Like in anything high tech you need either massive subsidies or network effects, this is why things have built up in Taiwan, Shenzhen and South Korea, with remnants in the US, EU and a bit more Japan as all three thought they can let the market play out, fell a bit behind, and then the network effects won out.
Similarly the car industry - Germany (and Japan) rose due to massive investment and network effects, then the shareholders put in CEOs with a clear mission just to milk the cows and get wealth out of the system; this gave China a chance to go all in on investments and overtake them on innovation and price. This has nothing to do with regulation, just with short-termism and the inherent diseases of a "pure" capitalism.
That there are few new innovative companies coming up is probably more due to regulations (need to figure out how to make the product work and be legal in various regimes). In turn that they don't scale is due to less financing options and a much more fragmented market (to sell in France and Spain and Poland you need to translate everything and adapt it to local expectations and payment standards.. to sell in Florida, Minnesota and Texas you just need to throw a single English version up.
A shame that the national governments keep blocking any real integration of the financial and regulatory regimes at EU level, this would solve the startup and scale up issues to a large degree. The EU just proposed "EU Inc" as a solution, not sure this will not be ground up in 27 regimes...
A new regulation when importing into Europe, is that you need to show that import materials do not have toxic substances, ... on ... shipping labels (meaning the physical labels are free from harmful chemicals like BPA, PFAS, or PVC).
You need from every company that ships from China, they need to provide certificates that their shipping labels are toxic free.
Pulled from AI because i hate summarizing this...
* EU Ecolabel: The gold standard in Europe. It officially guarantees that a product has low aquatic toxicity, a reduced environmental footprint, and strictly limited hazardous substances throughout its life cycle.
* EN 13432 Certification: If using compostable labels (like those from Better Packaging Co.), this mandatory European standard ensures the label, liner, and adhesive break down safely in industrial composting without leaving toxic chemical residues.
* FSC (Forest Stewardship Council): Certifies that the paper backing and label face stock are sourced from sustainably managed, non-destructive forests.
* Phenol-Free / BPA-Free Declarations: Thermal printing labels must formally declare compliance with EU Regulation 2016/2235, which legally restricts bisphenols in thermal paper across the European Economic Area.
Its a mess of paperwork ... We have not talked about a ton of others, and those are on the import side.
We had some fun discussions about vitamine pill manufacturing, where importing materials made it "made in China".
But if we imported the raw material, and the capsules are made in Europe, and its mixed / bottled here. Well, made in Europe. But the prime materials that goes into your body is from China ... Does not matter.
But wait, if the capsules are made in China and mixed / bottled here in Europe, then its still made in China. Because the capsule somehow made the difference?! I do not remember the details but the amount of easy customer cheating that can be done with "Made in EU / Germany / France"..
I can go on with some of the insanities i get told about ... There are good rules but a lot are like this mix that make no sense, and you can almost hear that somebody pushed for exceptions when the rule was designed. So you get this odd crap that half the time makes no sense.
Hard to do business when the rules are often a issue.
One of the issues mentioned is PFAS, ... ignoring the fact that we have tons of PFAS pollutions already in our soils and not a darn thing is done.
We live very close to one of those sites, but its always excuses after excuse to solve. But PFAS on labels, panic, panic, ... The whole label issue can easily be solved by random sampling at import and a fine system. That automatically puts backpressure to fix it. No need for certificates left and right.
My point is that we keep making bureaucratic rules, that make every step more difficult for entrepreneurs here in Europe, instead of having a proper compliance setup. There is a entire industry around yearly audits (that cost 10.000's), like people who do it non-stop suddenly forget how to do it.
That is the issue ... Its not about rules but about barriers that make often setup in such a way to be barriers of entry/working, then compliance.
Tell me, how many times do you go to have your car checked. Yearly or every two years? That is one of those example where in some countries its yearly, other twice. Do the countries with two years have issues with their car park. No ... The result is the same but some people get to be inconvenienced twice (and pay twice). Do you understand it a bit more now?
There are rules and there are rules that add little beyond making everything difficult, when it can be solved in a better way.
Specifically, imaging sensors. Canon still makes their own sensors in Japan, and Sony makes all sorts of sensors that are used both by competitors in the camera space as well as Phones, (e.x. Apple after over a decade is only now starting to diversify with Samsung US Fabbed sensors,) Dashcams and Security Cams(Even a lot of the Chinese built ones, if you see STARVIS it's a Sony sensor)
That said, Imaging sensors do hit a curious level of 'needing bleeding edge but is not necessarily as complex as a cpu'. i.e. you're striving for precision and quality but the part itself is a lot more 'repetitive' across the silicon area compared to a CPU.
On a side note, none of the TSMC fabs in the US are cutting edge. They're all at least a generation behind.
TSMC Arizona is a "gigafab" built in phases. The 4nm fab is already built and in volume production of chips for Apple and Nvidia. The 3nm fab construction is complete, and the 2nm (current SOTA) is under construction slated to start chip production in 2028.
In other words: TSMC Arizona isn't SOTA - it is lagging 3 years (~1.5 nodes) behind.
Taiwan isn't stupid. It knows that keeping SOTA domestically is the only way it can rely on the US for protection. The second their fabs aren't absolutely crucial for cutting-edge chips anymore, the US will drop them like a brick - and China will happily devour the country.
Or, more likely, due to energy prices.
there are several nuclear plants operation in Europe, some countries also just announced to restart some of their old power plants. There are no regulations that prevent any of the countries from doing it, each country makes that decision for themselves and has their own reasons to do it or not to do it
The Gerhard Schröder that
> Since leaving public office, Schröder has worked for Russian state-owned energy companies, including Nord Stream AG, Rosneft, and Gazprom.[2]
The whole world essentially stopped building nuclear power plants at the end of the 1970s and there's one obvious answer which you guys just can't accept, so you keep inventing one stab-in-the-back narrative after another for why nuclear energy failed.
China has over 30 nuclear power plants currently in development, the only way nuclear "failed" is the industry's failure to convince dumb boomers not to regulate it out of existence in the west.
Could the "EU has too much bureaucracy" users even say how much more bureaucracy EU is producing compared to the US and China? I doubt it. The US Congress has produced some insane behemoths of laws where the glossary is bigger than your average EU directive, so please put some numbers behind your claims.
Lastly, I think the average HN user just doesn't understand that the EU streamlines regulation across 28 countries, which is almost the opposite of coming up with new regulations. It makes things easier. But that would already require an iota of knowledge past the HN kneejerk worldview.
Are you earnestly confused or are you being rhetorical? The US has a long history of subsidies across nearly its entire catalogue of exports.
With Europe, I have no idea what they aim to achieve. They are losing their auto industry. Energy is so expensive they are losing their chemical and metallurgy industries. They are not moving to tech. They are not, as far as I know, investing heavily in any area at all other than spending money on stuff made elsewhere.
What is the plan for Europe's economy? Tourism?
Yeah, I am advocating for I would like to happen (hopefully INTEL and AMD will put a RISC-V decodecs on their µarchitecture out of good will... yeah since they hold the x86 and x86_64 IP then excluding all alternatives de-facto... the incentive is.. negative.
If I am not mistaken, EU is currently pouring money in defence. For defence needs, one state-of-art chip build line is enough... the EU armies could even share it.
Then you add in "services" and "assets growth" to cook the numbers (don't forget to incldue illegal drug trafficking and illegal prostitutions numbers to jack things up even more even though you have no real data about it), and magically everything in the the green, although pensions are decreasing, retirement age is increasing, social benefits are being cut left and right, but don't worry brother, we're in the green!
What value was added here? None, gdp is meaningless in post industrial countries, it wasn't designed to measure anything other than industrial outputs.
But if your core take is “GDP is meaningless in post industrial countries”, then you’re at a level of crank not worth engaging with
1k of produced steel is 1kg of produced steel, no matter how you look at it.
How much value does illegal prostitution brings to you country though? Someone had to come up with a number apparently
The main issues Europa has are dependency on Energy imports, an unhealthy but fixable dependency on US IT tech, an ongoing war with Russia, and an aging population. Renewables are are really good idea, immigration would also help a lot, but is politically difficult.
Uranium is energy-dense enough that it could come by private jet and still be cheap.
I think you could make that argument (at least structurally) as late as the 2000s when batteries and solar were still un-economical. Today it's very possible to power a modern economy without fossil fuels in almost every sector except long haul trucking, a few industrial processes, and aviation, and those together are a small percentage of overall fossil fuel use. Aviation and trucking are less than 10% of oil use.
Europe doesn't have an energy shortage that's not self-inflicted. Becoming dependent on Russian gas combined with anti-nuclear in Germany probably contribute. German greens are basically an advertising arm of Gazprom. (Just like how America's huge inflation is self-inflicted via dumb tariffs and unnecessary wars. We should pay politicians an extra bonus to do nothing.)
The most likely explanation for Europe's stagnation is a mix of stifling bureaucracy, low birth rates, brain drain (mostly to the US), and policies that are explicitly growth-limiting.
Is this a real question?
- just bend down to harvest, nature has done all the work over millions of years
- energy dense as fuck
- reliable, it doesn't matter if you have sun, wind, if it's winter or summer
- easy to store and transport
- can be transformed into fertiliser, which allowed us to feed more people, for cheaper and more easily
- literal building block of everything that made what the world is today: plastics, medicine, synthetic fibers, etc.
- allowed us to transform materials which required high temperatures: metal, glas, etc.
We're quite literally a fossil fuel society...
Ah yes, oil extraction, refinement, and transport is a famously simple and low-capital process.
I have seen this raised as yet another interesting Fermi paradox idea: maybe our planet is unusual in that it stored up a giant store of easily exploitable energy to bootstrap a technological civilization.
Cool, "added" is doing a lot of work here. We're still mostly relying on fossils, about ~70% of our mix.
> Solar and batteries continue to get cheaper
Bonus question: how much does it cost to build a solar panel or wind mill when fossils get 2x, 5x, 10x more expensive? When we run our of fossils?
It's cheaper than nuclear. If one is discussing vs. renewables, then Europe is comparatively poorly situated to exploit those, especially solar.
I think Europe's larger problem is a smothering blanket of taxation and regulation. Good for standard of living in the short term (or at least was), but not good for growth and long term competitiveness.
And obviously energy too, until Europe completely electrifies .
So it's quite a big deal when gas goes from being cheap and reliable to expensive and unreliable.
Citation needed, or I don't know what "very possible" actually means. Possible perhaps, but not realistic, and certainly not economical.
The best Europeans are 10x worse, only China is catching up with only 2x worse.
Europe is allied with Taiwan and South Korea, and until recently also with the United States. Those countries can't build new chip factories without European lithography. Do you want everyone to innovate and grow by having each country focus on what they are good at, or do you want everyone to burn trillions reinventing the wheel over and over again solely for their own domestic market?
The grandparent literally said "it would pack more punch if ASML wasn't the only go-to example European company accomplishing something in tech."
Do you consider ASML to be a web-commerce or adware business? If yes, then I am not sure you could be helped.
If not, then how is this relevant to the discussion?
It seems to me it would make sense if it were:
it would pack more punch if ASML WAS the only go-to example...
Is that what it's supposed to be? And then, since it isn't the only go-to example it must follow that the example packs little punch.
If it is supposed to be that perhaps the person you are responding to misunderstood and thought it actually meant exactly what it said, which after all was that ASML IS the only go-to example. And thinking what it seemed to be saying was actually what was meant they responded to that.
However I think you and I agree that what was actually meant was a sarcastic observation that hey, ASML is not the only go-to example European company thus this carries a reasonable amount of punch, it was just poorly phrased.
The iPhones that are “made in india” contain sub-assemblies that are made in china, that contain chips that are made in taiwan, made of metals that were mined in africa, wrapped in plastics derived from middle east oil.
A good metric is the difference in value between the precursor and the final product; for most Indian phone production, it's less than 1%. This is also a big reason why Indian export headlines are a bit silly; they never account for the increased import associated with the high value components.
