As both a Canadian and a European citizen, I have a bit of perspective of the regulatory framework of the USA (which, for the most part, Canada has to adopt) versus the European one. The regulatory framework in the USA seems to prioritise corporations, while the EU's seems to prioritise citizens and consumers. This is obvious in that most European countries, with some glaring exceptions (looking at you Hungary and Poland), rank higher in a myriad of freedom/democracy indices (good for citizens), as well as the quality of products (good for consumers). Food in Europe tastes better and is safer to eat, clothing is more stylish and lasts longer, buildings are built to higher standards, cars are more energy efficient, etc.
Thanks for sharing that perspective. I agree with you - and so would any european who has bought "parmesan" or bread in a north american grocery store.
I just felt on your channel and i really loved it 3rd video i watch, and the quality is just insane (both video and subject treated) i really love pls keep doin it.
Immediately subscribed! Awesome channel. I hope you will address how religion and policy relate to one another. I am a subdeacon in Byzantine Catholic Church. I highly recommend if you can make a video on Vatican joining Davos officially. Government comes and go. Religion is long lasting and has deeper influence to shape policy. I also hope you can discuss about WW3 🙏
When it comes to regulations I have noticed a somewhat bad trend latelly of american sumbol politics entering the european market. We banned plastic straws everywhere even though some people with handicaps need those in order to drink normally (my boss has CP and bunkered up with thousands of plastic straws due to this, almost crippling the personal economy) and the Swedish tax on plastic bags did make the inovation of degradeable wooden plasticlike materials to find a new market but they were still taxed the same meaning that the tax was not to save the environment at all, just to show the public that they do. And since the law of plastic caps on bottles came to EU i have started collecting caps in a bag and I swear that in Stockholm there are way more plastic caps being thrown in nature due to frustration than before they added this crap. Again, a sign that they really don't care about nature but whant to apear like they do. There are also some things being regulated at EU level, or talked about being regulated, that would not work in a market so vastly different in culture. There are talks of adding a EU minimum wage wich would undermine the power of the Scandinavian workers unions since the minimum wage and lack of strikes compared to other countries in the EU is due to said workers unions, among other things. So yeah, there are loads and loads of good areas, but there are also areas where the politicians in the parlament are just making a fool out of them selves.
12:40 I have written a short paper on biofuels regulations in the EU a couple of years ago. I noticed that EU regulations blocks out African imports of cheap biofuels, because those countries find it hard to comply with complex regulation. The major reason for this was to protect EU farmers, and hence protectionism is a valid argument in my opinion, especially regarding agri products. The farm lobby in the EU is very strong, and they often use this to protect themselves from foreign competition
Looking on that from different angle, food is for eating, not for converting it to fuel. If African country wants to starve it's people just to sell calories and enrich a few people, then this regulation is a god send for Africa, not the other way around.
Always depends. For entrepreneurs in the digital field, it is most by a curse, even though the EU claims that they are falling behind, and want to attract more entrepreneurs and skilled people in that field - good luck. For the consumers and general standard of living / quality of life, it is often a win, comes with side effects, though. And there are circumstances, but cases are true. Like parts of the GDPR, which everyone knows from clicking away, and never reading the annoying, total useless compliance banners on every website etc... I have a hard time to understand why there seems no intention, to roll back rules that turned out to be a stupid idea. Plus, all the red tape, and institutional "harassment" + high taxes does usually hit small companies, freelancers, and startups much harder than the large cooperations they are supposed to keep in check. I don't want to call the EU (Also most of the governments on a country level) a hostile environment to startups, and digitalization - but I have to. Interestingly, this is true to many aspects regarding the future. Might sound would, but I think facts would prove, that most countries here are also hostile towards young and mid-aged parts of the population. They are good to pay for everything, but other than that, most advantages are going to where the voters are - old people. I think that is also true for legislation. With Spain as one of the most outrageous examples. - So far for the rant for today. :-D So it is really a mixed bag, and I don't think that the ability to create as many rules as possible is something to celebrate in general... It highly depends...
