I think the Youtube comparison is a good one up to a point. It's a niche product. Everyone wants to be part of it, competing for a very very limited resource which is our attention. While with technologies like GPT or whatever comes next we empower anyone to excel in any area and create whatever (for now non-material things).
Most of our ancestors actually had less stressful jobs and worked less than we do today. The average agricultural worker 100 years ago was not even doing a part-time in terms of time spent doing actual work. More like 2h/day on average.
is not accounting differences at all:
- Europeans (and I am one) live in tiny housing even compared to people in NYC.
- we have less cars (you can claim it's due to public transport but if public transport is not available most people would not afford cars regardless.
- overall less leisure expenditures and less disposable income.
That 10k doctor is a myth and certainly not something the 100k developer will have to pay. That's covered by his company. Healthcare is an issue in US when you're at the bottom of the food chain.
last time I checked countries like Romania (E Europe) had the smallest pay gap in Europe. the issue is usually in countries like Germany, Switzerland or Netherlands.
why pay more taxes when there's no accountability and responsibility regarding spending? spending needs to get under control before raising taxes is even a thing.
where are the profits going? if a German company opens a factory in Hungary where it produces let's sau Automotive parts of course Hungary develops a trade surplus. they sell automotive parts to Germany. however the profits of the German HU subsidiary will all go back to Germany. that trade surplus means nothing.
>Western companies come to Hungary because its cheap force, despite being generally lower quality than west
I doubt the average Hungarian is of "lower quality" than the average Belgian (I live in Belgium and I lived in Romania and UK as well) - when it comes to people doing manufacturing jobs you refer to I'd say that E Europe has a more solid and reliable human capital.
>in the east, there aren't enough big domestic companies that would be successful and employ people
Before the collapse of communism E Europe was perfectly capable to keep all their population in employment. Sure those companies were not prepared to compete in an open market and were decimated by their Western counter-parts. Today E Europe cannot strong competitors (although that is changing in sectors like IT) primarily due to the open market (impossible to compete with somebody that has 10x your capital; even when some promising E European actor appears, gets acquired by some W European company before it manages to pass a certain size)
But besides the point, check the unemployment rate in any E European country and most fair way better than their Wester coutner-parts.
> Eastern Europe, like many other poor places in the world, is depleted of human capital because its simply such a crappy place to live.
Quite a broad unsubstantiated statement. What is crappy? The fact that most people are able to own a house while in countries like Belgium is getting impossible to buy anything for young people? The nature? The job opportunities that are plenty due to continuous and fast growth? I don't recall last time a new large corporation entered Brussels in the past 10 years.
The main issue is that there is a salary gap. A middle class salary in Hungary gives you a similar standard of living and lifestyle as a middle class salary in Belgium. But working in Belgium temporarily and planning a return to let's say Hungary... gives you an even better potential lifestyle. That is the issue. The gaps were too big to have an open market and there's little focus on closing the gaps.
Those 3b are such a simplistic narrative. How much money do Western companies make in Hungary due to EU? The reality is that EU is mostly a neo-colonial project where the East Europe is depleted of resources (especially human capital) and treated as nothing more than a marketplace for W European products.
Between the power/control being taken over by someone elected and supported by most of his country or being taken over by some bigger organization like EU with very twisted interests... well.. I thing the first is preferred.
I agree the burden of switching countries is too big. But as a share of that burden the beaurocracy of getting a new residence would be somewhere at the bottom. The biggest burden of switching to a new country within the EU would be language, culture (there's a lot of things in common but as many differences too) and family/friends. I did change country 2x and my biggest worry has always been first securing a new job. I never cared about the beaurocracy because I knew it will be sorted out sooner or later once I move.