Unclear if this will change going forward; there are some companies doing a higher proportion of the value chain in India, and some big incentives... But to me it's unlikely.
I don’t think that’s the whole story. Apple started making phones in india in 2017, back when the tariff situation was merely a twinkle in epstein’s best friend’s eye. I think back then it was about general supply chain diversity, more than tariffs specifically. Useful in cases of natural disasters, or trade embargo, and leverage in business negotiations.
By 2024 they were making 36 million iPhones in India, you don’t get to that capacity if you start in november, after the election. Way I see it india was the backup system, and tariffs are the reason they are using the backup system - not the reason they built the backup system in the first place.
> A good metric is the difference in value between the precursor and the final product;
I agree, that’s a useful metric, especially in this case. But it’s also not perfect. E.g. it’s easy to have a >50% “made in USA” product if all the parts are made in china but the last assembly step takes time. Labour in the US is more expensive, so 5-10min of clicking parts together can easily cost more than the parts themselves. You could increase the capacity of that type of manufacturing indefinitely without ever gaining any real independence.
Most of China development is sui generis and not replicable elsewhere.
It's too easy to get tied up in political labels, when any hybrid of public and private support for those helps growth. None of political ideas has an exclusive lock on providing the factors. At this point, I really don't think any political system guarantees the development outcomes, there are examples of all labels which fail one to all of those progress factors.
I lived there, Mister Confidently-Incorrect!
It sounds like you're saw Singapore Fun Facts once, and in your mind it permanently excluded any other place from having similar features.
* Like I said, Hong Kong does have a significant sovereign wealth fund that ranks in the top 10. [0]. It doesn't stop mattering just because Singapore runs a bigger one.
* Here's a article from 2021 with a nice stacked-graph showing 45% public housing [1], close to the half I mentioned.
That is actually something of a natural phenomenon (see [0] it is a large topic). Historically when a centre of excellence forms it tends to be a tight geographical region learning how to do work well.
Government policy should be cluster-friendly but as long as policy doesn't get in the way it happens naturally. The incentives on businesses are to form a cluster independently because the cluster in-group outcompetes businesses outside the cluster.
"One example we use is the No.3 Memory of Lenin Tractor Repair Factory in Zhuhai, which already in 1973 had started repairing tractors outside the plan. It would take tractors that needed to be repaired from other units, repair them on the side of the plan, and then get payment in kind. That payment in kind was then either bartered further within Guangdong, or smuggled downriver to Hong Kong. By 1973 this unit had a Hong Kong bank account. If this had been discovered at the central level, these people would have been shot."
Turning Shenzhen from an off-limits border area into a special economic zone made it easy for those businesses to go legit and grow, but they were already waiting in the shadows to seize that opportunity.
There are a few more SEZs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_economic_zones_of_Chin... but none did as well as Shenzhen, probably because of location factors.
If the government plans to try free-market capitalism then I'm in favour of the plan.
In my opinion, India is around 30 years behind China. This is unlikely to change for several reasons. However, the primary reason is that no Indian government ever had a manufacturing policy that comes close to China's. The service economy is strong but employs a tiny percentage of the population.
Most of Indian government spending is on welfare followed by endemic corruption. It leaves very little money for nation building.
That’s great, but does not translate well to ..say.. manufacturing modern chips or jet engines.
US patents are only valid in the US. India is not "ignoring" anything by not following foreign laws. Can someone with an Indian patent enforce it in the US?
"A PCT application does not itself result in the grant of a patent, since there is no such thing as an "international patent", and the grant of patent is a prerogative of each national or regional authority."
So, actually, No.
Design, the gap is nonexistent in terms of talent deployed (though we have some way to go to have homegrown product companies). Which puts us roughly where Europe is.
Also consider, a tiny percentage of the Indian population is a ridiculous number of people. Dwarfing pretty much any other country except China.
Your last point on welfare and corruption is also false; 35% of government spend is on interest payments (which is kind of normal for most countries?) and 30% is on infrastructure and other capex. Defence is 8% and central welfare schemes plus co-sponsored schemes with the states are only 26%. The point being, while corruption is definitely a problem, it doesn’t significantly come out of the central budget. And welfare is smaller than infrastructure spending even if it’s quite significant (and it better be, in a country like this).
Only an estimated 6 million Indians work in IT and tech services where the money is. India's working age population is approximately 950 million. India had the golden opportunity to bring manufacturing to India when Western companies wanted to reduce their dependence on China. But it wasted it.
I don't know where you are getting that 30% spending on infrastructue.
How many people do you think could conceivably work in manufacturing? And who buys all those manufactured goods? The social problem isn’t solved by quotas.
India's data collection is much worse than China's but we can also look at other metrics like exports. India exports less in total value than a resource-starved, tiny nation like South Korea.
https://www.perplexity.ai/search/3aba98a3-cba1-49d8-bcb4-869...
Thus, India could at least add another 100 million manufacturing jobs, along with an additional 100 million service jobs to support manufacturing in logistics, trade, maintenance, customer support, insurance, and food service.
Given the structure of Indian constitution which gives very little power to local governments to raise revenue and build infrastructure, India is structurally limited as of now from ever becoming as developed as China, let alone western countries.
I see India becoming more like Brazil than China. That's not necessarily a bad thing since even Brazil is 4-5x richer in per capita than India.
The opposite, all historical clear paths i.e. manufacturing/export led model is closed/closing (geopolitics + being automated away). Less clear service export also closing. The growth path that employs 100s of millions and 10s of millions are not available to Indian.
Reality is even PRC with most favorable conditions still left behind ~400m people because there's only so many opportunities. It's one thing to have ~1B who made it supporting ~400m who didn't vs India trending towards 1.7 B... and if they end up with 500m that makes it, and 1.2B that doesn't, then things may get very ugly in terms of governance. Now that 500m middle/upper class is large enough that India will in aggregate "make it" as geopolitical power, as in climb the tech tree, but due to sheer population and opportunities that looks now foreclosed, most of Indian's statistically, simply, won't. And when numerator/denominator of haves/have not too skewed, there's nothing haves can do (redistribute) even if they wanted to, which lbh, they won't. IMO this pretty much baked in dynamic for India for next few generations, unless we discover abundance.
Depends on what you mean by "a little behind". Reading Patrick McGee's "Apple in China" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_in_China) made me think otherwise.
I'm hoping for India development but that is quite far from the truth yet.
IMO the evidence suggests it is mostly tax policy and whether people are allowed to start and run businesses. Culture is important insofar as it affects those areas of policy. Getting wealthy is literally as simple as being able to create new wealth and keep it, plus lots of time. People don't choose to stay poor unless someone with a gun forces them to be poor.
Yes, that sums it up. The biggest problem is government officials who get in the way of starting or running a business, ask for bribes, and generally make it impossible to do any non-software non-backoffice business work. Plus taxes.
- As another commenter has noted, modern China is Communist only in name.
- Your analysis of how simple creating new wealth is, or how people only stay poor when a "gun forces them to" makes it painfully obvious that you and I grew up in different wealth classes. It's not that simple to acquire wealth, and poverty is a massive feedback loop. Wealth compounds, and so does poverty. This is the nature of capitalism.
Arguably India has the class system tied to the prevailing religion, but religion too has faded with modernity. Systems have a habit of breaking under strain and time.
Does India's caste system work like that? Can a lower caste person apply to be in a higher caste?
> Reality is that every country has its own way of sorting wealth to the most favored.
No shit!
However, when I discuss the issues with wealth distribution here in America, no one goes, "But India has a caste system!"
Yet apparently pointing out issues with India's wealth distribution, I'm met with deflection, blame games and a horde of people patronizingly assuming without cause that I live under a rock and have no grasp of global economics, politics or history.
China on the other hand defined your government benefits and the jobs you may get based on where you were born. People born rurally have to fake documents to work illegally in cities.
India has a ton of problems, but china is much worse when it comes to human rights. It's not even right to compare the two countries. India is a flawed somewhat liberal democracy (especially for the region of the world, India is a shining beacon on a hill surrounded by repressive regimes), while China is essentially a dictatorship
It was also designed for a clear purpose (slowing down migration into cities that weren't ready to accept it) and was pretty successful, it just outlived its usefulness and became corrupt. Not the same as something based on ancient class divisions that was probably never that useful in the first place.
People work illegally because getting a stamp legally is hard if you don't have money or contacts in the local administration. Same reason as illegal immigrants anywhere else. The central government has been pushing to raise registration quotas and make the process easier but it's clearly not enough.
---
absolute OT trivia that I needed a place to drop: the Indian karma system do not consider beings outside of animal kingdom, e.g. a roadside tree, to be alive and directly involved in the karma and reincarnation and all that, and apparently so did not the original Indian Buddhism. It was originally Chinese, and more prominently Japanese, exposition and localization of Buddhism that changed it up to be the current Studio Ghibli form of it that yes mountains and rivers and 100 year old Italian combat biplanes can all be alive and sentient and that you just ate a carrot is a sort of your original sin and even strictest of vegetarianism is not guilt-free. Your LLM can elaborate on this if necessary...
I educated myself and didn't participate. I resisted. I have little sympathy for those who cannot do the same in their own lives. It's a choice to adapt toxic culture into your life due to social pressures. We all have the internet now.
All I see is cultural and national biases coming out. I simply did not comment on China's own economic and democratic issues, but everyone assumed I either was ignorant or am playing favorites.
For the rest of us, I think we need to be reasonable in our assessments, especially when the other country under discussion is China.
Seems like it isn’t a system worth defending. China has so many issues, it also blows my mind that people around here defend and praise China like they’re doing good things. They aren’t.
There are some pockets where this is not true, but they are exceptions.
And those comments aren't defending it.
Upward mobility is available in India, too. But remember that to have "upward mobility", there needs to be place at the top. For a country which has been under hundreds of years of regressive colonial rulers, there is not much place at the top.
Global wealth is much more in the US than in India right now, so it is not wise to compare rags-to-riches of the US with those of India.
India's government jobs, elite engineering and medical seats have a legal 50%+ quota for "lower" castes people. Did you know that? So, I am saying, 50%+ students graduating ALL elite engineering and law and medical and nursing schools, etc. are from these "lower" castes. Did you know that?
> Global wealth is much more in the US than in India right now, so it is not wise to compare rags-to-riches of the US with those of India.
I agree and will go further to point out that the "rags to riches" story of the US is mostly a fairytale propped up by a few exceptions. I grew up impoverished and have seen over and over how it affects the trajectory of my life in ways out of my control. Any remarkable success on my part would be in spite of the American economic system, not because of it.
I have always been taught that greatness is in work (karma), and not in birth (janma), and honestly I have seen it practiced.
A "lower" caste High School teacher gets visibly much more respect in our society than a random priest from "higher" caste.
Not to say it isn’t a problem. But race is still a problem elsewhere too.
Yet, we also outlawed slavery and Jim Crow laws in the US and yet my local prison in the Deep South is filled with 90%+ Black people. We outlawed redlining and yet the modern credit score system does an excellent job of continuing the purpose of preventing Black people from getting loans and leveraging their wealth.
All this to say, my understanding is the sentiment and infrastructure are still in place regarding India's caste system.
This is like saying America's racial quotas (or former ones) put you in a 'bucket'. Caste is essentially race / genetics. You are not bucketed, it is simply a reality of your ancestry. Of course you can't change it.. you cannot change your genetics. This is a ridiculous goal post.
Caste is very much alive in India and this sort of blanket denialism reeks of upper caste privilege.
If caste is all that irrelevant, please go ahead with changing your surname to an obviously lower caste one. We will see how quickly you come crawling back to your so called “irrelevant” caste privilege.
Honestly the caste never comes up. In almost any conversation. And I also grew up far away from megacities.
I only heard a couple of priests blabber about the glory of their caste, but they were piss poor and had nothing else to be proud of. And they were bad as priests as well. That is, you wouldn't call them if you care about pure Sanskrit pronunciation, carefulness and seriousness during rituals, etc.