I think one of the points that was forgotten is that these EU regulations will find very little critique among the consumers and the politicians of other countries. There won't be someone who will feel strongly that mac'n'cheese should have dangerous food dies in it as opposed to paprika powder. As there is no opposition coming from the consumers, the company will follow suit. But if the EU bans petrol cars, those will still be produced for other countries, as there is a local incentive for them to do it. From the countries having strong petroleum lobbies, to the infrastructure making EVs impossible, especially in rural settings. In this case the EU will heavily influence the automobile market, incentivising manufacturers to develop EVs, but the international market will also make the investment in the further development of combustible engines worthwhile.
@@TheMarketExit Absolutely, from succession planning, family trusts to the 'industrial complex' of big law and service firms designed to reduce corporate tax liabilities. It's a huge problem!
You are right, and I do agree. I'm struggling though to find a good angle to make a video like that interesting/entertaining to watch. It's a complex topic to fit into 10-15 mins
Thanks for a great informative video! However, I have some opinions: 1. Regulations and Laws in the EU can certainly be seen as protectionism. For example, EU farmers are protected and subsidized, allowing them to outperform competition from emerging markets like Africa. 2. You hinder innovation and companies profoundly by passing the wrong regulations. If we stop innovations because we are too afraid of the risks, then it is not only EU citizens who will not benefit from it; it is also the third world who will not benefit from, for example, cheap energy. I’m not saying companies should be able to do anything they want in pursuit of new technology, but we should be more careful with regulations so that we don’t destroy more than we try to protect.
Why do you say that regulation does not impede innovation? The common understanding is that due to the burdensome regulation the EU cannot compete on creating a tech industry of its own (as well as access to capital and lack of an integrated market). Did you read any paper on the topic?
@Victorceme Thing is, they're designed to be that way. The EU doesn't care about business. All they care about is controlling what their populations are exposed to. European companies are more affected because most of those countries have very high taxes, low social mobility, high crime rate, etc. Which makes it infinitely harder to even start a business in Europe compared to the US.
I think the Brussels Effect works because the EU doesn't have a competitive industry. They have the money to buy from everyone, but not to manufacture things themselves. And given the geopolitics of global trade, they're even more important as consumers. This dynamic will change if somehow EU countries as a whole change their trade doctrine from mainly consuming to mainly exporting and generating trade surpluses. If there's widespread competition for many things, no part of the world can wield legislative power over any other. The far right is riding this wave at the moment, that's why they're gaining traction. Europeans want to re-industrialize. If that happens, the Brussels Effect is over. Just my modest opinion...
I’m 11 months late to this one… But, taking this to heart, how can this be viewed through another book “The Code of Capital” by K. Pistor? If we grant her take that capital (assets, monetary dynamics, fiscal) is created by law - oh… at this point in the video you pointed to her book… (smacking forehead) Thanks, great…! And subbed… 😅
Hey, thanks for watching and for your comment! Exactly, my thinking is that Anu Bradford simply assumes, almost as per definition, that not even powerful regulators can effectively regulate capital (through eg strict capital taxation, closing tax loopholes, forceful banking regulation etc.), since the capital will then just move away. But, as you note in your comment, K. Pistor shows in her book that also capital is created and governed by law, which means that, arguably, regulating capital shouldn't be more difficult than regulating anything else (within the constraints of the other criteria of the Brussels effect). Thanks for the sub, I hope you'll keep posting smart comments! :D
@@TheMarketExit Thank _you_ for such nice words! At this point, I don’t have too much confidence in our ability to revise our economic institutions. Looking at numbers, governments & many people across the OECD have very similar challenges - across parties and leaders over time. Corporate power is not within democratic reach. The ecological constraints are global, and so are macroeconomic, productive and corporate structures. The realisation of these constraints seems to increase nationalism and geopolitical anarchy - when internationalism and fair exchange are sorely needed. It’s understandable that the global south seek a different path, towards a thriving more than a nominally growing economy (capital assets). Traditional growth takes resources, however “green” they are. If said resources only exist as privately owned assets, people - and their governments, councils - are paying the rent. A “strong state” is equally burdensome as strong private ownership - since ownership is the foundation of power itself. Maybe some sort of _communalism_ (not state communism!) could decouple globalism and build local agencies - in meaningful ways for most people(s)…? 👍
Don't disagree with the points being made, but I disagree with the key takeaways, or at the very least dislike the title. Certainly not a 'superpower', title should be more like 'EU still relevant on global stage and will continue to be...'. You simply cannot apply the label 'superpower' to a group of countries that is 1) content to impose rules on the companies & innovation of the future, while the benefits of the growth accumulate elsewhere (i.e. Silicon Valley) & 2) cannot forge a unified self serving foreign policy even when there's a literal war on their Eastern doorstep
You're totally wrong here. Silicon valley is innovative only on paper. Most things including crypto, ai, tesla, are scams that people who don't know what's going on put all of their retirement funds into. Eu don't allow for such scams and money stays with people. Eu is superpower that is first choice to most migrants now. 50 years ago everyone fleed europe to us. Much changed since then and numbers show. Also it's more rare to see dollar as the most trusted currency in Europe. All you want to buy can be bought internally with one exception - cpus. But still all cpus are impossible without european companies. That probably is more of a political decision than technical. EU does high tech things, us sells it.
