I was just about to make that point. Chefs, farmers and vintners work long hours. Maybe that’s why the product is so good

Yes, Europe is quite socialist and I don’t like it at all – but I’m not sure it’s really as socialist as you pictured it here. This picture sounds more like Mussolini’s Italy than like Angie’s Germany.

I have to admit I know that much about Germany and France. But 15-20 big corporations could not support 60-80 million people. And entrepreneurship isn’t impossible as the rest of the millions of people are supported by it. Berlin has really lots of freelancers, that’s for sure.

Looking at the Economic Freedom Index or Heritage, there is a complex picture. For example, Sweden is very statist in almost everything, but business freedom is quite high – licencing and such – so I figure that’s what keeps it all from not falling apart. Italy is very statist too, but labour freedom is high, so perhaps that’s what it keeps it from not falling apart. France really sucks – I don’t what keeps it from not falling apart.

Having said that, I’d rather live in the US and especially in the US before the New Deal than here, and I find our socialism throroughly disgusting and counter-productive. (But I’ll stay because I don’t want to live my kin behind.) But it’s perhaps not AS bad as you pictured – though probably it will be.

My opinion shouldn’t be taken too seriously as my experience is with two atypical European countries, UK and Hungary.

There are indeed some people in France who do not work very hard/long, but there are also a LOT of people who do, despite the socialist controls. It will be interesting to see what happens in the US when the Democrats impose these controls on US society.

On the positive side, the French really are the world’s masters at cooking and wine making.

Unlike Europeans, Americans aren’t accustomed to massive restrictions on personal freedom. They also have a much higher standard of living. Those who idolize Europe have never lived their. European houses are 900 square feet, compared to America’s 2,400 square feet on average. American homes have large appliances and air conditioning. European homes do not. Europe suffers from high unemployment and deep job dissatisfaction stemming from the issues Scott described in his post. The list of differences goes on but the point is that a lower standard of living is what a European economy will sustain. Today we have an entire generation of voters who wasn’t even alive in the 70’s, has no idea what communism is and doesn’t understand that the only way to reduce income inequality is to make everyone but the most well connected equally poor. My hope is that once their employment prospects evaporate and they see the backslide in their standard of living, we will see another voter revolt like the one we had in 1980.

The thing we have going for us today that we didn’t have in the 1970’s is the competition from emerging markets. We will either have to compete or die. Europe was already learning that lesson and responding to it with lower taxes and more market liberalization before this “crisis” hit the fan.

What a condescending and idiotic statement made by someone who thinks he understands an agrarian economy circa 1900. Peasants, to be self-sufficient, would have to grow grain, tubers, leafy green vegetables, and fruits. They would have to raise chickens and cows or goats for meat, eggs, and dairy products. They would need horses or oxens to pull wagons and plows, and they would need pastureland and hay to feed them. They would have to make their own butter and cheese. They would have to mill their own grain; forge their own tools, hardware, nails, and plows; make their own candles or lamp oil; cut trees and saw lumber for house and barn construction and for barrels and bins; and find and correctly process a wide variety of plants with medicinal properties and learn how to treat themselves, their family members, and their animals. No peasant family can do all this. Only a network of farmers, farriers, smiths, millers, sawyers, coopers, veteranarians, and physicians could make this work. Our ‘peasant’ farmers never were self-sufficient.

What especially irks me is the idea that this peasant lifestyle if perfectly OK for the masses. I’d like to put him to work on a farm during planting, growing, and harvesting seasons and find out how much he enjoys the lifestyle.

Obama: For a change. Once.

Here’s a stray thought:

Given Obama’s 1930’s enthusiasm for labor unions, what happens if the Armed Forces suddenly announce they’re agreeable to unionization as well? Hey, if the sophisticated Dutch, Norwegians, and Germans can do it, why can’t we?

Seems to me if this happens, His Majesty will be cornered: if he opposes military unions, then he’ll look like a hypocrite. Conversely, if His Majesty supports military unionization then he runs the risk of dealing with all the charming habits exhibited by unions over the years: collective bargaining, closed shops, binding arbitration, work slowdowns, and even strikes. Hell, a unionized military might even flat-out refuse to deploy to a hot spot because “it’s not in our contract.”

Unlikely? Ummm, well, before this year nobody thought an underachieving, thuggish, community organizer, with a pretty face and paper-thin resume, could be a serious POTUS nominee either.