The people who suffered are dead. The people who committed discrimination are dead. Yet the whole nation has to accomodate. Reservation must be done on Pro-Rata basis. If one state like Kerela is advanced, doesn't do caste discrimination and another like Bihar is very much into it. Then only Bihar state should reservation, not whole of India.
As for changing caste... You only need to reference it if you're seeking government benefit. If you don't care about it, stop keeping track, and don't share it with your kids... They'll never know and just get assigned general or whatever they call it. Of course, since caste is literally genetic, anyone doing a genetic test will quickly figure it out. However a gene test is not enough for seeking caste benefit status if I understand correctly, so this is as erased as you can get
> people bring up the caste system as if it's the cause of every issue there or as if other countries don't have similar problems
This is a straw man; The US is a shit show. China has major problems. The topic is wealth distribution in India.
> While it makes sense for Indian nationals to want their government to do better ... outside observers comparing ought to benchmark countries against one another fairly
I am allowed to study and comment on the state of any government I please. Being from the US doesn't change my ability to think critically and again, the topic of my comment is not "a benchmark of all countries fairly", it's a discussion on future wealth distribution in India.
> All countries have social inequality
Sure! Doesn't change a thing.
> If India were to eliminate social inequality it would become superior to most countries on the planet.
Besides the point. No one here is arguing about where India fits into some arbitrary ranking of countries.
> For the rest of us, I think we need to be reasonable in our assessments, especially when the other country under discussion is China.
China has massive wealth distribution issues as well. We all remember the recent bank runs. That doesn't mean India doesn't have its own problems, which I have brought up.
Comparing the lack of a legal caste system because “of some sort” to a legal framework is quite the leap.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_dependen...
Coloreds are still hugely overrepresented in the criminal "justice" system, they're still much poorer on average, are still disenfranchised en-masse through gerrymandering and voter ID requirements that accept shooters' club membership cards but not ID cards poorer blacks might possess, etc.
For all intents and purposes, the USA has a caste system that has evolved from an earlier system that was apartheid in all but name.
So did India until 1843 (legally) and, like the rest of the world, still has many people in forced labor and human trafficking in essentially slave relationships.
Govt do work as long as beneficiaries are good friends - tatas and adani for example. I cautiously optimistic
Edit: AI claims HVAC and air filtering/handling can be 40-50% of energy usage. Plus a megawatt per EUV scanner (ok, the latter matches what I would have guessed, but compared to the 16 MW of a single large bucket wheel excavator or estimates I've seen for large shopping malls, that's not that insane either).
EUV lithography and etching rooms require ISO class 1 clean rooms. Those can have a maximum of 10 particles of size 0.1 microns per cubic meter.
While a shopping mall can get away with 2 - 4 air changes per hour, an ISO class 1 clean room requires 400-600 an hour, or about 10 a minute. Airflow needs to also be controlled: vertical and laminar. Every human entering the cleanroom needs to undergo an air shower with speeds of 60-90 mph to shear off loose skin flakes, hair and lint. This area needs to maintain constant positive air pressure to repel outside dust as humans move in and out.
In the EUV lithography systems, temperature control is measured in milliKelvins (0.001 C). If a wafer stage has a temperature variation of 0.05 C, the silicon expands by a few nanometers and the multimillion dollar batch is toast. Meanwhile in the same room, the EUV machine is generating extreme ultraviolet light using a plasma light source that gets to above 200,000 C. That's 40x hotter than the surface of the sun.
> I always thought of these as high-precision, not-too-high-volume processes
EUV rooms are churning out about 150 wafers an hour, 24/7. That sounds like not too high of a volume, but each wafer is about 500 cpus. So 75,000 cpus an hour.
They have special security guards who make sure you do the procedure correctly.
You can't use normal plastic or any kind of lubricant anymore because it starts degasing inside the vacuum, pump down after opening to air is a multi-day process that involves heating everything up to 150°C to get rid of the water that will settle on basically every surface when you pull the vacuum, every electricity feedthrough is a potential point of failure, transfering objects between different stages is a huge hassle etc. pp.
I'm sure there's still lots of UHV and HV systems in a chip fab, but there's no way that's easier on a full factory scale than clean room operation.
Heat dissipation would be the obvious problem.
Vacuum does not dissipate heat well (extra engineering in that department)
Vacuum is never 100% vacuum. If you have some dust in the air, it will mostly flow to the direction of the airflow, but in vacuum dust particles will do random walk thing and settle on surfaces.
But even more importantly, they need 2 separate completely independent substation feeds, since a 15 second interruption can cause 0.1B Euro of losses.
Finally, and here is where Europe really really suffers, generally you need these things to be planned, approved and built within a year.
I think that is not even possible in China, let alone in the USA.
A great example of this is trying to compete with the New Space companies.
> Finally, and here is where Europe really really suffers, generally you need these things to be planned, approved and built within a year.
Like the offshore wind farms in the US? I think Europe and China are building these things much faster. ;)
Just to address this separately: there is effectively energy rationing in several European countries, where the government intervenes to prioritize who should receive energy first (e.g., the Netherlands and Denmark).
Solvable but we need to be much smarter and redirect the fossil subsidies to reducing risk for grid-scale batteries and adding more grid capacity.
Water. Energy. Public transport (which is partially privatised). Healthcare has been a disaster.
Same thing for the UK but the results there were much much worse, especially the water (Brexit made it 10x worse). It was driven by the actions of the Unions in the 1970s (where they were taking the mickey) but of course went way way way too far. What was needed was to tweak the system such that the unions couldn't blackmail the Labour governments. Not to break it all up and sell it off for pennies on the dollar.
But yeah, we have one party that is most often in government that just loves privatisation, taxing workers more and the rich less, etc. and engages in a lot of short-term thinking. Apropos short-term thinking, one of them was a prime minister for 14 years and cut defense spending and did not even consider increasing spending when Russia invaded Crimea. And now he is the secretary general of NATO. Talking about failing upwards. Though he is probably primarily chosen for being able to communicate with Trump.
And Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan are also energy poor states that have been able to maintain capacity.
The energy excuse is true for some manufacturing processes like automotive in CEE which were pants that were built in the 1990s to 2000s and leveraged Russian ONG, but is a red herring for a lot of other manufacturing processes in Europe.
European states have a coordination problem as Draghi pointed out 2 years ago.
https://spectrum.ieee.org/taiwan-semiconductor
https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/news/tsmc-could-accoun...
But no, this failure is due a mixture or privatisation and politicians looking no further than the next election, leading to structural underinvestment.
Oh, and the energy transition going faster than even the most forward looking scenarios anticipated.
So that brand-new fab has to pay for itself within the first 3-5 years, or it'll simply never pay for itself. But indeed, once it has paid off its initial construction costs it'll happily keep running for another 10+ years, churning out pure profit.
An additional problem here is that the costs have been rapidly increasing as the nodes have gotten more advanced. The tech for something like, say, the 40nm node is now mature enough that building new fabs isn't too expensive, so there's a decent market for building new ancient fabs for cheap mass production. But with EUV everything has gotten so complicated that there's no reasonable way to make it cheaper as it matures, and scale-wise you're well into the diminishing returns for everything which isn't logic. It is very much doubtful whether building brand-new 7nm-and-smaller fabs for mass production will ever make economic sense.
More to the point, from 2019 they built €17 billion new fab development which doubled the manufacturing capacity available in Ireland and enabled the production of Intel 4, the company’s most advanced process technology.
The Double Irish (& Dutch Sandwich) where Companies routed profits through two Irish-registered subsidiaries, attributing intellectual property royalties to a management seat in a tax haven like Bermuda, is closed since 2015.
Subsequent sequential mismatch structures (the "Single Malt" tool) that replaced the Double Irish for certain firms using non-EU residency loops were also banned. Finally there's a 12.5% charge on unrealized capital gains when a company moves its assets or tax residency out of Ireland.
The headline tax rate and the effective tax rate are also very different things. France's effective corporate tax rate was actually lower than Irelands - but France is an absolutely brutal place to do business in for employers and they've comparatively no english-language tech FDI to speak of.
If you are completely broke and go/are brought to a hospital in the US with an immediate life threatening medical issue, they will still try to save your life.
I am too young for M&M, public schools are the worst and I pay ridiculous amount of money for private education. welfare services? depending on where you live (I live in urban area) welfare services would make sure I am just as homeless as if I didn’t get any welfare service…
and yes, the ER will take me to save my life but that about as low of a bar as one could come up with.
i.e. a 100,000 EUR annual salary, the employer pays ~40,000 EUR to the government, then the employee gets their wage slips with additional deductions of ~38,000 EUR.
= total of ~78,000 EUR tax on a 100,000 EUR salary.
I don't think anything like that level of taxation exists in the US?
At 100,000 USD (a bit lower than EUR) the combined tax load on income for both employee and employer is typically ~30-35% depending on locale. In the US, $100k is pretty close to the median household income.
If you have extremely high incomes (e.g. 1,000,000+ USD) the gap closes a bit but even in the highest tax locales the marginal tax loading maxes out at ~60% of top-line income.
US Federal tax rates are some of the most progressive in the world. Only ~20% of households are net taxpayers after transfer payments and subsidies. Ironically, this is why it is so difficult to significantly increase income tax revenue in the US. It would require the middle-class majority to vote to raise their own taxes.
It's because whenever Intel asks for anything, the Taoiseach, IDA, and Invest Ireland will move mountains to do it.
Ireland is extremely business friendly because their leadership actually listens to industry.
This is where the 'Inside Tennis' knowledge of the Irish Tech industry from someone working within it comes in handy. Enter the 21st Century Luddite, Thomas Reid, from stage left.
Thomas is an eccentric, independent bachelor farmer whose family has owned a 72-acre farm next to Intel's Leixlip manufacturing campus for generations.
Ireland’s State Industrial Development Agency (IDA) attempted to use a Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) to buy Reid's land so that Intel could proceed with a multi-billion euro expansion of its microchip production plant. The land was valued at €5 million. During the negotiations that followed, the farmer was reportedly offered in the region of €10 million. He turned it down. Reid had no interest in being a millionaire. Instead, he continued to live on-site without a telephone or modern amenities while taking on Intel and the state alone.
The battle culminated in a landmark legal fight that went all the way to the Supreme Court of Ireland, where Reid ultimately won a historic victory against corporate overreach and protected his property rights
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lonely_Battle_of_Thomas_Re...
https://www.reddit.com/r/ireland/comments/3s4bg1/how_a_farme...
https://www.irishtimes.com/business/commercial-property/inte...
https://www.rte.ie/culture/2020/1102/1003311-the-lonely-batt...
How does any of this make him a Luddite?
Luddites weren’t anti-technology. They were highly skilled workers that actually wanted to be involved with it.
They wanted technology to serve them not make their conditions worse as they worked with it.
This guy just doesn’t to sell his farm. That’s not the same at all.
I think what the OP wanted to highlight is right here: in China or Taiwan etc. this would not have taken 7 years.
2019: Kick-off
2020: Construction in Ireland basically halted due to Lockdown for 18 months
Q3'2023: Fab 34 begins running a ‘First Full Loop’ of silicon
Q4'2023: Fab 34 completed. Doubles the manufacturing capacity available in Ireland, enabling the production of Intel 4 and Intel 3, some of the company’s most advanced process technologies, and the first to incorporate EUV lithography
2024: Intel sold 49% stake to Apollo GM for $11.2bn
2026: Intel buys back stake for $14.2bn
Q2'2026: Intel announce a further $5.7bn investment to upgrade existing capacity for server chips, slated for completion by late 2027
The issue is with policymaking - coordination between the EU, national, and local governments is weak so high capex projects become risky.
Edit: can't reply
> Your first 3 countries are also incredibly poor comparisons for living standards as they have horrendous work/life balance.
Their hours worked are comparable to most Western European states as well now [0]. Germany is unique in Europe based on hours worked, and is why German industry is pushing to bring back the 40 hour work week.