bro europe should be the poorest place on earth according to economics. china showed the only legitimate way to increase wealth. europe is addicted to slavery and genocide because thats the only way they ever obtained wealth in the first place. they are literally allergic to paying for labor. but their poor genetics prevent them from maturing past toddlerhood so they cant understand why paying for labor is a non negotiable aspect of actually growing any economy. to europeans the word economy has a completely different meaning. economy to them means "wealth in rich peoples bank accounts and the power to harm life on earth with impunity" .. it has nothing to do with real economic power through the creation of valuable resources and it never has or will because its firmly addicted to monarchist economics.
I do believe that over regulation in the EU is a key reason why Europe keeps falling behind the US and China in terms of economic growth. Brussels is a bureaucratic monster, no reason to celebrate.
Thanks for your comment. Even if it's true that regulation makes EU "fall behind" the US and China, whatever that would mean, the notion of international competitiveness is misguided and makes us focus on economic growth instead of things that actually improve our quality of life.
@@TheMarketExit Brussels only employs 60k people to manage a huge market of half a billion people. There are local councils in the UK who employ much more to manage much less. I wouldn't call it bureaucratic monster, but an efficient, lean machine.
@tobias2688 You think China doesn't over regulate? Lol they're worse than the EU. But they still put satellites in the sky, they have a better economy.
Are any of these regulations putting certain industries and small businesses out of work, thus making the economy weaker. Have you thought about jobs in remote areas and farms that are hindered by regulation? Having regulation that extends so far across different cultures may have drastic long term effects on certain communities. More anthropology studies need to be done and sociological studies to really grasp whats going on. Although, many positive regulations were passed to help the people such as chemical bans, it should be left to the local city or state as we say in the u.s to mandate and enforce a regulation, based off of the ideologies of their local communities and their circumstances; it should be voted on by the people to take in those losses of freedom because otherwise it is somewhat an overreach of power and will only grow into a larger monster over time where the little guy has no rights or chance to object. which is why my ancestors fought in the American revolution and why we have an electoral college over popular vote for presidential elections in the U.S. tread carefully…
Thanks for your comment. I don't disagree with you. One of the main principles of EU law is the Principle of Subsidiarity, which means essentially that regulations should be adopted on the most local level possible. The "problem" with local regulations, though, is that it interferes with efforts to integrate markets and movements across borders. However, we should never forget that we need to strike a relevant balance here. For example, in Sweden where I, a lot of people use something called snus (a tobacco you keep under your lip). When Sweden joined the EU, there was a lot of fears that this would be banned because of EU law, and I do believe that if there hadn't been as much resistance to this, then it probably would have been banned by EU law. Overall, EU law is a complex system to strike the balance between integration and autonomy, between joint growth and cultural plurality. It's tricky though.
As a European myself...the level of cope among Europeans is unreal. We are not a power in any way, shape or form. The sooner we look up to the Americans, the better off we will be.
