyundai, SK, LG, Lotte etc. as well, and they all make up about 40% of the total GDP. Samsung would make up about 15% of the GDP.
Whataboutism here - What about Taiwan... TSMC makes up about 40% of their GDP, and 35% in their stock market cap weight.
Taiwan is more of a 'threadmill technocracy' than South Korea, yet everyone turn on a blind eye...
What about Australia - 70% of its exports revenue is based on mining resources.
What about the US, which is now essentially controlled by Trump, Elon and the oligarchies...
Yet the country of South Korea - essentially a tiny island surrounded by hostile giants - always seems to get singled out.
rintzscar | 15 hours ago
>Reported for glorifying white supremacy and essentially racism.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Economics/comments/1xkyl6b/comment/19rzkpfhcsttw/
This you?
Jugaimo | 17 hours ago
Quality of life, employment, spending power and comfort are all very complex concepts that cannot be boiled down into simple numbers.
Weisenkrone | 17 hours ago
It's 3, sometimes 38. In a cold winter you're looking at -8
coldbear25 | 14 hours ago
And did you ever live in south korea to know this? Or did you learn this from YouTube videos and tiktok? 😂
Ireland and Poland look like a wasteland compared to south korea 😂😂😂
survivorr123_ | 13 hours ago
its cultural differences, it always is
some nations work hard because their culture is to work 20h a day without breaks, otherwise you bring shame to the family, some nations work way less and take frequent breaks
Fernando_III | 11 hours ago
"You don't understand: GDP per capita or other economic metrics don't apply to Japan. Let me take one of the few exceptions where GDP doesn't really correlate with wealth. It's either that or admitting that Japan isn't the dreamland I imagine 🤩"
Hij802 | 8 hours ago
The US is a perfect demonstration of this. Extremely high GDP per capita but a lot of that GDP is fake and hoarded by billionaires and corporations.
In 2020, the US had a GDP of $21.3T with a per capita of $64,465. In 2026, the US GDP is $32.2T with a per capita of $93,335.
Ask any American and I guarantee they are not better off than they were 6 years ago, and the country certainly doesn’t feel like it’s $9 trillion dollars richer. All we see is billionaires are richer than ever due to price gouging and the AI bubble.
machine4891 | 15 hours ago
There is a quality of life index. Japan is currently 20th on it, between Czechia and Lithuania. They do however sit above Poland and Ireland, indeed.
https://www.numbeo.com/quality-of-life/rankings_by_country.jsp
Better_Wafer_6381 | 9 hours ago
Numbeo should never be used as a source. It relies on randos to go to the site and submit their feelings.
Kyiv and Baghdad are apparently safer that many western european cities according that twats that moan on there.
machine4891 | 9 hours ago
There's always a reason to dismiss some methodology. And I get it but it's still better than "I think so" and "trust me bro" from reddit. Just saying.
Absolute majority glazing here over Japan never went there and if, they went on short vacation. Then they preach all about "quality of life" they don't even understand. At the very least this is someone trying to quaintify tangible things.
HarmfuIThoughts | 8 hours ago
A more reputable resource is the legatum prosperity index https://www.prosperityindex.com/rankings
Karirsu | 8 hours ago
Sorry, but no way Poland's standard of living is lower than the severly overworked Japan.
Apprehensive-Fox5801 | 8 hours ago
According to OECD data, people in Poland work 200 hours more per year than those in Japan. It seems you may hold some romanticized notions about Poland and certain stereotypes about Japan; in reality, the Japanese work 200 hours less annually than the Poles. Furthermore, while Poland has experienced soaring inflation due to the war in Russia, Japan has remained largely unaffected. When you take into account essential infrastructure—such as transportation, healthcare, and education—as well as the broader welfare system, life in Japan is significantly better than in Poland.
IIIIIlIIIIIlIIIII | 18 hours ago
Spain was higher than south kores until recently.
plastic_alloys | 16 hours ago
Without looking it up, wages are definitely higher in Ireland than S. Korea
Low_Ability4450 | 5 hours ago
Interesting comparison. Poland's catch-up is impressive, but the demographic adjustment is the key point: Japan has not necessarily become less productive; it has fewer working-age people supporting its total population. The same demographic headwind is now emerging in South Korea. Economic convergence and demographic sustainability are two very different challenges.
Apprehensive-Cost482 | 38 minutes ago
Poland also boast one of the lowest fertily rates and high emigration. If not for ukrainian refugees the GDP growth would be quite reduced since 2022
mascachopo | 15 hours ago
One could also make the point that Japan is in fact almost as poor as Poland now. And the rest of the text is to make it to one hundred and forty characters.
coke_and_coffee | 11 hours ago
Japan has not become poorer so this would be a really stupid and incorrect point to make.
mascachopo | 7 hours ago
They have stagnant GDP growth for 20+ years, when the rest grows faster, that by definition makes you poorer. Maybe you need to support your claims when you call the ones from other people stupid for absolutely no reason.
coke_and_coffee | 7 hours ago
> when the rest grows faster, that by definition makes you poorer
lol
> Maybe you need to support your claims when you call the ones from other people stupid for absolutely no reason
I didn’t call you stupid. But you should learn to read or it might be germane
mascachopo | 7 hours ago
Great argument /s Proud to get downvoted by someone so proud of his own ignorance
devliegende | 21 hours ago
I'm a little confused. The gist of the storie is that the average Pole is as well off as the average Japanese, because they all work while the Japanese are retired. Is this supposed to be better for the Poles or better for the Japanese?
YourFuture2000 | a day ago
The country produce as much wealth, but which country have the real returned to society and people in form of wage and social investments the most?
I don't know the answer, that is a honest question.