[0] - https://www.oecd.org/en/data/indicators/hours-worked.html
Your first 3 countries are also incredibly poor comparisons for living standards as they have horrendous work/life balance.
So vague as to be utterly meaningless.
And slow moving regulation literally incentivises high capex long-horizon investment.
Also, slow moving, stable regulation can be better than arbitrary flippancy, but that doesn't mean it directly incentivizes investment, it just means the investment already incentivized by demand can proceed with more confidence that it won't have the rug pulled out from under it, assuming the regulations didn't discourage a tentative proposal in the first place.
And slow moving execution and creation of relevant legislation is a hindrance for capex in high risk projects like those in the semiconductor segment.
The Draghi report was published 2 years ago, and remains largely unimplemented.
[0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Human_Dev...
A country with living standards at Bill Gates levels with perfect good health until 200 where everyone is illiterate has a lower HDI than South Sudan. Even if we fix it by setting the minimum education value at 0.1 billionaires with perfect health land would have a HDI lower than 180 countries. HDI has a 90%+ correlation with GDP. It’s not a worthwhile measure.
What?
This was strategically planned with EU as part of bringing back production locally, similar to CHIPS Act in the US.
And it's not like US has companies doing own manufacturing outside of Intel. CHIPS specifically wanted to address that.
Those alive invest in long term planning, those with a dead drive get conservative in their action.
It’s mostly the Green Party’s fault, as they have been vehemently anti-nuclear since their inception(1970s).
But having read "Stalin" by Stephen Kotkin I've concluded that the USSR was nothing more than a legal construction to increase Russian control over its neighbors.
Moreover, Russia and its coopting of the German Left and Greens is well documented.
Schröder also famously called Putin a "true democrat".
German post-WW2 distrust of anything seen as related to war, plus the fact that Germany has large coal reserves and so less need for nuclear than many other countries, are likely to have contributed to the phenomenon.
Get real.
Also, even the nuclear plants near the coast are often shut down during the summer. E.g. France's Gravelines was running only half it's generators due to jellyfish nearly shutting down the cooling system (at least) the second year in a row.
(Edit: Russian influence is German politics is welle stablished though, but in relation to the right-extremist AFD party)
https://www.energy-charts.info/charts/price_average_map/char...
Furthermore, old nuclear is already paid for, and hence often the cheapest option where available:
https://www.reuters.com/graphics/EUROPE-ENERGY/NUCLEARPOWER/...
1. "Russia is insignificant infinitely small nothing. It's economy is less than economy of Texas!"
2. "Putin and russians are controlling all the world. They bought every world leader, everyone from Trump to Xi is controlled by them! Anything bad that happens in the world from USA to Africa is directly staged by Russia!"
> "Russia is insignificant infinitely small nothing. It's economy is less than economy of Texas!"
It is insignificant on a large scale war against united West, short of using nukes. At the same time it doesn’t mean they can’t terrorize Europe for decades or slowly chip it bit by bit.
Think of it as a delinquent, poor neighbor constantly throwing shit to your back porch, and alternating between threatening you with a knife and a grenade (nuke). Constantly trying to bride, and recruit citizens of your home for its goals.
> Putin and russians are controlling all the world. They bought every world leader, everyone from Trump to Xi is controlled by them! Anything bad that happens in the world from USA to Africa is directly staged by Russia!
I don’t think anyone in their right mind thinks that Xi is bought by Russia. On the contrary, it is widely believed that modern Russia is China’s vassal.
IMHO, democratic countries should do the same. I want pro-Western, democratic, liberal propaganda bots to flood the internet, just like the Russian ones do. But I guess liberal governments are just too good to use the same weapons. It could be their downfall.
Western governments are spending billions on propaganda. There's so-called "Russian opposition" - a clique that receives millions from western funds such as NED (CIA proxy fund).
If you open YouTube from a freshly created Russian google account, the whole home page will be filled with videos from Radio Liberty, BBC News Russian, DW Russian, Khodorkovsky Live, and other channels. The theme of all these channels is the same: "You must surrender and bow to the great western overlords".
Even though my google account is ~15 years old, I still get such recommendations on my main YouTube page daily.
There was an interview with a former Russian lady that works for Google in London and her job is to pick such videos to push to Russian audience.
It does well for itself and Europe but there are several US states that have a larger GDP and industrial output than France does.
Cheap energy is a necessary, but not sufficient condition for "economic miracle". France has relatively cheap energy, but it has other problems. It would be worse off without nuclear, though.
The problems are pretty fundamental issues of how we set up and developed our economies since around the late 80s.
Unfortunately that also means it will take decades to right the ship (and probably at least one more decade until people are even willing to accept that there's fundamental issues), but we still have lots of money, lots of engineers and lots of scientists. We'll get out of this, but it won't be pretty for quite a while in my opinion.
I think one of the big differences is that the "Gate Contact Area" simply isn't the smallest "feature" anymore - but the ITRS that defined those names called it "feature size", not "gate size" from the beginning intentionally.
You probably could make a transitor with a gate size of a similar order to the "feature size", it'll just perform awfully to be completely useless.
The Infineon Smart Power Fab was opened some months ago and builds power ICs for the energy market. Probably something like ACDC and DCAC converter ICs. This is also needed in AI data centers. https://www.infineon.com/de/regional/dresden/smart-power-fab
European Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (ESMC), the TSMC fab in Dresden is still under construction and will produce logic chips in 28nm or 16nm. Bosch, Infineon, and NXP each have 10% share in this fab. I assume that it will mostly produce products which will be sold by these 3 companies, probably just the next generations from what they already sell. This fab was 50% subsidized by the German government.
GlobalFoundries also has a big 20nm Fab in Dresden.
The most advanced logic fab in the EU is the Intel fab in Ireland.
It was pretty clear that this fab - much like the other Bosch facilities - is going to be for automotive and industry ICs, not for high end node sizes in CPUs or GPUs.
So you seem to know more about ASML's business than the ASML executive quoted in this article.
1. They provided evidence (construction of a fab in Dresden).
2. Executives lie all of the time.
Aside: after all of the denunciations of AI companies claims of danger, I expected comments here to be denouncing this as a “ASML shill article trying to get the government to buy more of their product”. Not that I believe, but the contrast is striking.
even more so it is reasonable to assume their (executive) statement was a simplification ignoring small for the overall statement irrelevant exceptions
like ignoring there being a factory build which is small and only meant for older nodes producing embedded chips and is for the car industry only
because honestly while the factory does matter for Bosh, it doesn't really make much difference for the larger picture of chip production in the EU
Will lie for billions of taxpayers money.
Will Europe accept being a manufacturer only? Or will they finally pick up with a late comer advantage? We need to wait and see.
Missing from article is where they are selling which I assume is mostly Taiwan and America.
The fact that Europe has incredibly limited frontier chip making capability is the issue, though. Even if they can produce other chips, its position is not at all resilient.
[1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-09-22/asml-exec...
I guess the US chip designers could switch to Intel as a fab if they had to, but there are not even any US-made DUV machines, so far from self-sufficient.
There are no companies in Europe designing high-end semiconductors because the wages are much lower than in the U.S. The best European talent is moving Stateside and raking in ten times what they can get at home without having to build up seniority first.
Europe will keep making manufacturing equipment, but leave the actual production to those who have the grid capacity and capital.
Europe has been anti-innovation for a long time, completely missing the tech wave in the 2000s. I was hopeful that Europe would learn from its past mistakes, but now it is also completely missing the AI wave and falling behind.
The politics are bad, way too user-centric (see Arthur Mensch complaining about AI regulation), and the European mentality does not help. The social safety net is strong, which is good, but perhaps too generous given the state of the economy. Without sufficient economic growth, it becomes unsustainable, leading to a lower and lower quality of social benefits.
People complain, rightly so, that things were better before, but nobody does anything or even seems to understand that innovation and economic growth are what fuel everything.
I am very bearish on the state of Europe, which, as a European, makes me sad.
Disclaimer: I have immigrated to the US.
The article is literally about ASML, the company that builds the most complex machine ever built by humans.
I can pick a couple of other companies across a wide variety of industries if you'd like.
An economy is there for the people. If that larger number of people have a higher quality of life than in the US, aren't they wealthier?
And if they do it for less money, aren't they wiser?
> They invented the Industrial Revolution.
And a lot more, my friend! You're welcome.
It's a little unclear how it shakes out there.
I've met a number of young western Europeans while traveling there who are jealous of the ability of Americans to afford cross-ocean/different-continent multi-week trips to tier-1-hotel-cost cities, while feeling like it's more out of reach to them to find a job that would let them. (Phrasing edited here because, as a reply pointed out, "international" travel in Europe is easy and common due to proximity.)
On the flip side, those people also enjoy having much more time off. But hey, at least American isn't as 996'd as China yet?
There's no single linear "better" scale.
(There are, of course, many Americans without the means to travel to Europe or Asia themselves, who could give two shits about an "innovative" company being based in the US vs anywhere else since it doesn't seem to be helping them personally, but the overall mobility is still higher for now. But that's more due to the age of the country than anything else. History suggests that as low-hanging-fruit continues to close the US will also get more and more of that social stagnation too. It's easier to become upper class when you go to a place without an upper class yet.)
Anecdotally, I think it’s out of reach for many young Americans in my cohort (26) but we’re insulated from that in tech
The statistics tell a story different from those anecdotes: young Europeans are considerably more internationally traveled than young Americans, probably by something approaching a factor of ~2 in the likelihood of crossing national borders in a given year. But they're not necessarily twice as geographically well-traveled. Much of the difference is due to Europe's small countries, open borders, dense transportation network, and cheap short-haul international travel.
Look up what percentage of Americans between 25 - 34 have never traveled outside their own country, vs. Europeans in western or Northern European countries.
etc.
Not that hard as a European.
Means and using those means for any given particular end are entirely different things. It's hardly surprising that Americans are generally insular and uninterested in non-American things. (This is not a good thing IMO. But it's a thing.)
But more importantly, like you say, "interntional travel" in Europe includes, say, "going to the UK from France" vs the overseas 5-to-10hr+ flights that are required to cross the Atlantic to have these conversations in my anecdotes.
That's my bad for saying "international" instead of "cross-ocean" or such. So let me clarify that the jealousy here is being able to pay for flights and hotels to spend 2+ weeks across an ocean in cities with $100-or-equiv-per-night-to-$300+-per-night hotel costs. They didn't think they'd ever be able to afford a similar trip to SF or NY.
---
The non-anecodotal version of this story would likely be the rise in social-acceptance and popularity of the more right-wing parties in Europe. A lot of people, younger especially, feel like they're getting left behind and aren't interested in mostly-older or born-into-more-money people's generic remarks about how it's still great overall for them.
K-shaped economies + "stay in your lane" are how you get Trumps :(
Europeans have time for traveling but not money. A third of Europeans can’t even afford a one week holiday.
It's true that most of us in Europe get more time off but we don't really get more to spend on expensive holidays. We don't have the culture of spending thousands upon thousands on holidays. Most of us think it's crazy to spend that much on travel and do it much more frugally which means we get more but at a lower level of luxury.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)...
But no one cares about gpd per capita
Maybe. I have citizenship in Switzerland and America. I aim politically active in both. That doesn’t give me authority—but it does afford me perspective.
And no. Europe is poorer than America. Comparable measures show the effect one would expect.
> unless someone pulls up actual stats on quality of life
These exist. Individual numbers slope as one would expect.
If you’re poor, Europe is better. If you’re middle class, it’s debatably, but probably Europe. If you’re rich, by which I mean you make a few hundred thousand a year or more, America. Obviously.
This depends entirely on which USA state is being compared. Many USA states have healthcare, education, and social safety nets that rival or exceed typical European benefits. Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York, Vermont, for example.
This is what most Quality of Life America/Europe arguments on Hacker News boil down to. Overrepresentation of rich people. America has more upward redistribution of wealth. Ergo America is better.