We have deindustrialized, we aren't capable of competing in cutting edge technology or having any big tech companies, we are not energy independent, we have no resources to speak of, we have even fallen hopelessly behind China in EVs, battery technology and solar panels AND our population is falling which we are trying to make up for by importing immigrants en masse from completely different, incompatible cultures whom we cannot integrate... BUT... we have regulations !!!
its painfully easy to see who is controlling the world just by seeing which cultures are allowed to retain the most amount of obsolete traditional values through violent coercion. seeing as europe still retains most of its monarchs, and europe is demonstrably the least productive place on earth with its workforce while simultaneously spending the more money than everywhere else despite not having any practical or legal means of showing where all the money the spend comes from, its borderline mental illness to say anyone but europe controls the planet. when all the resources are being controlled and consumed by one single continent, its just obvious. that stuff cant happen on accident. you dont just go "whoops all the wealth everyone else generated just fell right into my lap so i spent it all on displays of wealth and self worship" lmfao... look at which things are producing actual value and look at which things are spending that value. the spenders are the ones in control. because they couldnt be the spenders in any other circumstance. everyone else on earth has to produce more than they consume to even begin to deserve to stay alive. europe produces nothing essential and yet still has the highest quality of life and the highest expenditure on its populations well being. spending many hundreds of billions of dollars they did nothing to earn or deserve... and its done through mass corruption and violent coercion. not legitimate business practices. every major eurocentric company has over 100% of its operational costs subsidized by their governments. they pay less than nothing in taxes and wages and get untold amounts of free money from the government to make it happen. nothing in eurocentric culture is even capitalist anymore. its just monarchy wearing a mask and calling itself a democracy despite not having a single identifiably democratic aspect to their culture or economy..
number 3 is correct. Look at the car companies. I am not sure if this is really a "superpower". USA can easily dictate EU's international policies such as using NATO to go to Afghanistan and so on.
I´m sceptic. The EU as a significant regulator in economy and product-design and components? And i have heard of the american elites, that they are impressed of the EU regulation-Strategys. But that is maybe only posioned praise and signs, that there is something hidden behind all this scenario. First of all, its not very honorable to redgulate some things, when there is much more, that have to get regulated. I mean for example the uge use of pesticides in Farming or the problem of metalions in the enviorment and food also. Ther is no way, that this is good for life, besides the problem, that it seems to support the increase of harvest-amount out of same area. But thats not, what happend in reality. And if that isn´t happend, why poisoning at all, if that will make problems for consumers health? Maybe because there is a dark strategy behind the scenario: Those, who want to get away without farming-chemicals, may get their fields contaminated with varmints? So they will adapt the pesticides and whatever more there is chemical for a calculably harvest? That would be a bad dystopia.... but the modern world maybe is such unhonorable programmed and does not forgive non-cooperation. That "freedom" sucks... when you have guarantzed formal freedom, but in the end you are forced to do, what others want over strucutral mechanisms.
Great video! But I cannot convey how much pain, frustration and anger brings me a wrong map, where Crimea is marked as being part of Russia. I hope it was just a silly mistake, where you or your editor took some existing fancy maps and forgot to check the validity of the map. But for now it is a dislike.
Thank you for your comment, I really appreciate that you bring this up. I download most of the geodata I use in my animations from the public domain source Natural Earth Data. Here's the policy they follow for disputed territoires: www.naturalearthdata.com/about/disputed-boundaries-policy/ To be honest, I've just taken this policy as acceptable at face value. But, following your comment I will reconsider this and be more critical going forward. Thank you!
As both a Canadian and a European citizen, I have a bit of perspective of the regulatory framework of the USA (which, for the most part, Canada has to adopt) versus the European one. The regulatory framework in the USA seems to prioritise corporations, while the EU's seems to prioritise citizens and consumers. This is obvious in that most European countries, with some glaring exceptions (looking at you Hungary and Poland), rank higher in a myriad of freedom/democracy indices (good for citizens), as well as the quality of products (good for consumers). Food in Europe tastes better and is safer to eat, clothing is more stylish and lasts longer, buildings are built to higher standards, cars are more energy efficient, etc.
Thanks for sharing that perspective. I agree with you - and so would any european who has bought "parmesan" or bread in a north american grocery store.
@thomaspatricio Could you please elaborate on why you think Canada has to adopt the regulatory framework of the USA?
NAFTA@@akay_2
@@akay_2I would expect that would be if Canada wants to trade with the US, they need to bow down to their more powerful neighbour.
Your videos have an amazing quality and are very insightful. Thank you for making them!
