Thread: How does Europe compete with such unproductive workers?

Originally Posted by raytri

Compared to the U.S., sure.

The EU has a population density of 116 people per square kilometer.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demogra...European_Union

The United States has a population density of just 34 people per square kilometer.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...lation_density

The more people you pack together, the cheaper it is per capita to house, clothe and feed them. Density facilitates other things, too -- like the exchange of ideas.



And the more spread out a population is, the higher the per-capita transportation costs. Europe has 4 times the density of the U.S., so it gets serious efficiencies there.

That view seems illogical. If that was true. The slums in brazil would be the most productive on earth. As they dense more people than anywhere on earth.

Your view seems with transport is more historical than density. Europe have constructed cities to meet transport needs before america (the one you live in, was invented by european settlers)

Even then the European style of transport infrastructure was taken to the new world. Although in your view it has largly been ignored in america.

Also don't forget Russia is nearly twice as big as the Usa. but yet they do seem to have transport not a great concern.

And the biggest flaw. Europe is split by nation states. The bueacracy to ship anything is complex. So for this view. It needs more review.

Originally Posted by lizarddust

What a load of hogwash!

Fast food workers pay tax just as an investment banker does. They buy goods and services just like investment bankers do, therefore contributing to the economy and society in general. Fast food workers also sh!t, vomit and menstruate just like investment bankers do!

SiliconMagician,, you really need extract your head out of your bum and think before you write.

It sounds to be like he's saying making more money makes a person better than everyone else.

Originally Posted by lizarddust

Are you saying fast food workers aren't pay as you earn employees? Or do they work for cash in hand? Or are their wages so p!ss poor they are below the tax threshold? Are there more married fast food workers than singles?

That would mean they make less than 600 dollars a year. That is the tax threshold.

Originally Posted by SiliconMagician

There is no way in hell that Europe's lazy people can outproduce anyone else by spending so little time on the job. So how are they managing to compete and stay floating despite being so (*)(*)(*)(*) lazy and unproductive. Is it not more competitive to turn out 20 Honda's instead of 5 BMW's in the same span of time? The 20 Hondas should win.

The average person does most things well for maybe four hours. Then you see a 50% reduction in productivity. After another two hours, you see another 50% reduction in productivity. I forget where I read that, but it seems true.

And no. 5 BMWs are a much better long-term investment than 20 Hondas. Aren't they?

Human beings aren't industrial equipment. We weren't designed to live industrial lives. We're designed to climb trees and garden.

Silicon is great forum chat. He reminds me of the city workers in the merchant banks. Anyone earning less than 50k a year was considered poor vermin and should be spat on.

The greed is great mantra. It is not the type of person you are. But how you present yourself to be. Do you have a rolex and a porsche? if the answer is No, then prepare to be spat on by silicon and the investment bankers.

Originally Posted by Daggdag

That would mean they make less than 600 dollars a year. That is the tax threshold.

How many fast food workers in America make less than $600 per annum?

It sounds to be like he's saying making more money makes a person better than everyone else.

True,, but somewhere it was mentioned SiliconMagician only earns $24K

Originally Posted by raytri

Compared to the U.S., sure.

The EU has a population density of 116 people per square kilometer.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demogra...European_Union

The United States has a population density of just 34 people per square kilometer.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...lation_density

The more people you pack together, the cheaper it is per capita to house, clothe and feed them. Density facilitates other things, too -- like the exchange of ideas.



And the more spread out a population is, the higher the per-capita transportation costs. Europe has 4 times the density of the U.S., so it gets serious efficiencies there.

Also this view of transport density. Nearly destroyed New york in the early 20th century. When the horse was the main transport. Tens of thousands of horses in the city. It is written the stink was so bad from the droppings, it killed scores of people per year from the unclean practises of letting it forment in the streets.

Add to that the european era of squaler with dense populations. It is wonder either continent has survived.

Originally Posted by Zosiasmom

Because you've been told it is impossible to be productive and work shorter hours so you believe it.

I think you are correct.

Originally Posted by SiliconMagician

Frankly, I'm scratching my head at how European nations manage to compete on the global stage when their workers spend so little time on the job in the first place. It is common sense that if you have a society that works more hours, they are more productive and competitive. Societies that worker few hours on average, would be less productive and competitive.

Here is an example of the sheer laziness of the Europe worker.



I honestly fail to see how such an unproductive and lazy society manages to produce anything at all that allows them to be competitive on the world market where societies are in rough and wooly competition with each other and whose competitiveness is based on productivity and it stands to reason that a nation whose workers spend too much time on vacation/leisure cannot possibly compete with societies whose workers do not.

Common sense would tell me a societies whose workers only get 2 weeks of vacation on average, would be more competitive and productive than a society whose workers get 6 weeks of vacation.

American workers, the hardest workers in the Western World, are having a hard time competing with Asian workers and are losing their jobs as a result. How is it that Europe's lazy ass people aren't all suffering from economic collapse?

There is no way in hell that Europe's lazy people can outproduce anyone else by spending so little time on the job. So how are they managing to compete and stay floating despite being so (*)(*)(*)(*) lazy and unproductive. Is it not more competitive to turn out 20 Honda's instead of 5 BMW's in the same span of time? The 20 Hondas should win.

It is not the quantity of work that europe produces that makes it competitive but the quality. Since they are well rested from generous vacation and welfare subsidies to their living wages they have more time and energy to make sure everything is complete rather than putting together something half assed like that of what Americans produce.

Compare Cadillac and Lincoln craftmanship and reliability to BMW, Mercedes, etc..

Originally Posted by SiliconMagician

There is no way in hell that Europe's lazy people can outproduce anyone else by spending so little time on the job. So how are they managing to compete and stay floating despite being so (*)(*)(*)(*) lazy and unproductive. Is it not more competitive to turn out 20 Honda's instead of 5 BMW's in the same span of time? The 20 Hondas should win.

Let's reverse this for a minute. Fender guitars and Harley Davidson are two iconic Amercian brands (although think Harleys are a pile of sh!t). Both companies produce at a lesser volume than say their Asian competitors. Does this mean workers in the Fender and Harley factories are lazier than Asian workers?

Do market forces apply here?