Because to me, personally, it doesn't if China, US or whatever country produce more wealth. In many cases, countries with less wealth production people are wealthier.
TheRadishBros | a day ago
Quality of life in Poland has rocketed over the past 10-15 years. I’d rather live there than Japan right now.
yellowbai | a day ago
Some cities like Krakow look as good as any in the West now. Warsaw has a brand new metro since years.
They have unbelievable quality highways. The most modern ones in Europe built to the highest standards. Also building rail infrastructure and a planned new airport. They’ve a lot of legacy skills from the Soviet times in manufacturing which has plugged very effectively into the German industrial supply chains.
The Polish used the EU money wisely and they are integrated into their neighbours economies and they properly reformed when it wasn’t easy. This is a return of investment that took decades to bear fruit.
They pretty much are the textbook example for a country that transitioned from a communist economy to a market economy in the least traumatic way possible for the people.
A lot of Polish emigrants are returning with lots of useful skills learned in Western Europe and they are ramping up in productivity. The EU solved the “lack of good jobs for young mobile Polish people for a decade” and the remittances allowed capital to pool to facilitate private investment.
Many come back with a big bank account full of euros and plan to make their families or set up businesses.
The thing is the EU can be steroids for your economy but you have to engage with it and truly reform. You need honest civil servants to audit the allocations. The EU can’t check every single project it’s too vast. You need honesty. And the Polish made sure it was being spent legitimately.
Other EU countries just go the scam as much money out of it route. Croatia, Hungary and Romania have had anemic growth because they don’t respect the institutions. And just pissed the money away. It goes to local elites who skim what they can and not to actual projects that build wealth.
Basic_Step2923 | 23 hours ago
Poland respecting its institutions? What happened with the institutions under PiS? What happened with the courts dispute just recently?
And more importantly, if Poland is a rule-of-law state, then why processing a karta pobytu takes more than 18 months?
yellowbai | 23 hours ago
PiS lost in a free democratic election which in itself is a vindication of the system.
Basic_Step2923 | 22 hours ago
Sure, but PiS messed up with the institutions, undermining democracy. On top of that, you have a 'vetoing' machine as president.
machine4891 | 15 hours ago
>Poland respecting its institutions? What happened with the institutions under PiS?
Poland has vast judiciary issues, however in the context of EU funds it's a prime example how to spend and invest those. Almost no corruption involved and little waste, with a very large number of approved projects.
Definitely not the case with couple other EU countries. However those couple other countries may have better judiciary situation but those are apples and oranges. And it's not Hungary anyway.
JanLevinson_irl | 16 hours ago
Rule of law doesn't mean you get free entry or easy access
Basic_Step2923 | an hour ago
Rule of law means you enforce the law. By law, a residence decision has to be made in 60 days. Nobody is asking free access.
AmoebaPuzzled8390 | 19 hours ago
You cannot just put those 3 countries in the same bin (Croatia, Hungary and Romania). All 3 have very different issues and challenges which affected their development, like high level corruption. For example regarding Croatia, since 90's it went through war which destroyed roughly 1/3 of country, joined EU more than decade after Poland so it missed main wave of EU money injection and industry transfer during 2000's from west to east EU, went through great recession without EU (which significantly prolonged it), but in the end even with all Poland head start Croatia still has similar growth and GDP per capita like Poland since it joined EU.
Poland is only singled out every time as success because it is most visible due to it's population size compared to rest of eastern EU countries, but other eastern EU countries had similar growth and are far from "anemic" as you described them.
Own-Long3308 | 21 hours ago
Can confirm as a Pole. Our highways are fucking lit.
FunForm1981 | 23 hours ago
Actually, Hungary has the best highway network among post-communist countries (abeit Poland would be second).
The-Faz | 21 hours ago
What makes one better than the other? Genuine question
machine4891 | 15 hours ago
As a Pole, I don't know. All new highways in EU are built according to specific standard and I would say they are equally solid. We stick out because all of our highways are new, while western Europe has a lot of badly projected roads from the 70s.
However you still need to maintain those roads and we make regular repairs, so maybe that's what Hungary do even more often?
Honestly, I really dunno.
hungariannastyboy | 19 hours ago
I guess you mean in terms of coverage or extent, maybe, I'm not sure, but definitely not road quality. Even Romania has us beat on that because they've built so much of their infrastructure more recently (same reason they have amazing Internet).
machine4891 | 15 hours ago
Per capita it seem to be quite close. 172 in Hungary to 160 in Poland.
Almeric | 17 hours ago
Croatia has an anemic growth? Croatia has one of highest growths in GDP per year(percentage wise) in the EU in the last 5 years.
UncleIrohsPimpHand | 15 hours ago
> Some cities like Krakow look as good as any in the West now.
In fairness, Krakow has always been an unbelievable city.
Money-Bell-100 | 2 hours ago
Ah, yes, the unbelievable quality of highways with only 2 lanes...
[OP] InForTheSqueeze | a day ago
Yea, we are seeing literally polish people which came to Germany like 20 years ago for work now returning to Poland because quality of life improved so much there
yellowbai | a day ago
It’s very exciting to see the EU have successes. Wealth builds wealth. By Poland flourishing it’s going to facilitate more growth. The only way to ensure a stable EU is to secure growth for people and a standard of living. Wealth creation pays for the social state and the pensions and all that.
On another level, seeing a country that suffered immensely in the 20th century, become strong, safe and doing better is a total vindication of the European project. A country having good relations with the country just besides it that inflicted so much misery just shows what the EU stands for is a force for good.
If Germany and Poland after all the horrors of the previous century can be friends and profitable business partners it just proves the European model has value and is worth protecting.