Thank you very much for watching and commenting. It encourages me to keep going! :)
Commenting for the algorithm. Your videos are great and should be seen more!
Such good videos. Thanks for this high quality releases and for sharing!
I’ll hope your videos gets more attention. Phenomenal work!
Thanks! :)
His stuff seems honest and to the point..
Keep doing this brother, and you will definitely make it big in YT
Thanks for the nice video!
Thanks for the nice comment :)
Hell of a good video…. It also offers a very fresh angle to „us invents, eu regulates“ type of silicon valley chants.
Glad you enjoyed it!
I just felt on your channel and i really loved it 3rd video i watch, and the quality is just insane (both video and subject treated) i really love pls keep doin it.
Wow, that's kind of you. I will keep making videos. Working on one now that hopefully will be out soon, stay tuned! :)
Immediately subscribed! Awesome channel. I hope you will address how religion and policy relate to one another. I am a subdeacon in Byzantine Catholic Church. I highly recommend if you can make a video on Vatican joining Davos officially. Government comes and go. Religion is long lasting and has deeper influence to shape policy. I also hope you can discuss about WW3 🙏
man your content is amazing and I wish you the best
Amazing, as always
When it comes to regulations I have noticed a somewhat bad trend latelly of american sumbol politics entering the european market. We banned plastic straws everywhere even though some people with handicaps need those in order to drink normally (my boss has CP and bunkered up with thousands of plastic straws due to this, almost crippling the personal economy) and the Swedish tax on plastic bags did make the inovation of degradeable wooden plasticlike materials to find a new market but they were still taxed the same meaning that the tax was not to save the environment at all, just to show the public that they do. And since the law of plastic caps on bottles came to EU i have started collecting caps in a bag and I swear that in Stockholm there are way more plastic caps being thrown in nature due to frustration than before they added this crap. Again, a sign that they really don't care about nature but whant to apear like they do. There are also some things being regulated at EU level, or talked about being regulated, that would not work in a market so vastly different in culture. There are talks of adding a EU minimum wage wich would undermine the power of the Scandinavian workers unions since the minimum wage and lack of strikes compared to other countries in the EU is due to said workers unions, among other things. So yeah, there are loads and loads of good areas, but there are also areas where the politicians in the parlament are just making a fool out of them selves.
Love your video keep up the good work very acknowledgement
Thanks :)
12:40 I have written a short paper on biofuels regulations in the EU a couple of years ago. I noticed that EU regulations blocks out African imports of cheap biofuels, because those countries find it hard to comply with complex regulation. The major reason for this was to protect EU farmers, and hence protectionism is a valid argument in my opinion, especially regarding agri products. The farm lobby in the EU is very strong, and they often use this to protect themselves from foreign competition
Looking on that from different angle, food is for eating, not for converting it to fuel. If African country wants to starve it's people just to sell calories and enrich a few people, then this regulation is a god send for Africa, not the other way around.
Always depends. For entrepreneurs in the digital field, it is most by a curse, even though the EU claims that they are falling behind, and want to attract more entrepreneurs and skilled people in that field - good luck. For the consumers and general standard of living / quality of life, it is often a win, comes with side effects, though. And there are circumstances, but cases are true. Like parts of the GDPR, which everyone knows from clicking away, and never reading the annoying, total useless compliance banners on every website etc... I have a hard time to understand why there seems no intention, to roll back rules that turned out to be a stupid idea.
Plus, all the red tape, and institutional "harassment" + high taxes does usually hit small companies, freelancers, and startups much harder than the large cooperations they are supposed to keep in check. I don't want to call the EU (Also most of the governments on a country level) a hostile environment to startups, and digitalization - but I have to. Interestingly, this is true to many aspects regarding the future. Might sound would, but I think facts would prove, that most countries here are also hostile towards young and mid-aged parts of the population. They are good to pay for everything, but other than that, most advantages are going to where the voters are - old people. I think that is also true for legislation. With Spain as one of the most outrageous examples. - So far for the rant for today. :-D So it is really a mixed bag, and I don't think that the ability to create as many rules as possible is something to celebrate in general... It highly depends...
I think one of the points that was forgotten is that these EU regulations will find very little critique among the consumers and the politicians of other countries. There won't be someone who will feel strongly that mac'n'cheese should have dangerous food dies in it as opposed to paprika powder.