Anyone can take time off work and go on vacation. That is certainly more enjoyable. But it's not an economic plan for high living standards in the future.
Europe is going to have a difficult winter. You are going to see announcements of government benefit cuts, higher costs, and this will continue up until the "high standard of living" in Europe catches up with the realities of economic output.
Europe didn't choose to do that.
> In 1997, ASML began studying a shift to using extreme ultraviolet.[7] Two years later, it joined a consortium, which included Intel and two other U.S. chipmakers, in order to exploit fundamental research conducted by the US Department of Energy. Because the Cooperative Research and Development Agreement (CRADA) it operates under is funded by the US government, licensing must be approved by Congress.[14] Furthermore, in return for being permitted to join this consortium, ASML committed to the establishment of a US-based research center and to source 55 percent of components for all machines sold in the US from American suppliers.[7] ASML collaborated with various manufacturers to obtain mirrors, including the Belgian firms IMEC and Sematech as well as Germany's Carl Zeiss.[14][15]
ASML is definitely a fully globalist enterprise.
ed: and also to the above point, those optics companies look frightfully european...
The top ten companies by revenue, worldwide, features zero European companies.
We in Europe cheer our meddling technocratic leadership while sneering at American risk taking and innovation. We have a fundamental cultural malaise, and those of my friends who feel the same as me have simply left Europe for a better life in the US or other dynamic economies.
At this point I feel like a stick in the mud for staying here, and quite honestly, I worry for my children's future here.
> The top ten companies by revenue, worldwide, features zero European companies.
There were 17 European companies in the top 50 in 2006, 13 in 2016, 10 in 2026. Most of the remaining companies are automotive and energy (oil). None is tech. ASML isn't even in the top 100 in Europe.
Japan is the same story. There are 7 companies in the top 50 in 2006. The only remaining one in 2026 is Toyota. None is tech.
China's share has increased from 2 companies in 2006 to 12 in 2006.
In other words, China's progress and the importance of tech, along with the decline of automobile and energy accurately reflect how the global economy has changed.
(Side question: how much AI does my comment sound?)
Source: you can find plenty. Start with Fortune 500
China and the US are continent-scale megastates. Obviously a mid-sized Atlantic island like the UK, or smallish peninsula like Italy, are not going to compete on scale.
But when such a pull exists, it's very hard to counter that. Consider the number of non-SV places in the US that have tried to replicate that environment and basically failed. Even the famously "business friendly" places like Texas or Georgia that are success stories for poaching tech companies or film production largely work by having companies move there once they've left the high-growth phase and are no longer chasing strictly the most ambitious would-be-best-and-brightest talent.
The success stories there (that aren't just resource-extraction) have come from significant protectionism, essentially forcing a country to build its own version of the mega-companies even if it's a money-loser with copycats building shoddy copies for decades at first.
There's no easy way for Europe to magically change that with "culture." There's too many already-established mega-talent-bases in other places to think you can have people just pass up on that in a fully-global-market situation.
I would ask instead: why let those foreign mega-corps be so integral to so many basic services of modern life?
Perhaps not just Europe, but the entire world, would be better off if we had fewer monoliths and more variations, with more flexibility for local markets to develop different solutions or in different directions.
edit: In all seriousness, some numbers I'm concerned about for children are the
- % of carbon in the atmosphere
- the number of militaristic demagogues in positions of power
- the number of hours the average person spends reading propaganda on social media
- the parts per million of microplastics in drinking water
- the democracy index
The sum of dollars consumed, dollars invested, dollars spent by governments, and net exports is a weird proxy signal to obsess over
I think doing so would introduce far more risks to them. Space ain't friendly.
Beyond that I find it hard to care to drive anyone to work their ass off today for whatever humans are around 100+ years in the future. And, of course, more technological development brings more chance of mass self-inflicted die-off of humanity anyway. In 1900 it would've been much harder to kill 10%, 20%, 50%, 90% of the global population than it is today.
Everything is death eventually. And predicting the future is hard.
That’s not what I’m advocating. I’m not even proposing a global prioritization of goals. What I’m advocating is simply to not attempt to slow or halt the progress of technology.
Yet Europe is stagnant.
- 2008 financial crisis. Somehow, the U.S. was able to spend its way out of the crisis, while Europe's strict austerity measures made things quite bad. That was followed by the 2010-2012 debt crisis, the 2013 Cyprus banking crisis, and another Greek debt and banking crisis in 2015.
- COVID: Most European countries, at least those with strong economies, had very strict restrictions and closures. The restrictions were as strict as they were in California. They did not really have any Texas or Florida style "rebellion" states. Sweden was the main exception. But borders and travel restrictions still existed.
- Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Europe was much more economically integrated with and dependent on Russia (especially for energy), than the U.S. or many other parts of the world.
So basically, the world has gone through three major crises in the last 15-20 years, and in each case the U.S. was either less directly affected or somehow managed the economic consequences better than Europe.
But there definitely seems to be a lack of ambition in business and technology. For example, the car companies seem to be more coasting on past successes vs pushing things forward. Europe is also not trying much to compete in AI.
There are few places I've seen that seemed as dull or boring when walking through them as the LA metro area, for example. Yes, there are also awesome looking neighborhoods, but damn, I didn't actually realize those concrete brick 1 floor no sloped roof buildings were truly universal as were those very ugly vacant lots with wire fences.
I imagine most LA residents are just used to them plus they only drive by them.
> [T]he food was probably the worst I had anywhere in Europe.
(Btw. Last week I was in Istanbul; maybe unlucky, but I did not like kebab in Turkey, ingredients were somehow strange)
Instead the wall fell and Europe decided to go on vacation for 35 years
Could something be done starting with 1990? Probably, though the much fragmented by natural borders (if not regulatory) markets with resulting less cash-flush companies had issues fighting against US competition being able to underprice them with politicians ensuring there were no barriers for american companies "or else".
Some of it was at worst mostly local (if with American "advisors"), like in Poland - we started technically from same position as Taiwan when it came to semiconductor manufacturing, but instead of investing "shock therapy" destroyed it. At the same time... can you mention a taiwan major business that is not TSMC, or part of semiconductor manufacturing chain? Without thinking too long or googling?
Europe did itself in with intense bureaucracy and a culture of "individual wealth is bad"
Did you misread the time period they suggested?
By the mid-90s we were 50 years after the end of the war. It didn't take three generations to put the cities and infrastructure back together.
Or rather, you shouldn't appeal to authority.
The discussion here is a mess. This specific article about ASML is more about outlook, than Krugman's, which is about the current state. This will be a problem in the future. Currently, Europe's quality of life is at least on par, or probably even better in some parts of Europe, but these are signs that this won't last.
If the current positive sum game is eroding more, then there are two options. Embracing the feudal times as in America, or keep pretending. In the short and mid term, the former is better. However, in the long term, if you pretend for the following decades, then you will win. Unfortunately, there is only a slim chance that you will be able to, but all of those countries will win in the end.
For not the 1%, feudal logic is obviously not good at all, but they are still voting for them. Even in Europe. Those European countries which stay democracies will win.
Take those out of what US "builds" and Us doesnt look very exceptional
If you take out the exceptional parts then the US doesn’t look exceptional? Forgive me if I’m not convinced by this argument.
You’re also generalizing too deeply. The top companies in the US cover a lot more than ads and social media.
In the top 100, there are only 8: ASML, Siemens, SAP, L'Oréal, LVMH, TotalEnergies, Santander, and Seagate Technology.
In 2005, the EU (excluding the UK) had 19 companies in the top 100.
So something is going on.
Big tech isn’t that big. Silicon Valley is $840B, while the US is $32T, so about 3%.
The US could lose all of Silicon Valley and still be much more productive than the EU.
> From my American perspective it looks like they are trying to lose
How're the tarrifs going?
This is only what I have noticed as someone from a continent that is not North American or Europe. The Europeans don't seem to see a problem with their stagnation.
Is it contradicting - does it mean the tariff is "over 100%"?
A five euro package has:
€1.05 VAT
€3 duty per product category
€0.36 VAT on duty
€2 EU per package fee (per 1 November)
That is €6.41 in tax/duty/fees/tariffs whatever you may call it over a €5 value.
I think this is part of it. Growth is treated with skepticism in Europe.
Growth isn't "jobs, high salaries, innovation, cheap good/utilities, well funded military" there it's "pollution, inequality, big corporations".
It's no surprise that they aren't growing as fast as other regions: it's not their priority.
As the saying goes, if you aren't growing...
If anything it should symbolize the cautionary tale of the how to have the power to exact punishment can and will come back to you.
I’ll assume your question is genuine and benevolent and not like my social media feed full of Europe vs USA ragebait.
I believe these economies and cultures are optimized for different things. And also I’d be precise about the country as well, since UK, Norway and Italy are also optimized for different targets. More accidentally then a cunning plan around it to be honest.
Americans as a culture are more risk takers. This is normally a good thing for entrepreneurship. They are also rather tax friendly. Which is great for capital intensive businesses like the unicorns you are asking why we see less of this in Europe. Take Norway, come here with a ton of cash and make a anthropic competitor, and you are probably a fool. Taxes alone will punish such huge capital. Less so in UK though.
But what you hear less about is the huge amount of medium companies around Europe. They have their small niche in pharma, manufacturing etc. They are often highly trusted. Often highly profitable. Often keep their people longer with lower tendencies of burnout.
But would often be seen as a failure by US vcs, as they perhaps lack a giant market to grow further into. This can lead to a lower stock price then price per earning would suggest.
Nor to say that those companies don’t exist in the US. I’m just saying the entire economy is not just lifted by companies like alibaba and google.
I’m also curious sometimes how Americans kept their risk appetite so high through nearly a century. Japan went a similar lane until the 90s crash, where after they became a lot more risk averse.
Part of my speculation here is that the US could borrow their way out of the crisis in their own currencies.
- Railways and signalling equipment
- Container shipping
- Reinsurance
- Industrial machinery
- Wind turbine technology
- Luxury goods, luxury fashion and fast fashion
- Tourism
A big difference is that in Europe most companies are not big conglomerates. Yes everyone has heard of Siemens. But then you have tonnes of companies like WALDNER, based in a small German town with revenues of €350m, they make packaging equipment that can fill 100,000 yogurt pots per hour. Oh and they are a private company.
> Container shipping
> Wind turbine technology
The US has ports. But they don't build civilian ships, and they don't really own ships either. The vast majority of American ocean-going shipping is floated on ships owned by Europeans and built by East Asians
But of course anyone can buy and operate ships. Europe still has large shipping companies, although they are losing marketshare to Asia now, whereas the US has never been a dominant player in this area.
The US does operate some massive logistics companies that are a bit higher in the stack.
That's why it's so crazy to see Europe sabotage its shipping industry by seizing Russian ships and banning so many oil transports. That is going to result in Russia seizing European ships and the asian shipping carriers taking even more market share.
Across the board, Europe is de-industrializing.
Not everyone can operate civilian ship fleets, managing a global shipping operation is not a "pick up and do it", it requires some build up.
Probably alluding to the fact that Europe owns the largest portion of the worldwide fleet.
I assume they mean the ships.
Something that distinguishes Europeans from Americans is the general level of economic security here. This is generally good for the mental and physical health of everyone involved, but it does mean that there's no hustling or grindset among the educated classes here.
The one in the US worked at a chip company and they had gotten a chip back and it worked without any respin.
The one in europe was working with GPS stuff and with a european chip that was on spin 400+. (it's been a while so I don't have more info, but I think maybe it was government subsidized?)
I couldn't help but think something was seriously wrong with european engineering.
The first rule of government spending, why build one when you can build two at twice the price? Sounds like the project's goal wasn't to build a successful thing, but to bilk the government for as much funding for as long as possible.
The US goverment continues puking out cash to prop up this clusterfuck. The EU governments stopped puking cash for it, which is why all the EU quantum companies moved to the US.
Quantum computing has basically zero credible commercial demand.