Primary-Signal-3692 | 23 hours ago
It's a nice story for Poland. But the other side is western European countries like Germany getting worse
Suitable-Economy-346 | 23 hours ago
Germany isn't getting worse. Germany just isn't getting better or improving as fast as it should. Why? The culture wars of course! The billionaires have taken over every aspect of society, from our thoughts to the air we breathe. Every aspect of our lives is controlled by billionaires. Yet, Germans are fighting about minorities like it's 1930 again.
Triangle1619 | 21 hours ago
Germany is absolutely getting worse, and it’s not due to culture wars. An aging society is putting pressure on a lower proportion of the population to prop up the system. At the same time industry is getting shuttered due to high energy prices, and China is eating Germany’s lunch in the export market in core exports. Outside of France it probably has the bleakest future in Western Europe.
Negative-Bag-653 | 20 hours ago
Those are all problems that Poland will face just as well in the not so distant future.
RollinThundaga | 21 hours ago
Germany has more serious problems, too, in its overly rigid beauracracy making public spending other than social services onerously difficult and procedurally expensive.
Woottonhouse | 21 hours ago
And if course the elephant in the room, Mrs Merkel's refugees
coke_and_coffee | 10 hours ago
Lmao at people blaming “billionaires”. Same dumb argument Americans make. So stupid.
Ateist | 20 hours ago
Polish people who came to Germany 20 years ago to work are returning to Poland because they can afford a lot more in Poland on their German pensions.
justlyunwelcomeethan | a day ago
japans gdp per capita is high but median wage has barely budged in 30 years, polands been catching up fast on that front
stargazy-pi | 23 hours ago
Japan’s median wealth is double that of the US.
They also have the least wealth inequality of any developed country.
The joke in Japan is that you may get paid twice as much in the US but you’ll end up paying three times as much for shittier things.
OddlyFactual1512 | 23 hours ago
>Japan’s median wealth is double that of the US.
According to your second link, the median wealth in the US (ranked #15 at $107,739) is greater that of the median wealth in Japan (ranked #18 at $103,681). The numbers are different in your first link. A perfect example of Wikipedia not being a reliable source.
Nessie_of_the_Loch | 21 hours ago
You're conflating two different metrics. The first one uses median wealth per adult, which is widely considered to be a better metric for evaluating the financial health of a typical household. When you have a nation like Japan that has had a low birth rate for decades, it's bound to skew higher.
Particular-Way-8669 | 23 hours ago
I would prefer to have high income than high wealth, this is what increases your individual qol. Most of that wealth is locked in personal real estate (mostly in Tokyo where it is more expensive than LA) anyway and means absolutely nothing. You can not live off of it. You can at most sell it and buy different place.
EDIT: Also just a side note.
You are comparing median which means 38 year old American with 50 year old Japanese. Do you think that it is fair comparison in any way? That American has 12 years of peak career in front of him to accumulate wealth to catch up (including things like inheritance).
And "the joke". Even in median disposable income in PPP terms which accounts for "expensive items" US ranks second only to Luxembourgh. Japan ranks 27th. Poland ranks 24th:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income
BlindSquirrelValue | 20 hours ago
I would definitely prefer a high wealth to a high income. Even the apartment you mentioned would save on rent, which in turn could be invested elsewhere or at least significantly reduce living expenses. A high income can disappear from one moment to the next. An apartment won’t.
stargazy-pi | 23 hours ago
You’re confusing income with financial security. A high salary is a yearly flow; wealth is what remains after debts and what you can rely on when you stop working. And home equity isn’t “meaningless” because it’s less liquid: it’s housing you own, lower future housing costs, and an asset you can sell or downsize.
The latest UBS figures put median wealth per adult at $135,745 in Japan versus $68,998 in the US. Nearly twice as much. Japan’s median is also much closer to its average, while the US average is pulled far above its median, showing how much more top-heavy American wealth is.
And “the American has 12 years to catch up” is a fantasy, not an argument. A younger national median age doesn’t guarantee anyone will save enough to close the gap.
Japan is ahead on the measure you’re trying to dismiss. Calling the numbers meaningless doesn’t make your argument look smarter.
Particular-Way-8669 | 22 hours ago
Income is what matters the most because you can not really defer consumption. Having equity in housing means very little in aging societies. Not to mention that you would have to turn that equity into income regardless so Japanese who are downsizing the way you claim to fund their retirement are literally counted in those income statistics.
The wealth distribution is completely irrelevant here.
The way you dismiss the age difference is pathetic. Do you realise that Americans do not repay student debts into their early 40s? Do you not realise that mortgages act as negative net worth for decades in every country? Of course that the age difference is massive especially due to mortgages that as we all know you take when you are younger and do not repay until you are much older. Yes, median wealth increasing with median age is guaranteed in aggregate. Arguing otherwise makes your argument look incredibly dumb. Of course that it matters that the ages of comparison are ages of typical person with mortgage versus typical person with fully paid off home.
Also, I never used word meaningless. You did. It is measure of something and it can absolutely be used for comparisons. But you would always use more metrics for any kind of comparison and those metrics are far less important than others. And you always have to put them into context.
EDIT: Respond to me and then block so I can not answer. The absolute class.
Disastrous_Entry_362 | 20 hours ago
I've tried to have the same discussion you are before. That report that showed housing cost which they try to translate to wealth.
krombough | 19 hours ago
You arent listening to them about their very real refutarions of your reading of that report, then being a complete toolbox and blocking them. You arent worth discussing with, even if you are right, which you arent.