As there is no opposition coming from the consumers, the company will follow suit.
But if the EU bans petrol cars, those will still be produced for other countries, as there is a local incentive for them to do it. From the countries having strong petroleum lobbies, to the infrastructure making EVs impossible, especially in rural settings.
In this case the EU will heavily influence the automobile market, incentivising manufacturers to develop EVs, but the international market will also make the investment in the further development of combustible engines worthwhile.
Makalös redigering, som alltid😱👏🏻
Tack!
Please make a video on how the law creates wealth and inequality!
Thanks for the encouragement. Think people would click that video?
@@TheMarketExit Absolutely, from succession planning, family trusts to the 'industrial complex' of big law and service firms designed to reduce corporate tax liabilities. It's a huge problem!
You are right, and I do agree. I'm struggling though to find a good angle to make a video like that interesting/entertaining to watch. It's a complex topic to fit into 10-15 mins
@@TheMarketExit maybe make it in 4 parts? 🤗
Thanks for a great informative video! However, I have some opinions:
1. Regulations and Laws in the EU can certainly be seen as protectionism. For example, EU farmers are protected and subsidized, allowing them to outperform competition from emerging markets like Africa.
2. You hinder innovation and companies profoundly by passing the wrong regulations. If we stop innovations because we are too afraid of the risks, then it is not only EU citizens who will not benefit from it; it is also the third world who will not benefit from, for example, cheap energy. I’m not saying companies should be able to do anything they want in pursuit of new technology, but we should be more careful with regulations so that we don’t destroy more than we try to protect.
Those are valid points
Why do you say that regulation does not impede innovation? The common understanding is that due to the burdensome regulation the EU cannot compete on creating a tech industry of its own (as well as access to capital and lack of an integrated market). Did you read any paper on the topic?
@Victorceme Thing is, they're designed to be that way. The EU doesn't care about business. All they care about is controlling what their populations are exposed to.
European companies are more affected because most of those countries have very high taxes, low social mobility, high crime rate, etc. Which makes it infinitely harder to even start a business in Europe compared to the US.
I think the Brussels Effect works because the EU doesn't have a competitive industry. They have the money to buy from everyone, but not to manufacture things themselves.
And given the geopolitics of global trade, they're even more important as consumers.
This dynamic will change if somehow EU countries as a whole change their trade doctrine from mainly consuming to mainly exporting and generating trade surpluses. If there's widespread competition for many things, no part of the world can wield legislative power over any other.
The far right is riding this wave at the moment, that's why they're gaining traction. Europeans want to re-industrialize. If that happens, the Brussels Effect is over.
Just my modest opinion...
the algo picked it up just now
What's the deal with random ticking noises throughout the video
I’m 11 months late to this one… But, taking this to heart, how can this be viewed through another book “The Code of Capital” by K. Pistor?
If we grant her take that capital (assets, monetary dynamics, fiscal) is created by law - oh… at this point in the video you pointed to her book… (smacking forehead)
Thanks, great…! And subbed… 😅
Hey, thanks for watching and for your comment! Exactly, my thinking is that Anu Bradford simply assumes, almost as per definition, that not even powerful regulators can effectively regulate capital (through eg strict capital taxation, closing tax loopholes, forceful banking regulation etc.), since the capital will then just move away. But, as you note in your comment, K. Pistor shows in her book that also capital is created and governed by law, which means that, arguably, regulating capital shouldn't be more difficult than regulating anything else (within the constraints of the other criteria of the Brussels effect). Thanks for the sub, I hope you'll keep posting smart comments! :D
@@TheMarketExit Thank _you_ for such nice words!
At this point, I don’t have too much confidence in our ability to revise our economic institutions. Looking at numbers, governments & many people across the OECD have very similar challenges - across parties and leaders over time. Corporate power is not within democratic reach.
The ecological constraints are global, and so are macroeconomic, productive and corporate structures. The realisation of these constraints seems to increase nationalism and geopolitical anarchy - when internationalism and fair exchange are sorely needed.
It’s understandable that the global south seek a different path, towards a thriving more than a nominally growing economy (capital assets).
Traditional growth takes resources, however “green” they are. If said resources only exist as privately owned assets, people - and their governments, councils - are paying the rent.