Timelines for anything useful are perpetually 15 years out. Even the QC boosters refuse to commit to a timeline for Cryptographically Relevant Quantum Computing. But they sure love scaring everybody with it as a boogeyman.
Truth is though none of it matters if the planet goes up in flames.
If you focus only on tech the discrepancy is larger than if you include the wider economy. Even though USA is ahead economically, the EU is still the second largest player globally and the gap is probably not as wide the HN bubble makes it seem.
Even the EU is a lot of different countries. Some of them quite poor, and some of them wealthier also with high GDP per capita.
GDP per capita does also not give you the whole picture. It is a number. Other numbers are median life expectancy, shootings per capita, PPI, median income, average vacation days, average distance to nearest high-speed rail station, physicians per capita, average number of pupils in a school class. Unemployment rate. Air quality.
GDP per capita is one indicator among many that says something about the country’s or region’s inhabitants, but in itself it is just a measure of how much money is being moved around annually. And it is potentially quite misleading. You could have a high GDP per capita and a poor population, if all the money went to large cooperations and billionaires.
I am not saying that everything is rosy in the EU, but just that there are also other important indicators and that it is a lot more complicated than just looking at GDP per capita across the entire EU.
All poorer than Mississippi per-capita
Mississippi: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MSPCPI
Belgium: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD?location...
And that is not counting the substantial safety net that your average European has. I would MUCH rather live in Belgium than Mississippi, and I say this as an American.
Or are you basing that on what you see on social media?
The best thing about living in Mississippi is that you have absolute freedom to move to another State where the benefits of living in the US are much easier to realize.
Been there, done that, and know many others that have.
40-50% of US citizens live in a different State than the one they are native to. 4-5% of EU citizens live in a different country than the one they are native to. That is a very large disparity.
Quality of life has few objective measures beyond standard of living. One man’s “quality of life” is another man’s oppressive conformity and risk averseness. American culture places an enormous value on self-actualization and trades comfort and certainty to get it. Average Europeans demonstrably would not make this trade in many cases. Neither is objectively correct.
I think Europe may have had a comparable or better quality of life at one time allowing for the cultural differences. As someone who has spent a lot of time on both sides of the Atlantic, I don’t think that has been true for well over a decade. The slow impoverishment of Europe has become noticeable to American eyes in a way it wasn’t before.
A cheap Android phone can do all the things an iPhone can, but the experience is worse. How do you quantify that?
I would urge Europeans to visit the US and stay at an AirBNB outside of a city to see how people live. I’ve done the same in reverse. Could I have a similar lifestyle to what I have in the US? Yes. But only with my American salary. This is the point that is being made here. There is nothing that Europe lacks. The problem is the numbers and what is available to the median household.
The idea that economic growth is irrelevant is nonsense.
https://econofact.org/factbrief/fact-check-has-the-economic-...
Size of homes, yes, certainly different, but population density is also different. In super expensive places in Europe you'd pay more for less compared to the US (London comes to mind).
Charity spent - social model is different.
Agree that economic growth matters, though, but I would rather look at less cultural, political or physically linked indicators (e.g., cancer survival rates).
Absolutely not, most places in Europe outside of a few rich countries like Switzerland and Liechtenstein and maybe a few flagship cities seem very low-QoL compared to similarly sized population centers in the US.
There is also really weird segregation, like neighborhoods where only African-American people live. We once walked into a large restaurant and people looked at us in shock. There were only black people in the restaurant and by the shock on their faces, a family of white people walking in must have been rare occurrence. They were super kind, but it also was very weird.
How many years ago was this? Because over the past 20 years things have gotten better in the US and worse in EU, steadily.
Last time was 15 years ago, though family has been as recent as a few years ago and havent's seen a much of a change change. Also, in many ways, the last 20 years is quite a bad example to pick, since wealth of everyone under the 90th percentile was the same in ~2017-2018 as in ~2007:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth_inequality_in_the_Unite...
Recent years are better though.
gotten better in the US and worse in EU, steadily
Not GDP at PPP, it's same-same: https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/$s_!4NLV!,f_auto,q_auto:...
Average (and probably 10th percentile) retiree is much richer in US. Yes we have higher variance but the mean is much higher too
Europe also has racial ghettos, it's just different groups
Also, GDP per capita is what pays taxes. Taxes pay for social programs and infrastructure.
The EU is going to have a lot of trouble paying for social programs if its economy is in the dumps.
Life expectancy? Infant mortality? Paid parental leave? Gun deaths? Incarceration rate? Income equality? Voter participation? Child poverty?
By any of these measures US falls far behind Europe
If you adjust for population size and limit just to high income countries, the US comes out on top.
According to a recent Guardian article, the reasons are immigration and the far-right's ability to masterfully tell a story how things were better in the idealized past.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/jun/24/nearly-quar...
Perception is reality in people's minds and therefor shapes reality, but it isn't necessarily true.
I don't get it.
Many Europeans are better off than a few decades ago. Heck, many European countries were still under authoritarian rule until a few decades ago (East Europe, Spain, Greece, etc.).
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cabinets_of_the_Nether... <- note that 'liberal' in NL has a different meaning than 'liberal' in the US.
I get that people always want a simple answer and vilifying your political opponents feeds the ego.
Clearly Europeans don't feel like things are better than a few decades ago. Any politicians who ignores that or blames something like xenophobia has blinders on.
Have you been to Mississippi? Have you seen the middle class suburbs?
Most gun crime is limited to a small geographic area either the rest have no having low gun crime.
Let's disregard all negatives and compare to some made up boogeyman of Germany.
I’m not saying it’s terrible but to pretend it doesn’t have problems is pure fantasy
This answer is 2 seconds away from you yet you still stand by American exceptionalism.
I am so glad that I don't have to live in the US right now. If this is loosing we should do even more of it.
If the measure of "winning" is chasing any current hype so that line goes up no matter the cost, I would rather not be in such a place.
I think that that Berlin is 100x better than Atlanta. But on the other hand, San Francisco is a million times better than Milan.
FAANG, west coast.
I firmly believe my quality of life where I live is many times better than in places like San Francisco or Seattle. In many ways, this was likely the best decision I ever made.
Not getting too specific to avoid having my HN account being in any way related to my real identity. In fact, it is about time I should create a new account and retire this one.
And speaking of "a less prosperous society" -- have you been to most of the USA recently? Doesn't look very prosperous to me vs most of Europe.
That's how I see it anyway, almost everyone else wants to double down on neoliberalism ie the negation of industrial policy. Except perhaps Frank Heemskerk from the article, who mentions wanting governments to create demand for made-in-europe chips so that fabs get built to supply that demand.
I mean, Europe built ASML, for one.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EUV_lithography
You can read the history and learn that the technology was developed almost entirely by the US government Department of Energy, Intel, IBM, and several Japanese companies.
ASML is an important company but it is largely just an integrator of tech and process IP licensed from several different countries.
By that logic SpaceX is a German company. Liquid-fuel rocketry was researched and developed at Peenemünde, and the US brought in von Braun's team wholesale to build its program. SpaceX just integrates German IP. Or Google is Swiss. The web was invented at CERN; Google is just an integrator of European tech. Or Apple Silicon is British. ARM was designed in Cambridge; Apple just licenses it.
Not from any wrongdoing on Toyota's part, but a combination of it being cheap, reliable, repairable, etc.
They should make another law and probably a few more commissions of auditors.
Airbus proves the EU can do this. It remains to be seen if they still have the ability to take constructive action, or if “add more bureaucracy” is the only tool remaining in the toolbox.
*could.
Airbus has been grandfathered into the current legal situation. Today a future Airbus would not be able to even start collecting data for its initial Environmental Impact Study.
And Boeing's rampant carelessness proves European laws can be beneficial. "Hurr durr, how about them European laws" is a low-effort comment that adds nothing to the discussions.
The argument that a slack regulatory environment is sufficient was disproven when the US government subsidized new fabs via the CHIPS Act (a new law!), and then went further and partially nationalized a failing Intel to prop it up.
And there’s a supply chain, with packaging often separate from fab.
It seems like a reasonable objection but not a showstopper.
Fun fact in this context: (Dutch) Philips was a major initial investor in TSMC (both in money and IP):
Only Philips was willing to sign a joint venture contract with Taiwan to put up $58 million, transfer its production technology, and license intellectual property in exchange for a 27.6 percent stake in TSMC.
Nobody said that. That is a strawman
This stuff is all blood, sweat and tears to get it done, and to be honest a culture.
You can't just buy it off the shelf. If that was possible everyone would have gone paid for it like an Ikea product years ago.
The inability to cope with failure is a culture that is common in Europe. Failure is so personally devastating, so destructive to social and cultural standing that not only must you not take risks but other people must be actively prevented from taking risk.
Maybe the US investment doesn't work, but the US will have tried at least. Taiwan is, ironically, the perfect example of where the initial impetus came from the government because there was no culture of risk-taking. Parts of Europe have a savings culture that is very similar to Taiwan and led to very poor growth and very high inequality.
If the US keeps trying, they will succeed. On here, the view was that China could never build out this capacity, they did. The only way to guarantee failure is to never try.
Older article, but seems like things are going pretty ok?
The Taiwanese are doing a lot to try get it up but all the reports on the ground level are rough.
https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/semiconductors/ts...
USA passed the CHIPS Act and is spending close to a trillion dollars to strategically re-home all of TSMC's most advanced fab technology to Arizona as a matter of national security. Monetary losses don't matter when the point is to not be reliant or China in the event of South China Sea conflict.
I think the point of this article, and the warnings from ASML, is that Europe is not making the same effort.
Like are you really going to buy a chip that costs 70% more out of national pride? Might work on some but think that very few else will sign up for that.
You'll do that because of national adversity?
People really don't understand how this stuff is borderline magic turning silicon into these things. There's so much that can go wrong at every step, it's the most advanced manufacturing process on Earth.
Once upon a time chips went down in value but I don't think that's happening anymore, lot of other people seem aware of that. Not to mention the semiconductor talent is getting eaten up like pancakes everywhere.
And that's largely because the average Brit has terrible beliefs that actively make them poorer. A shockingly high percentage of people believe that building more houses won't lower costs.
I make average US wages, have my entire adult life. I cannot afford a house in my city unless I buy a literal ruin in the ghetto. The suburbs are far more expensive, and that's where the McMansion complexes are. I don't know who's buying them, but it isn't me and likely never will be.
Very disingenuous counterpoint.
Also corner shops should be allowed everywhere.
Scotland is a good example: every government since the mid-2010s has been elected on the explicit promise to build more houses, they cannot do so because of the electoral consequences so they attempt to build council houses, it is impossible for the government to build enough council houses to make up for multiple decades of underbuilding (this problem has accelerated significantly whilst they have been promising to build housing, had explicit targets, etc.), but at the next election they make the same promises (and people vote for them because there is no alternative).
The really strange thing is that people also see the massive growth in student housing in Scotland. Again, very good for politicians: more conservative foreign students can't vote, domestic students will vote left-wing.
The politics of this topic are very strange. The public is still at the stage where they think in vague terms that the problem is a lack of housing.
I believe the problem is worse in Scotland because the growth in council housing in the 60/70s was organised in order to create this permanent bloc vote. The same has happened in London where you have whole constituencies where 70% of the effective vote is void.
This doesn’t add up. Promising to get more housing built is getting these people elected, but they can’t make good on this promise because then they will lose their election?
Politicians continue with the lie that they will build council houses. Voters continue with the lie that voting will change the outcome.
That's a conspiracy theory and a half!
A lot of the new student accommodation being built is privately owned. They're chasing the (pre-Brexit/pandemic) overheating market for student accommodation that resulted from the universities targeting international students for the inflated tuition fees they can charge, and in some cases have features explicitly advertised to international students as positives (e.g. some of the ones in Nottingham have built in rice cookers as standard).
However, some of the properties are at risk of becoming unviable (i.e., lying empty or having to be turned over to housing non students [0]) because of a combination of Brexit and tightened immigration rules reducing international student numbers.