Enjoy your own tactic.
stargazy-pi | 21 hours ago
Income matters for what you can spend now. It doesn’t make wealth irrelevant to lifetime security or living standards. And selling a house doesn’t turn the whole sale price into income. It converts one asset into cash; standard US personal-income accounts exclude capital gains.
You’re also counting the mortgage while pretending the house isn’t there. Net wealth counts both the home and the debt against it. Student loans count too, which is exactly why net wealth tells you something a salary figure leaves out.
Also “wealth rises with age” doesn’t prove that a 12-year median-age gap explains the Japan–US difference. Not even close. And median wealth isn’t irrelevant to distribution: it tells you where the typical adult stands, while the average can be skewed by the very rich.
In any case, you still haven’t shown that Japan’s wealth advantage disappears or that the typical American is better off. You’re just throwing out the scoreboard because the typical American is losing.
Ayangar | 19 hours ago
Did you read your own link??? Lol
Ayangar | 19 hours ago
No, this makes no sense. Salaries are a lot higher in the US, and my company, we have offices in Japan and senior AI engineers with 10+ years of experience in Japan, are only getting ¥10 million, which if you use the current conversion rates, only like 80 K USD, and if you use the more traditional exchange rate of roughly ¥100 to the dollar, then it’s $100,000. But my company in the US, a senior AI engineer, could be making $180,000 a year, and I know that Japan has a lower cost of living, but I don’t think it makes up for an $80,000 gap
Sherm | 16 hours ago
>and senior AI engineers with 10+ years of experience in Japan, are only getting ¥10 million, which if you use the current conversion rates, only like 80 K USD, and if you use the more traditional exchange rate of roughly ¥100 to the dollar, then it’s $100,000.
At the moment it's more like $60K. And the 100-1 hasn't been a good benchmark for 10 years. They've been sliding hard and people have been sleeping on it.
Particular-Way-8669 | 23 hours ago
>In many cases, countries with less wealth production people are wealthier.
This is just not true. The correlation between GDP per capita and citizens well being is near perfect. Like sure, there might be countries with lower GDP per capita than US and higher QOL but the GDP per capita difference is not large and all the countries at the top of any of those indexes have high GDP per capita themselves. There is no "poor" country with "wealthy" population.
Also it very much depends what you mean by wealthier people. Is it income? Is it net worth? Is it good economic opportunity and good job? Is it safety or social cohesion? Because all those can be viewed as wealth of population and more. And it is heavily individual, even general metrics like qol will not give you an answer because it heavily depends on what you value the most as an individual.
I would much rather live in Poland these days than Japan. Countries experiencing economic growth are far better to live in than stagnating aging countries in my opinion. Not that Poland will not run into same issues Japan did but it is not there yet and will not be there for a while.
YourFuture2000 | 22 hours ago
GDP measures production of final good wealth in a country, not how much of the production wealth goes to people.
In fact, in many cases, many of the wealth production of a country comes directly or indirect from unpaid work.
GDP doesn't mesure how much wealth people are receiving, regardless if it is wage, material goods, other forms of assets.
Particular-Way-8669 | 22 hours ago
I never said it did measure any of that. It does not. However I said that correlation between high GDP per capita and all those things is nearly perfect. Not perfect but pretty good. So throwing it out of the window using these arguments makes very little sense.
YourFuture2000 | 12 hours ago
India is the 6th biggest GDP in the world. Russia is 8th biggest GDP in the world. Brazil has the 10th biggest GDP in the world. Mexico 13th and Turkey 16th
Most Europeans Courier have lower GDP, including Switzerland, Netherlands, Sweden, Norway, Austria, etc.
But you said 1. It is not true and 2. GDP are nearly perfect correlated to people's wealth. Both you claim is false according to GDP and people's wealth statistics.
Particular-Way-8669 | 12 hours ago
The article is clearly talking about GDP per capita. And so am I.
YourFuture2000 | 11 hours ago
And so am I.
You are trying to find ways to denying the fact you are wrong, and failling miserably.
Particular-Way-8669 | 11 hours ago
Do not act like sore looser please. I literally stated GDP per capita.
YourFuture2000 | 11 hours ago
In the US, GDP per capita is about $94,430, ranking 8th, but its median wealth per adult is only about $69,000, even though average wealth per adult is the 2nd highest in the world.
The US is below Belgium with a median of about $277,000. Australia has a median of about $211,000. The Netherlands has a median of about $127,000. Malta has a median of about $114,000.
Ireland is ranking 3rd in GDP per capita, but that number is inflated by multinational company profits that don't reach ordinary residents that has a much less media income than GDP per capita figures.
In UAE 46.1% of adults have less than $10,000 and own absolutely none of the country's wealth.
So your claim that GDP per capita is nearly perfect to people wealth is far from true. And saying that these figures are not true you are arguing against statistic facts.
melleb | 19 hours ago
I think I saw that Mississippi or some other poor state had a higher GDP per capita than all of Canada. In no way could you ever convince me it’s a better place to live than everywhere in Canada. GDP is a great metric for measuring how much an economy creates, but it doesn’t accurately measure standard of living. One reason why the American GDP is higher? Because even though the average Canadian and average American pay a similar amount of government taxes to prop up their health care systems, in America you have to pay again to access it and the cost doubles because the health insurance industry is equal in size to the health industry. In Canada taxes alone already paid for it. So yeah Mississippi has a higher GDP per capita because Canada provides a service to its people for half the cost, but the outcomes in well being, bankruptcies, etc aren’t reflected in GDP nearly the same way
Particular-Way-8669 | 19 hours ago
This is not how it works at all. There may be waste in US healthcare system (pretty convincingly when you look at spending data) but that does not mean it inflates GDP. It would simply just be produced elsewhere within the economy - simply because the production capacity, labor that provides it and money that pays for it would not disapear.