A “strong state” is equally burdensome as strong private ownership - since ownership is the foundation of power itself.
Maybe some sort of _communalism_ (not state communism!) could decouple globalism and build local agencies - in meaningful ways for most people(s)…?
👍
Don't disagree with the points being made, but I disagree with the key takeaways, or at the very least dislike the title. Certainly not a 'superpower', title should be more like 'EU still relevant on global stage and will continue to be...'.
You simply cannot apply the label 'superpower' to a group of countries that is 1) content to impose rules on the companies & innovation of the future, while the benefits of the growth accumulate elsewhere (i.e. Silicon Valley) & 2) cannot forge a unified self serving foreign policy even when there's a literal war on their Eastern doorstep
That's a fun title suggestion, I like that. Cheers! :)
You're totally wrong here. Silicon valley is innovative only on paper. Most things including crypto, ai, tesla, are scams that people who don't know what's going on put all of their retirement funds into. Eu don't allow for such scams and money stays with people.
Eu is superpower that is first choice to most migrants now. 50 years ago everyone fleed europe to us. Much changed since then and numbers show.
Also it's more rare to see dollar as the most trusted currency in Europe. All you want to buy can be bought internally with one exception - cpus. But still all cpus are impossible without european companies. That probably is more of a political decision than technical.
EU does high tech things, us sells it.
bro europe should be the poorest place on earth according to economics. china showed the only legitimate way to increase wealth. europe is addicted to slavery and genocide because thats the only way they ever obtained wealth in the first place. they are literally allergic to paying for labor. but their poor genetics prevent them from maturing past toddlerhood so they cant understand why paying for labor is a non negotiable aspect of actually growing any economy. to europeans the word economy has a completely different meaning. economy to them means "wealth in rich peoples bank accounts and the power to harm life on earth with impunity" .. it has nothing to do with real economic power through the creation of valuable resources and it never has or will because its firmly addicted to monarchist economics.
Thats why have we California to lead or at least thats what we're led to believe
You expect us to trust your research when you cannot even find the correct pictures of the people involved in the Maastricht treaty?
I do believe that over regulation in the EU is a key reason why Europe keeps falling behind the US and China in terms of economic growth. Brussels is a bureaucratic monster, no reason to celebrate.
Thanks for your comment. Even if it's true that regulation makes EU "fall behind" the US and China, whatever that would mean, the notion of international competitiveness is misguided and makes us focus on economic growth instead of things that actually improve our quality of life.
@@TheMarketExit Brussels only employs 60k people to manage a huge market of half a billion people. There are local councils in the UK who employ much more to manage much less. I wouldn't call it bureaucratic monster, but an efficient, lean machine.
@@marsjfieldsYep it’s always the people that shout “biG bAd gOverNment” don’t actually know what governing bodies does
@tobias2688 You think China doesn't over regulate? Lol they're worse than the EU. But they still put satellites in the sky, they have a better economy.
👍
Are any of these regulations putting certain industries and small businesses out of work, thus making the economy weaker. Have you thought about jobs in remote areas and farms that are hindered by regulation? Having regulation that extends so far across different cultures may have drastic long term effects on certain communities. More anthropology studies need to be done and sociological studies to really grasp whats going on. Although, many positive regulations were passed to help the people such as chemical bans, it should be left to the local city or state as we say in the u.s to mandate and enforce a regulation, based off of the ideologies of their local communities and their circumstances; it should be voted on by the people to take in those losses of freedom because otherwise it is somewhat an overreach of power and will only grow into a larger monster over time where the little guy has no rights or chance to object. which is why my ancestors fought in the American revolution and why we have an electoral college over popular vote for presidential elections in the U.S. tread carefully…
Thanks for your comment. I don't disagree with you. One of the main principles of EU law is the Principle of Subsidiarity, which means essentially that regulations should be adopted on the most local level possible. The "problem" with local regulations, though, is that it interferes with efforts to integrate markets and movements across borders. However, we should never forget that we need to strike a relevant balance here. For example, in Sweden where I, a lot of people use something called snus (a tobacco you keep under your lip). When Sweden joined the EU, there was a lot of fears that this would be banned because of EU law, and I do believe that if there hadn't been as much resistance to this, then it probably would have been banned by EU law. Overall, EU law is a complex system to strike the balance between integration and autonomy, between joint growth and cultural plurality. It's tricky though.