If they're being built as some kind of social engineering it would be a really convoluted way of going about it.
This is just such a dire situation to be in. Even USA has seen the writing on the wall regarding China-Taiwan which is why it has been strategically re-homing all the most advanced chip fab technology to Arizona [1].
If you have a two step problem, the strategy of "I can't do two things at the same time so I'll just give up", is not a good one.
While bleeding edge backend processes got the bulk of reporting, the major push for the American CHIPS Act was the rebuild packaging capacity in the US (Samsung is working on this in Texas).
This was also the same approach Taiwan, Malaysia, and China used to climb up the semiconductor value chain.
The EU also failed to tie design capacity together as well, as semiconductor design capacity is almost nonexistent in Europe.
Europe is increasingly relying on the rest of the world to supply it with critical things. It’s FAFOed with regulations that have driven these things elsewhere and now is heading into a “FO” world of hurt as the tables are turned and they desperately need things and have to pay the price. This will likely define the next 20 years in Europe.
Chip production is not nearly as high in value as all the things you can build with those chips.
Local production is about supply chain security, not profit. Europe doesn’t mind one bit paying for chips produced somewhere else, but it does mind a world order where global trade is unreliable.
It is what it is.
The thing that seems to have changed is that both the US and Russia are determined to destroy their own future.
That's quite the statement, considering there's still more than a quarter left in 2026.
A price problem in terms of it not being worth the cost... sure.. but that's because there are little/no fabs in Europe. Lowering the price, even by magic, doesnt really seem like it would matter.
>but i don't like the expectation that governments should subsidize mega corporations profits.
To be clear they are asking the EU to kickstart chip fabrication. Which is a chicken-and-egg problem. A fab can't tool up without orders. Orders wont come without tooling. It's in the EU's interest to fabricate chips locally.
Is it though? I'd put forward that it's in the EU's interest to foster good international relationships. Countries can get away without domestic strategic industries if they can play nice with others.
> little/no fabs in Europe
Europe is just a geographic accident as far as the Dutch are concerned.
oddly cheering for this but I doubt it will end well
* https://www.reuters.com/world/china/how-china-built-its-manh...
When China leads chip making the rest of the world is just vasal states.
It's well known tech that is used globally, just not to that degree as yield and throughput goes way down
they'd just tell all their export ships to turn around and stop all exports
US would collapse in 30 days
it would be like the blockade US is doing to Cuba except 90% of every product we use and they wouldn't have to fire a single shot
they could also sell off the billions in US bonds and other assets
US economy would be utterly destroyed, we'd never recover because even the middle-class would be living out of their cars (now dead because all the parts for them are made in China)
Why are there no buyers as it is? Doing this would force lower margins for ASML, effectively knee-capping a Crown Jewel of European technology and business. Do you think the EU should subsidize those losses?
We will keep working on philosophy, theory and arts. Let the rest of the world get their hands dirty building things.
The combination of Trump's Iranian shitshow and Putin's Ukranian madness, means energy prices in Europe are currently insane and predicted to keep rising. Uncertainty due to the possibility of war is not exactly conducive to investing in fabs either.
Europe has been deindustrializing for decades, and IMO that's had more to do with profitability than anything else. That hasn't changed.
EU countries went from killing each other in two of the most deadly wars to having a union in 30 years.
I wish that the EU did the same as China did years ago, and that is to block any non-EU tech company from entering the market. We could have had the Google/Meta equivalent years ago.
I'm from the EU and glad to be a part of it. I just wish it was easier to do multi-national projects (I think anything aerospace or military related shows how little the countries want to collaborate) or even just tackle large projects and undertakings better.
Hell, in regards to chips I'd be happy with at least 2020 level performance chips for servers, desktops and laptops, even ARM ones. Okay maybe that is aiming too high cause my current Ryzen 7 5800X is from 2020 and so is my M1 MacBook Air and I don't see the need to upgrade, even 2016 would be good enough. Just more domestic production, CPUs, GPUs, memory, storage, everything else.
The thing that produces competitive industries is requiring them to compete globally. That's how Chinese cars got good (Tesla joint venture -> independent Chinese Tesla -> competitive domestic companies).
There are two main reasons why the EU struggles to produce strong text companies are, IMO:
1. EU laws and regulations are very burdensome and cover everything from employees to packaging waste.
2. There is not enough capital that gets invested in EU tech companies to pay high tech salaries, again largely driven by more restrictive financial rules.
The result of these two is that European engineers tend to leave for the US, and European companies struggle to grow to American size.
Around 70% of American billionaires made their money themselves, while in the EU a similar share inherited it. Despite all the talk about social mobility in Europe being better than in the US, the truth is that the ultrawealthy in Europe have created a regulatory environment which makes it nearly impossible for real competition to exist.
Yes, It is not sufficient but I would argue it was necessary. In case of China it allowed them to have a set of domestic copycat companies like Baid, Alibaba and Tencent, that enabled high demand for local engineers to serve their needs and that allowed to have a large pool of competent domestic engineers which now can benefit other emerging sectors too. It keeps surprising how many top contributors to large OSS projects are from China.
Maybe in terms of valuation. In terms of tech itself, I would say they are pretty close, few years behind maybe with gap closing
The top 100 wealthiest Austrian families own two thirds of the country's wealth <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36755835>, and none of the wealth came from tech companies. The same is likely true of Germany with one exception: SAP.
Put another way, the two wealthiest German-born tech people (except the founders of SAP) are Peter Thiel and Andy Bechtolsheim, both of whom earned their billions in the US.
I guess you mean EEC in 1958, because EU was officially formed in 1993. And normally people would count the period of the two World War and starting to count by the end of it. Either way it is a lot more than 30 years.
Which wouldn't do Europe a lot of good at this point. EU needs a TSMC and an Anthropic/OpenAI.
if the US or China had disappeared tomorrow, it would affect the rest of the world. what does an average person outside of Europe own that was made in Europe or couldn't be made in China instead? even ASML, its crown jewel, is built upon American tech and would be rebuilt in the US within a decade if there was necessity to do so.
Was that the halcyon period where they were too broken to fight back and got the continent split between the Americans and the Communists? Or the modern period where it turns out the security situation in Europe was so totally mishandled that we ended up with the Ukraine war?
The spectre of nukes getting used isn't dropping over time and this sort of grinding destructive war is probably raising the risk of a big conflagration. Everyone seems to be rearming.
What do you mean by this? Ukraine is not part of the EU.
The project has not scored well on matters of war and peace. And there is still a far too likely possibility here that after re-arming and in an era of war the Europeans fall back to their old tricks and descend into a state of war against each other again, given that the adults keeping them peaceful seem to have left the building.
You're going to have to really spell it out for us how Russia invading Ukraine is the EU's fault.
You can do it even today. But you can't bring back manufacturing from China. You gave them your techology and the market.
I don't want the problems those kind of companies bring. The world would be better without Facebook and Instagram in particular.
Maybe, but it's also better to have our own alternatives for those than to rely in so many cases on US tech only
Turns out if it's more economically efficient to simply import skilled workers, or outsource, then that's what will happen. Breeding and educating your own citizens in a first world country is very expensive. So you don't do it.
The only reason not to do this is national preference. Economically it makes sense, on a national level it makes sense, individually it's genocide.
It's petty and anti-nationalist to demand that your nation destroy it's own economy to fit your arbitrary political mold.
No, you don't need to accept migrants. You need money. You can get money in many many ways.
The best way for this to happen for the general prosperity of citizens is for the state to enrich themselves from the work of others, non citizens, and give that money to citizens. This is what Norway has done through its sovereign wealth fund.
If you do not want to defend Europe's front lines with teenage conscripts and geriatric riflemen, you need a way to bring warm bodies into the fold. Refusing lawful immigration will undermine domestic security, doom the elderly and ruin pension funds for future retirees. No sovereign wealth fund is worth losing your sovereignty over.
I told you what the requirement was. Money. You have simply arbitrarily decided instead it's just people for no reason at all. As though magically people will spawn resources from their finger tips. According to you the richest countries in the world must be the most populous.
Obviously this is idiotic to even a cursory examination.
The next assumption you've made is that birth rate is completely random, a roll of the dice, an unchangeable fact of the universe. The reality is of course it's a result of policy and economics. This can be solved extremely easily.
Europe's troop deficit is just as immediate and pressing as the economic and policy problems. It would be nice if we could ignore it, but you can only expand your domestic middle class if you don't condemn them to the conscription lines first.
No. What I said is just a fact. There's no assumption, the requirement is a fact. You need money to pay for goods and services for the people no longer working.
There's no assumption there? What's the assumption, that goods and services need to be paid for?
So stop bringing up migrants for no reason at all. The actual issue is money, and there are many ways to obtain money.
The nonsense about troops is of course ridiculous. Just a fantastical statement divorced from reality. Who is this enemy Europe is facing that will require a ww1 style meat grinder of 10s of millions of troops, which of course took place when the european population was half the size.
No, you don't have to.
Are you enlisted? Do you want to be? Europe needed to figure out it's defense plan yesterday, not in 20 years. If Europe won't ally with migrants, then maintaining European sovereignty is nearly impossible.
Get out of Belgium, then - if it was you and your people.
There are clear ideological, decadent faults in the eu administration. They are responsible for the destruction of one of the main continental industries, transferring (even reduced) pollution to Africa, where decent old cars go (with again no effect on global warming), and transferring the enterprise to China.
"The swan's shriek".
Both in longer term ofc
From my point of view is as awful as it can get: stark inequality, literally hundreds of thousands of homeless people roaming, no basic health care, but to be honest just the number of guns pro capita is enough to keep me and most of other Europeans away for good, it's just insane for what we're accustomed to. And I'm not even referring to the dystopian situation worsened daily by the current administration.
Unless you're the kind of person who confuses absolute numbers (e.g. money you can spend per month) for actual wealth / quality of life / freedoms / rights protection / etc. Then perhaps USA is the right place, I guess?
FWIW, FEANTSA estimated over 1.2MM homeless in Europe in their most recent report[1]. That's over a population of 515MM so ~23 per 10k population. Us 746k homeless is roughly 22 per 10k population. I suspect that differences in methodology will overwhelm that 1/10k difference, but the order of magnitude seems similar.
1/3 of the US homeless are unsheltered ("Living Rough" in the FEANTSA terminology). A quick skim of the FEANTSA report did not show any countries breaking out their rough-sleepers from the rest of the data. I do suspect that this number is higher than in the EU.
1: https://www.feantsa.org/files/Themes/Overview/2024/Rapport_-...
The numbers seem to say it's the same in theory, in practice my experience is that it very much doesn't _feel_ the same.
I saw that in London, in Rome and afair in Berlin
Not to the same extend as camping villages in LA but still. But I also didn't go that much inside those bad parts of cities in Europe, in US I drove through them
I can and all of them are from EU.
But that's little consolation I understand. I get that when there are two elephants sitting on you, someone telling you how fortunate you are to not have a third one on top of you as well, is a little annoying.
Well duh, EU GDP is like 3000x Russian one, Italy alone is richer than Russia, so ofc EU military combined is greater than Russia.
Russia is broke gas station with nukes, not really a benchmark for military supremacy.
The US regime has no support from its voters and taxpayers to get deeper into the IRan war because the US is the one who started it, it's not an existential threat for Americans in the US to spend more of their money or die intervening in the middle east.
But for EU what happens in Ukraine is an existential threat and they also didn't provoke the war there, so Europeans are more motivated to support the war against Russia than AMericans are to support military intervention in Iran.
But now Trump is inviting Putin to G20 and I'm sure sure all those EU politician would be all smily and act like no war is going on and gladly talk with Putin. If you think about it the war could have ended years ago and all the Ukranian/Russian lives lost could have been avoided if EU leaders were not so arrogant.
Europe has 15x the GDP of Russia. If they were "hell bent" on militarily defeating Russia, they could have made even tiny sacrifices to the social welfare system, diverted industrial production to military aid, and drowned Ukraine in help. That was a very achievable goal, and they didn't do it.