Also, I do not think you understand how little sense your comparison and specifically "all of Canada" means. Alberta in Canada f.e. has 50% higher GDP per capita than Mississippi. You can not just take Mississippi and expand it to all of Canada, that is not how it works. You have to work in aggregates.
Again, any well being index more or less follows GDP per capita. You do not have countries with low GDP per capita at the top and you do not have countries with more GDP capita at the bottom. That is simply just not happening.
long-legged-lumox | 16 hours ago
I think GDP should be reported as a median perhaps. Or with a standard deviation or something.
GDP relates to the movement of money in an economy, right? Like I pay you 100 to move my lawn and you 100 to mow yours and we have generated 200 as domestic product. Meanwhile, schmucks mowing their own lawns are at 0 but this seem meaningless. The main protection against this is that people try really hard to not waste their money.
kotman12 | 13 hours ago
Yea but if you save money on mowing the lawn you invest and someone else takes that money to build something that does flow to GDP. It's not a perfect measure but it is still really good at measuring economic power and welfare.
europeanguy99 | 12 hours ago
> I think GDP should be reported as a median perhaps. Or with a standard deviation or something.
How do expect that to work? How would you calculate a GDP value for all individuals of a country?
kotman12 | 14 hours ago
This. The "US healthcare inflates GDP" is a common misconception. GDP has its share of problems but this ain't one of them.
kotman12 | 14 hours ago
> Canada provides a service to its people at half the cost.
This isn't really accurate. I mean Canadan could indeed be doing this but that would open up resources in other areas of the economy to compensate yet this doesn't happen. So GDP on healthcare is just as valid of an account as anything else. If US made healthcare cheaper for the same benefit it would increase its GDP lead even more. Economies aren't 0-sum so these kinds of misconceptions are easy to fall into.
Edit:
To convince yourself think of all the things we've made cheaper (in real terms of course) and more efficient over the last hundred years, has GDP gone down? No, on the contrary, it has skyrocketed.
GreatAndMightyKevins | 11 minutes ago
Do you really believe that? The GDP and we'll being correlation? Or you're just memeing?
litritium | 22 hours ago
QoL is pretty subjective over a certain threshold. Wasabi farmers in Japan seems to live a meditative life in beautiful surroundings.
It requires expertise and attention because the ripening process takes two years and requires these streams of clean water at the right temperature.
YourFuture2000 | 19 hours ago
I am aware of it. Statisticaly a lot of people with good living standard in France, with universal health care, good homes and healthy food, has less wealth than many people living in poverty in the US.
I know for a fact that life in South America can be much better than in Germany where I live, depending on many factors.
litritium | 19 hours ago
Costa Rica ranks 4 on worlds most happy countries. But then again - even "happiness" are subjective to a degree.
Like, combat soldiers who have been on the line in fierce fire fights, have difficulty adjusting to the boring civilian life afterwards and the lack of tight camaraderie.
YourFuture2000 | 11 hours ago
I was not really talking about happiness but wealth.
In Germany less than 60% of people own property because it is not affordable. The homes in Germany, despite costing more, have lower quality than in many poor countries that have better materials and are more solid. The access to varieties of food and varieties of brands and products in supermarkets in many countries in South America is bugger than in Germany. In countries like Brazil, many types of preventive medicine are completely free to people while in Germany nothing is free to people regarding medicine and treatments. The access and availability of cultural, education and entertainment in many countries is higher than in countries like Germany. In Germany people also pay more tax, the government follow the politics of austerity for decades and pay more tax on income, dividends, etc.
Technically, people in Germany have more wealth but they do less with more (because the access to different types of wealth is more restricted. While in some countries where people have less wealth they do more with less, because wealth are more accessible. Like buying property.
Latter-Yam-2115 | a day ago
Nice way to look at it. One would expect Scandinavia would be leading on those metrics
US would perhaps be the worst performer
I’m sure we can put together some kind of ratio to measure this!
depwnz | 20 hours ago
I'm not sure about "rich" but Poland is the most european country to visit these days. Spotless, beautiful, great architecture old & new, still affordable. There was a time I took so many ryan air flights to, or transit in Poland and therefore visited Gdansk, Poznan, Krakow etc. They were already great back then compared to dumsters like Paris.
[OP] InForTheSqueeze | 20 hours ago
Poland has really made an insane comeback in the past 20 years. Got friends here in Berlin that actively think about moving to Poland for better QoL, which would have been an insane thing to think just a few years ago.
PurplePachyderme | 16 hours ago
It kinda helped when you enter in the EU and become one of the most beneficial country of its financial help.
artlurg431 | 7 hours ago
The eu is a big reason why poland is where it is right now. They helped alot
menelov | 4 hours ago
It’s called like reparations or something
Sykolewski | 15 hours ago
Tell them to stay in Berlin,we have more than enough problems
JebacBiede2137 | 8 hours ago
Not really. People move to places like thailand because of “higher QoL”.
But usually it just means a remote job and a higher purchasing power because you can spend a western currency there
milkolik | 13 hours ago
Its not so much of a comeback, its that all other countries are killing themselves with mass immigration, destruction of national identity and leftist ideas. Poland just avoided those and look at them now.
pandeiro_h2o | 13 hours ago
You haven’t been to Poland. Krakow is filled with crooks
survivorr123_ | 13 hours ago
> still affordable
its affordable but some places are more expensiv than dubai, we joke that its cheaper to go to italy than our own sea
idiotslob | 14 hours ago
But sadly there are no doctors or engineers
lolkot | 13 hours ago
Wrong take.
Poland has always been like this. The architecture/food/people haven’t changed. It was always spotless, and since I encountered foreigners on a regular basis in Poland since the 90s that was their major comment.