As a European myself...the level of cope among Europeans is unreal.
We are not a power in any way, shape or form. The sooner we look up to the Americans, the better off we will be.
We have deindustrialized, we aren't capable of competing in cutting edge technology or having any big tech companies, we are not energy independent, we have no resources to speak of, we have even fallen hopelessly behind China in EVs, battery technology and solar panels AND our population is falling which we are trying to make up for by importing immigrants en masse from completely different, incompatible cultures whom we cannot integrate... BUT... we have regulations !!!
@@S41GON whom we cannot integrate? Lmao this is utter bs. The racism reeks through
its painfully easy to see who is controlling the world just by seeing which cultures are allowed to retain the most amount of obsolete traditional values through violent coercion. seeing as europe still retains most of its monarchs, and europe is demonstrably the least productive place on earth with its workforce while simultaneously spending the more money than everywhere else despite not having any practical or legal means of showing where all the money the spend comes from, its borderline mental illness to say anyone but europe controls the planet. when all the resources are being controlled and consumed by one single continent, its just obvious. that stuff cant happen on accident. you dont just go "whoops all the wealth everyone else generated just fell right into my lap so i spent it all on displays of wealth and self worship" lmfao... look at which things are producing actual value and look at which things are spending that value. the spenders are the ones in control. because they couldnt be the spenders in any other circumstance. everyone else on earth has to produce more than they consume to even begin to deserve to stay alive. europe produces nothing essential and yet still has the highest quality of life and the highest expenditure on its populations well being. spending many hundreds of billions of dollars they did nothing to earn or deserve... and its done through mass corruption and violent coercion. not legitimate business practices. every major eurocentric company has over 100% of its operational costs subsidized by their governments. they pay less than nothing in taxes and wages and get untold amounts of free money from the government to make it happen. nothing in eurocentric culture is even capitalist anymore. its just monarchy wearing a mask and calling itself a democracy despite not having a single identifiably democratic aspect to their culture or economy..
number 3 is correct. Look at the car companies. I am not sure if this is really a "superpower". USA can easily dictate EU's international policies such as using NATO to go to Afghanistan and so on.
We made mac and cheese change color! EU is world power. Lol checks out.
Gotta celebrate them small wins, right?
I´m sceptic. The EU as a significant regulator in economy and product-design and components? And i have heard of the american elites, that they are impressed of the EU regulation-Strategys. But that is maybe only posioned praise and signs, that there is something hidden behind all this scenario. First of all, its not very honorable to redgulate some things, when there is much more, that have to get regulated. I mean for example the uge use of pesticides in Farming or the problem of metalions in the enviorment and food also. Ther is no way, that this is good for life, besides the problem, that it seems to support the increase of harvest-amount out of same area. But thats not, what happend in reality. And if that isn´t happend, why poisoning at all, if that will make problems for consumers health? Maybe because there is a dark strategy behind the scenario: Those, who want to get away without farming-chemicals, may get their fields contaminated with varmints? So they will adapt the pesticides and whatever more there is chemical for a calculably harvest?
That would be a bad dystopia.... but the modern world maybe is such unhonorable programmed and does not forgive non-cooperation. That "freedom" sucks... when you have guarantzed formal freedom, but in the end you are forced to do, what others want over strucutral mechanisms.
Too unrated
Thanks!
Great video! But I cannot convey how much pain, frustration and anger brings me a wrong map, where Crimea is marked as being part of Russia. I hope it was just a silly mistake, where you or your editor took some existing fancy maps and forgot to check the validity of the map. But for now it is a dislike.
Thank you for your comment, I really appreciate that you bring this up. I download most of the geodata I use in my animations from the public domain source Natural Earth Data. Here's the policy they follow for disputed territoires: www.naturalearthdata.com/about/disputed-boundaries-policy/
To be honest, I've just taken this policy as acceptable at face value. But, following your comment I will reconsider this and be more critical going forward. Thank you!
@oleksandrdashkov951 Cry more. Crimea IS part of Russia, just as the Donbass region soon will be. L O L