Instead, the vacillated on importing US natural gas, continued shutting down nuclear power plants, and paid Russia MORE CASH FOR OIL than they ended up giving Ukraine in military aid! They did not in fact, dedicate themselves to this war in any way shape or form.
We already did that. Welfare and funding to social services, elderly care, etc is significantly reduced and with higher bar to get than before 2022 where I live. Plus we're also paying the price in higher housing costs thanks to housing millions of Ukrainians.
It's easy to want a higher reduction on welfare services when you're not the one needing them. It's easy to write cheques that other people have to cash.
Same here! I'd actually say it's basically shut down to new people.
I have spoken to 5 different health/government departments just trying to get some care for my elderly family member who lives alone and has badly hurt both legs, but I have been denied, denied and denied and lied to at every single stage. "We have no money", "Go private", "We are at capacity", "There is a 16 week wait for an assessment", "You can only access us via your GP" [lie]
All because they aren't retirement age yet - then they get more red carpet treatment.
The Government is also busy trying to figure out how to cut welfare for those who don't vote in sufficient numbers to matter
Have you told them to jump on a small inflatable boat, throw away their passports and enter the EU via the Mediterranean? They'll get first class treatment for all their needs on the taxpayers' dime. Because if they don't get it, there's a dozen NGOs paid from your taxes that will sue their government for breaking their human rights for not providing them with the housing and care they need.
But I think we have bigger taxation/spending and economic issues in the UK. Nobody really cares about asylum seekers/immigrants when the economy is booming, jobs are plentiful and inflation is low.
We do seem have a defective system in which people who suddenly need help after having a job and paying lots of tax are more-or-less ignored, but life-long welfare claimants are already so entrenched in the system, it's just a continuation.
Job Seeker's benefit is £408/mo for a maximum of 6 months and only if you had paid sufficient tax in the 2 years prior – basically just a small tax refund but only if you follow the rules imposed upon you by your 'job coach'. And that benefit doesn't then entitle you to any other discount/benefits unlike certain other benefits. It's designed to make you to take any job that turns up – indeed your work 'coach' will likely force you to do that.
Rant over lol
No, there have been absolutely no real cuts to elderly care, the UK's triple lock ensures that the situation gets monotonically worse until the system collapses.
YES.
I don't live in France or the UK.
>No, there have been absolutely no real cuts to elderly care
Yeah they have. My city is short 30 million Euros on disability care this year despite increases in taxes. I (non retiree) now need to wait 6+ months for a surgery when it used to be 2, and pay from my taxes for money and weapons to Ukraine and housing to Ukrainian refugees in my city while they have nicer cars than me and don't pay the back breaking car taxes because they leave them on UA plates. I don't necessarily mind that per se, but I do mind being berated as if I'm not sacrificing enough. Please set an example and sacrifice yourself and your family for Ukraine before lecturing us.
which EU country permits non-EU plates (and insurance?) indefinitely?
Why do you think an entire continent with multiple and (sometimes even conflicting with each other) culture, priorities, national interest would do that? EU is an economic union. Not a federation like US
European support started out slow, but has ramped up as the US has backed away.
Germany will spend 20% of it's federal budget on military in 2027, planning to increase that to 30% by 2030. "We cannot defend ourselves against Putin with a balanced budget".
What would come next after Ukraine may be the Baltic states or Poland.
According to your YouTube sources? NATO has nothing to do with Ukraine. NATO countries can defend themselves if one of those countries actually are being attacked. That happened in 9/11 and NATO countries supporting militarily the US wars that preceded.
They have no such obligation towards Ukraine.
There is if you ever want to negotiate a nuclear arms-control deal again. None of this would be an issue if Ukraine had kept their nukes.
How exactly is Europe to blame for Russia continuing its war in Ukraine? Russia has clearly demonstrated a lack of interest in peace on any terms that could be acceptable to Ukraine.
Not such an easy thing to say if you’re the one facing that threat. Nobody wants their own country to be invaded and conquered.
And Russia would take that as a green light to keep on conquering other former Soviet states. Where do you draw the line?
Putin is deathly afraid of being assassinated and is avoiding air travel in favor of trains, and has identical offices to film in at multiple locations to hide his location. There is no chance he is getting on a plane to Florida.
> If you think about it the war could have ended years ago and all the Ukranian/Russian lives lost could have been avoided if EU leaders were not so arrogant.
How so? By Europe rolling over and not supporting Ukraine?
Europe is of course well aware that war with Russia seems increasingly inevitable, and have been preparing for it.
What is the source for this? I have seen some news articles with this narrative, it was more on the line of fear-mongering rather than providing evidence.
Europe is not tolerating Russian drone incursions, and has been shooting them down, have been on air combat footing patrolling the finish border and Kalinograd region (operating out of Lithuania), boosting defense of the Suwałki Gap, etc.
YouTube is perhaps one of the best sources of information, since US MSM is not interested.
You lost me at this. If your official source of information is YouTube, then good luck.
( /s)
No other country outside the US and China really even matter when it comes to AI. Cohere and Mistral are important labs, but in no way do they make Canada or France significant in any way shape or form.
In 2026, Europe is great for a holiday. That's about it.
I really like living in Europe (Sweden right now, but I lived in Czech, Estonia and I’m from the UK)…
But, I think unless we do some wealth generating activities, we won’t be such a nice place to live in future.
Our power on the world stage will decrease, our infrastructure will start to be neglected due to lack of investment, quality will diminish in most areas…
I say this because that’s how the UK feels in most areas (outside of London), a bunch of “new flashy stuff” to prove that “we still got it” but it’s incredibly low quality while the actual infrastructure crumbles to bits.
I believe you've chosen the wrong tense there
The EU is no longer the largest economic bloc in the world, but that happened due to Brexit.
This was hugely evident during the recent spate of tech layoffs - employers planning collective dismissals are obliged to hold a mandatory 30-day consultation with employee representatives and notify the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment beforehand. Issuing premature "done deal" announcements before meaningful consultation breaches Irish law.
Even at the micro level, non-collective or individual restructuring must still rely on objective selection criteria and fair procedures. Failing to do so exposes employers to Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) claims for unfair or constructive dismissal.
There's also very very strict regulations around work/life issues. A famous case this year in 2023 where a Customer Care Team Lead at the Dublin office of Israeli software company Wix was dismissed after posting comments on LinkedIn. In her posts, she described Israel as a "terrorist state" and referred to Zionism as "the root of violence" while expressing solidarity with the Palestinian people. In July 2024, the WRC ordered Wix to pay Carey €35,000 in compensation after Wix acknowledged that the dismissal was "procedurally unfair" under Irish employment law.
In short, we're not that poor and have significant societal safety-nets that make up the delta in direct wages.
That's quite a bit short to buy an EUV machine.
But of course, the parent commenter was not talking about salaries, because ASMLs products are not B2C.
This can be compared to protectionist policies such as tariffs.
If employees are hard to fire, then companies hesitate to hire them.
If employees on-shore are protected, then un-protected employees overseas are more competitive, eventually gutting local industries.
Etc.
This came up in Australia recently where a liberal government proposed loosening some employee protection laws with the idea that it would encourage hiring.
It did. It worked.
Then the policy was swiftly reversed by a more left-wing party, and a lot of those newly employed people lost their jobs because they turned from an asset to a liability.
Protectionism is a double-edged sword.
In any case, don't be too sure about your claim. According to <https://ourworldindata.org/where-do-migrants-live-and-where-...>, 170K Spanish-born live in the US. By contrast, 69K US-born live in Spain <https://ourworldindata.org/where-do-migrants-live-and-where-...>. Given that the US (341 million) has 7.25 times Spain's population (47 million), this means that a Spaniard is 17-18 times more likely to move to the US, than an American is to move to Spain.
Using the Our World in Data figures, a Singapore-born person is about four times more likely to move to China than a China-born person is to move to Singapore.
That does not seem like an unreasonable ratio, given that a) Chinese are not nearly as free, whether economically or politically, to emigrate, b) those Chinese who have the money and connections to leave are likely going to be in the large cities that offer good living standards, and c) China is going to have, from sheer size, aspects that will appeal to Singaporeans regardless of per-capita economic disparity. Put another way, if Chinese were as free to move around the world as Singaporeans, there would surely be many more China-born people in Singapore ... perhaps four times as the current 530K.
By contrast, the US and Spain are fairly comparable in terms of their citizens' freedom to move about, so that factor can be eliminated from the comparison.
The american dream is dead, US is a country for working, not for living.
Definitely a testament to each country too - presumably they have a fairly wide choice. They wouldn't go somewhere they disliked the culture that much. We know how discerning US folk are.
Retirees and people who already made money to outbid the locals on housing and purchasing power.
Why would they move to a more expensive country where they'd feel poor?
Think about it... a hint, it's not about money.
By comparison, try emigrating as a poor person from a poor country with a weak passport. Americans are playing life on easy mode but they complain the most.
Anyway. New world order. USA hegemony is going way.
I guess USAians are beginning to find out how we in the UK felt about the loss of our empire.
(Don't know your country to know if that's true or not, but it's a possibility)
My country offers them both, people from lots of countries como here looking for money and also for a better way of living.
The lesson explains itself.
If the car companies actually go down the drain I have no clue what products of note we would still be producing that would continue to bring money in. So, I think our goose is cooked here in Europe.
In Ireland alone we manufacture:
* Cardiovascular Stents (80% of Global Supply)
* Orthopaedic Knee Implants (75% of Global Supply)
* Acute Hospital Ventilators (50% of Global Supply)
* Contact Lenses (World Leader)
19 of the world's top 20 pharmaceutical companies operate manufacturing, R&D, or biopharma facilities in Ireland; this compromises over 50% of all physical goods exported from Ireland, totaling well over €100 billion annually. Needless to say it's also the pivotal manufacturing hub for high-demand GLP-1 weight-loss and diabetes treatments (like Mounjaro).
Ireland is among the top global exporters of antisera, blood fractions, and complex cell cultures, making it indispensable to global healthcare infrastructure.
Ireland is the absolute world leader in dairy science per capita, and produces roughly 10% to 15% of the entire world's infant milk formula, with estimates indicating that roughly one in ten to one in seven babies globally consume formula manufactured in the country.
That's an Island of less than 5 million people, 1/8th the size of Texas, that was basically bypassed by the Industrial Revolution and had no colonial benefit. Now extrapolate for a second and imagine what Germany is manufacturing.
The Republic of Ireland has more than 5 million people. The Island has well over 7 million.
https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2026/0824/1588997-cso-popul...
There's a lot more market opportunities in China and USA...
We would probably buy slightly worse value European GPUs if they were available right now.
There is regulation and people moan about it. But realistically the AI act and other laws give us legal certainty (a German favorite) and the requirements are not so onerous. We pay a lawyer to figure it out and he tells us to slap a few "AI generated" labels on our website and to have a couple of procedures in the drawer and that's it. ISO 9001, 27001, C5 or whatever you can get as a cloud provider are orders of magnitude more hassle.
Building a competitor to TSMC is definitely something Europeans would like, but it’s also a multi-decade undertaking.
GDPR and other privacy related regulations have existed for basically a decade at this point so it should not be a surprise that companies need to follow those laws.
Anecdotally, there is data center and energy buildout talk here in the Netherlands, a country where land is the top priority for everyone.
Europe might not have a “frontier” lab but this is absolutely investment happening at breakneck pace.
The European Commission wanted to put hefty tariffs on dumped Chinese steel but the carmakers sought an exemption. They don't care about European sovereignty, only about their profits. Penny wise and pound foolish. I doubt there will still be a European car industry in two decades or so.
Europe is a lost continent.
You clearly have no idea about the value creation chain. Steel is a commodity, why shoot yourself into the foot by buying expensive one. And semiconductors are not commodities.
But I guess this logic only makes sense to a country that insists on using its own overpriced steel to save a couple jobs.
Steel is not a commodity, it's a basic ingredient in any industrial base.