Currently, all people glazing Poland do so, because it is safer than it used to be, there are tall buildings, and huge influx of FOREIGNERS that give an impression it is modern European city.
Chlearcus | 11 hours ago
Poland was heavily impacted by the Soviet occupation and communist oppression and this obviously colored the country for years after the 90s liberalisation efforts.
VincentvdA | 9 hours ago
And full of racists 🥸
Electrical-Penalty44 | 7 hours ago
Someone mad that there are so many white skinned folks in a country where white skinned folks come from?
LiquidSolidGasPower | 8 hours ago
Name 1 country which isn’t?
Imnotalic3 | 6 hours ago
Vatican City? I don’t know I haven’t been there. Full of is a subjective term though isn’t it. Is there a way we can quantify the number of racists in a given region?
liubeingloved | 6 hours ago
even black too
trufus_for_youfus | 8 hours ago
There isn’t one but contrary to popular belief the United States is pretty racist free considering the numbers involved.
LiquidSolidGasPower | 8 hours ago
Yeah America is least Racist
Klichouse | 8 hours ago
Of all the countries to pick you're going with that one
Old-Importance-6934 | 8 hours ago
Lmao you could have chosen any other country.
_urat_ | 4 hours ago
Poland is less racist than other EU countries. I don't get where your strange prejudice against Poles came from.
Just check this EU study conducted in 2023 about the experience of Black people living in Europe. Black people living in Poland faced much less racial discrimination than Black people living in other parts of Europe. You can read more about it here: https://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2023/being-black-eu
Creative-Trouble3473 | 3 hours ago
Throughout history, Poland has had a long tradition of religious tolerance and openness, which was quite remarkable for its time. Of course, our history is far from perfect, and communism and modern Russian propaganda have both played a role in shaping political attitudes. But I don’t think it’s fair to label Poland as a racist country.
Racism certainly exists in Poland, just as it does everywhere else. However, EU research has found that Poland is among the European countries where people of African descent report some of the lowest rates of racial discrimination. That doesn’t mean racism isn’t a problem, but it does mean the picture is more nuanced than some people suggest.
Virtual-Escape2305 | 9 hours ago
Winner what's your source on that. Because of its just an opinion, then it's ironically prejudiced of you.
Intercostal-clavicle | 5 hours ago
you mean not allowing immigrants that bring huge cultural divide to flood the country? Because thats also one of the reasons the country is flourishing
ikeusa | 5 hours ago
The country is not replacing its workforce fast enough to maintain economic growth into the 2030s. The restriction on migration is hurting that. There's no free lunch.
Zestyclose-Ice-3434 | 4 hours ago
That assumes that migrants that came to Germany or UK or whenever do work instead of sitting on welfare.
11bag11 | 5 hours ago
number go up, country good
Intercostal-clavicle | 4 hours ago
if only there was something that could incentivize people moving from one country to another country inside the same without dealing with visas and passports...
they should make one and call it schengen area or something like that
Tiny_duckling0702 | 2 hours ago
lol if you think people are going to move en masse to Poland, of all the countries in schengen area
Fearless-Cattle-9698 | 6 hours ago
Felt very Soviet to me when I visited for work about 6 years ago
IsoldeInInk | 17 hours ago
The most European country? Poland was once the most multicultural and multiconfessional country in all of Europe. Glorifying the way it is now huh? I’m sorry but I definitely reported you. 😊
ed-with-a-big-butt | 16 hours ago
Definitely a dog whistle this
Lucko_Coldwolf | 12 hours ago
Why would you report anyone for anything? Do you want people to report you for your opinions?
InjuryEmbarrassed532 | 17 hours ago
Reported for glorifying white supremacy and essentially racism.
TanCressida666 | 17 hours ago
Poland is a safe place. Politicians there are doing what their people wants. Is democracy a bad thing now?
eatallthecoookies | 14 hours ago
Lol all out politicians seem like the dumbest people on earth. Our government is like a circus with childish clowns. The situation was never good
Striper_Cape | 17 hours ago
Because he called Paris a dumpster? Or is there a dog whistle in there somewhere?
IsoldeInInk | 17 hours ago
Yes, glorifies the demographic shift Poland went through.
altmly | 14 hours ago
You mean the shift it didn't go through? 😂
Common-Method2202 | 13 hours ago
Poland is already going through a shift lol. Just via Russian sphere of influence
IsoldeInInk | 13 hours ago
Let’s ignore the demographics in the first half of the 20th century shall we?
altmly | 8 hours ago
Not like Poland had a lot of say in it
InjuryEmbarrassed532 | 17 hours ago
Dude is an incel that only saw any of those online. Like most people with these opinions, they haven’t left their country.
Legal-Chocolate8482 | 13 hours ago
Lmao you know it costs like 20 pounds to fly to Poland right? Even sometimes just 9 quid. Lemme guess you think everyone is an American online. Believe it or not a world outside the Us exists. In the Uk we go on weekend benders for just 20 pounds to Poland or Croatia or wherever and stay in 10 pound hostels.
The train ticket to the airport costs more than the flights. Hell going out locally costs more than flying to Croatia or Spain or Poland and going out there.
And Paris is widely trashed by most people I’ve meet who’ve gone there. Just look up Paris syndrome , Japanese tourists literally get medical shock when seeing what a dump Paris is today.
SchemeWestern3388 | 16 hours ago
Reported for clearly being underage.
v12vanquish | 16 hours ago
Argumentium ad racism isn’t an argument and we’re all dumber for reading what you wrote
Demka-5 | 16 hours ago
chip on your shoulder?
Chlearcus | 11 hours ago
One of the few European countries that is safe and improving in that area every year, having great GDP growth, and actually working to improve the lives of its own citizens instead of people from the other side of the world.. How horrible!
Adventurous-Bee-5934 | 11 hours ago
People like you are why the right wing is rising
rintzscar | 15 hours ago
Please, never come to Europe. Thank you.
IsoldeInInk | 17 hours ago
Did the same.
AdministrationSea96 | 4 hours ago
Why then Poland doesn't pay into the EU budget but instead still the biggest recipient of the EU funds ? If they are as rich as Japan they can be asked to contribute now into the United Europe idea.
kompocik99 | 2 hours ago
Poland is not even in the top ten biggest beneficiaries per capita. Actually, it's one of the lowest.
EU funds are not a charity. Countries like Germany or France advocated for Poland (and other countries in the east) to join the EU to open a market of milions of people next to them. They get back more than they ever paid.
AdministrationSea96 | an hour ago
The point is that they are almost as rich as Japan and should be now contributing instead of taking out.
virtual9931 | an hour ago
Rich? National debt skyrockets, more and more loans from EU. We are not rich, elites are ;) and foreign corporations because they are not paying taxes in Poland - in fact small and medium businesses are paying more taxes than foreign corps.
mastershuiyi | an hour ago
Confusing GDP with wealth is a fundamental mistake. GDP measures annual economic output, not accumulated national wealth. Poland may have a higher GDP per capita by certain measures, but Japan remains one of the world's largest net creditor nations, with vastly greater accumulated foreign assets.
BoringAd1876 | 7 hours ago
Japan has been thoroughly overtaken by Korea and Taiwan over the past few years, and now it is being chased by Poland. They've completely screwed up.
Geigengiger | 22 hours ago
And as a thank you for receiving their very own Marshall Plan from the EU, they grow increasingly isolationist and stage a constitutional crisis.
czrolalej | 22 hours ago
The constitutional crisis is literally casued by a push from our pro-EU government to fix a system that was broken by the isolationists, the fuck do you want?
Ok_Inflation_1811 | 21 hours ago
Why did you vote for an anti EU government before this one?
Angry-Sek-man | 17 hours ago
Because in 2015 during Refugee Crisis, mainstream EU went insane and wanted to force Middle Eastern/African migrants into Poland. So PIS was elelcted.
Now, 10 years later, idea and policy when it comes to immigration, of said PIS is European mainstream.
When center go insane/can't deliver changes extremes go into power, same is happening in France right now
czrolalej | 21 hours ago
Because we are evil obviously, and you are so good and noble for being high and mighty about something you can't be bothered to even read about.
spiaca-salata | 20 hours ago
Maybe the reason is the same as in Brexit case and trump election?
Ok_Inflation_1811 | 20 hours ago
That the population in those countries is dumb?
JefeRex | 17 hours ago
If a few people do something destructive and you see the folly, they’re dumb. If every rich country in the west is being swept by the same mindset and political outcomes on a scale of millions and growing, and you can’t find an explanation or anticipate where it is inevitably headed without major intervention, you are the dumb one.
There are reasons, consistent reasons that more and more smart people find compelling. If you have no good explanation and can’t evaluate or understand that reality, the dumb people are not them but you.
czrolalej | 16 hours ago
I mean, no, electing weird fascists is dumb and anyone who votes for them is a dupe. Not being smart enough to do actual analysis on why people make that choice may make one dumb, but it does nothing to make the thing we try crtiqueing smart.
spiaca-salata | 20 hours ago
Mind your words young boy/lady
majkkali | 18 hours ago
No we don’t. It’s only a vocal minority that proclaims this. Most Poles want to keep being a part of EU.
UnbitePl | 14 hours ago
Buddy you get your news from reddit and article headlines. Actually get informed on the subject matter before spouting misinformation.
machine4891 | 15 hours ago
>And as a thank you for receiving their very own Marshall Plan from the EU,
Portugal is receiving that "Marshall Plan 2" from EU for 20 more years. What was their WW2 destruction again?
Maybe stop calling EU funds that everyone receive "Marshall Plan" or repaymant and we will be good. Otherwise you're just singling out countries out of the whim.
Sykolewski | 15 hours ago
Oh really?? I earn only 1200 euro after taxes ,thanks to my rigoristic way of spending ,i am able to save around 500 euros. Over 33% of what i earn,is taken by tax
sebastianinspace | 21 hours ago
but does poland have japanese toilets yet?
word count word count word count word count word count word count word count word count word count word count word count word count word count word count word count word count
mrjerichoholic99 | 23 hours ago
It's a mix of two things: Poland's incredible growth since the fall of socialism, and Japan's decline. Whenever global inflation and interest rates are high, the yen just gets hammered.
manliness-dot-space | 21 hours ago
What's wild is the demographics they have and the various decisions they made to reject the "diversity is our strength" hypothesis that western European countries decided to test on themselves.
Weirdo9495 | 21 hours ago
Western European countries aren't nearly as big or explicit of proponents of "diversity is our strength" as the US. And you happen to be an American, so why don't you use your own country as example here?
Also, you probably have no idea about challenges Poland faces (like its extremely low birthrates and fastest aging population in Europe), or how its improvement was in great deal enabled by Western European investments, subsidies and common market...
manliness-dot-space | 19 hours ago
Sounds like Western European countries made a lot of dumb decisions
ArmedWithBars | 17 hours ago
Diversity and controlled immigration is great for a country. Immigrants come and integrate into society over time. While first Gen are typically a net loss, 2nd Gen are typical net positive.
What isn't great is accepting mass migrants. This causes immigrants to congregate instead of intergrate. They build their own semi-isolated communities and over time with enough of a population it will cause cultural clashes, especially if they are from countries with fundamentally opposing culture (compared to progressive western society). For a melting pot to work there needs to be a melt.
Poland made the controversial choice but the correct choice. Controlled immigration and majority from countries that hold similar cultural beliefs to their own, such as Ukraine. These groups will integrate into Polish culture over time without much issue.
Poland is looking at the rest of Europe right now and whispering "I told you so".
manliness-dot-space | 17 hours ago
Describe the specific metrics you're measuring rather than an opinion that it's "great"
Since, obviously, we might form different opinions about these metrics and if they are great or not.
ArmedWithBars | 16 hours ago
Only so many ways to counter a population decline without state mandated child birth or throwing piles of cash at young adults to hopefully have children. Immigration is a counter to this, even though it's not perfect nor ideal. Fixing deep seeded economic issues causing population declines is astronomically harder than just importing bodies.
Look at the US through history, many of the greatest leaps in technical innovation were from immigrants. I'm not talking new world settler offspring either. Bringing in perspectives and talents from across the globe is a good thing, when controlled.
manliness-dot-space | 16 hours ago
There was roughly a 30% population decline in Europe after the plague.
What was the result for the survivors?
Population reduction is a threat to the ruling elites because a decrease in the tax cattle they own brings them closer in wealth to the cattle.
But yes, if immigration is structured in such a way as to brain-drain other nations and only import the top performers, of course this would result in the resulting pool of people becoming high performers...assuming cultural compatibility.
TeeRKee | 16 hours ago
Yet, their population is aging and shrinking by 150k ppl every year.
Sherm | 15 hours ago
>What isn't great is accepting mass migrants. This causes immigrants to congregate instead of intergrate.
This is literally, almost word for word the complaint that was leveled in the US against the Irish, Italians, and even ironically enough, Poles. Like, I can show you a pamphlet printed by the KKK in the early 1920s that makes exactly this argument. It pops up constantly over time, nearly always asserted by someone who puts it forward as if it's some self-evident truth that requires no support. But we have numerous examples of populations integrating with practically no attempt made to force the issue. Hell, it happens so naturally that making sure it didn't happen after the Civil War required a decadeslong campaign of terror codified into the law. And it still didn't work.
The evidence you're wrong is all around you. It's just so normalized to you that you can't even see it.
ArmedWithBars | 15 hours ago
The key difference between the historical examples and now is cultural. Euro immigrants back then were culturally close compared to the existing Americans. Take a progressive French and compare them to a north African fundamentalist Muslim. It's two entirely different cultures that clash at a fundamental level. It's not a problem when they are being drip fed into the culture, but just opening the proverbial flood gates is straight bad.
Let's not forget that global perception has changed on the west (including Europe). People back then were immigrating with the sole purpose to integrate into the west for a better life. There wasn't decades of anti-western sentiment spread through communication channels (which aren't even close to the modern internet). Many of these people coming over hate the west and what it stands for, they are simply using the west for the economic opportunities they don't have at their home nation. They have no plan to ever integrate into the culture. This is the issue with mass migration in modern day.
Sherm | 13 hours ago
> Many of these people coming over hate the west and what it stands for, they are simply using the west for the economic opportunities they don't have at their home nation.
Yes, and 100 years ago, Italians and Irish were "servants of the Holy See" who were being sent here to subvert and destroy our way of life. There's not a single argument you're making that wasn't deployed against Europeans at some point. Here, read all about it. All the same arguments you're making, about people who were already integrating even as they were making them. If you want to claim things are different now, you're going to have to do better than "that was then and this is now," because your rhetoric suggests otherwise.
manliness-dot-space | 10 hours ago
Do you have data that suggests it wasn't a mistake even back then?
Just because the US survived after doesn't automatically mean it was a good decision.
Also if I just look around at all of the places in the US where I don't want to live, it happens to be the same places that were the landing zones for those historic huddled masses.
So... why are you just assuming it was helpful?
HarmfuIThoughts | 8 hours ago
I don't know about back then, but we have data that it's a good idea today. East and South Asians are incredible contributors to the US economy.
Psycholama972 | 23 hours ago
Does that mean they will stop taking money from the European Union or is that going to keep happening.
Word count words count word count word count
(Sorry)
EuropeanLord | 22 hours ago
It stops very soon, on the other hand if you take a look why Poland needed all that money and you rewind back to 1939 then you wouldn’t be so salty about it.
xdarkeaglex | 21 hours ago
1939 - 1989 would be way more accurate. Poland isn't even taking the most money per capita but the other guy doesnt want to actually know the truth. He just want to shit on Poles.
machine4891 | 15 hours ago
Things wasn't too shabby in 1795 - 1917 period as well, as we had literally no say in our country's direction.
Salt-Freedom-2419 | 21 hours ago
We were invited! Punch was served!
Psycholama972 | 19 hours ago
Oh I wasn’t angry at all I’m not from Europe I was just legitimately curious as too what was happening.
kot-sie-stresuje | 13 hours ago
It was a promise. First democratic president of Poland after soviet union fall. Promised the Poland will be second Japan. Now we have that realization. Although Lech Wałęsa, peace nobel prize winner, promised that in early 90's. When Japan economy was bigger then currently. However stagnation and recession cycles there allowed Poland to catch up, but that also required a lot of work and help like from EU.
RebbitUzer | 9 hours ago
Yet they are very unhappy with Ukraine exporting their grain to EU through Poland. In fact they completely blocked it some time ago. They might be rich in money terms, but not that rich in morale/virtues.
Master-Weight-2676 | an hour ago
And you think the Japanese are rich in morals?