r/USvsEU • u/swamperogre2 Pimp my ride • 1d ago
Right, to the Yanks here always commenting about how Europe is taking advantage of the US, can you politely answer these questions?
No name calling, no insults or childish retorts. Just a polite explanation of your viewpoints please.
You support tariffs on U.S. exports to Europe because you think that will stop Europe from taking advantage of the U.S. economically. But have you thought about how tariffs usually work? They're typically used to make imports more expensive, so they protect local industries from foreign competition. If you're putting tariffs on what you export then aren't you just making it harder for American businesses to sell overseas? That could actually help European industries by reducing competition from the U.S., and not actually hurt them. So I'm curious how you see that helping American companies. Can you walk me through your thinking on that?
You believe the U.S. should leave NATO because European countries have been relying too much on American military power and haven’t been doing enough to build up their own defenses. But if the goal was to push Europe to become more self-reliant, why didn’t the U.S. give a formal announcement two to five years in advance? That kind of notice would have given European nations time to prepare and invest in their own militaries instead of being caught off guard and if this move wasn’t intended to be aggressive or hostile toward Europe, how do you explain the U.S. turning around and forming closer ties with Russia? Russia has a long and consistent track record of military aggression in Europe. So I’m wondering how that fits with the idea of encouraging European independence while supposedly still supporting peace and security?
You argue that Europe can't build up its military because it spends too much on social safety nets. But I'm trying to understand why you think those two things can't exist side by side. There are plenty of examples of countries with strong militaries that also have robust social programs. So why, in your view, does Europe have to choose between defense and supporting its own citizens? The fact that there are countries where both can co-exist seems to suggest that it's possible to do both. And when you criticize Europe for this supposed trade-off, do you also apply the same logic to the U.S.? Because the U.S. has massive military spending, yet it struggles with things like healthcare access, infrastructure, and affordability of basic needs. So is the issue really about Europe's priorities, or is it more about how any government chooses to allocate its resources? It sounds like blaming social programs is a convenient way to write off Europe's approach, but it doesn’t hold up when you look at what countries are actually doing. I’m genuinely interested in how you reconcile all of that.
You’ve said that European countries were foolish or weak for still relying on Russian gas after the invasion of Ukraine. But I’m wondering if you’ve thought about how complicated it actually is to cut off energy supply chains on short notice. These aren’t just switches you flip. Entire industries, national grids, and millions of households depend on those pipelines. Shutting them off overnight isn’t just difficult, it could cause economic collapse or even put lives at risk. It’s easy to criticize in hindsight, but can you honestly say that your own country would have done things differently if it had been just as dependent? And even if leaders wanted to cut ties with Russian gas immediately, they still needed time to find alternatives, build infrastructure, and secure new contracts. That’s not about weakness, that’s about managing a crisis responsibly. So I’m curious, when you say Europe should’ve just stopped using Russian gas right away, what exactly do you think the realistic alternative was? Do you believe energy independence happens in weeks or are you just looking for an excuse to sound tough after the fact?
You seem to have a real issue with the fact that European countries have social safety nets. But I don’t get why it bothers you so much. If you believe that not having those kinds of systems works better for your country, then fair enough. No one’s stopping you from living that way. So why are you so quick to mock or insult countries that choose to do things differently? What difference does it actually make to you if another country decides to provide healthcare, education, or housing support to its people? It’s not your money, not your system, and not your government. If Europeans are happy with the way their countries function, why does that get under your skin? You say it makes them weak, but weak compared to what? And even if you think their model is flawed, do you really gain anything by constantly ridiculing it instead of just focusing on what works for you?
32
u/ItsACaragor Pinzutu 1d ago edited 1d ago
They don’t know how tariffs work. Just go read /r/conservative, they think the exporter is paying them so they don’t see any harm to themselves and that it will make the US stronger, as a result to them more tariffs is always better
Obama was already asking EU to invest more in their militaries so we had more than enough heads up that this would be an issue, our leaders just ignored it.
Yeah this is one of the many dumb thing they believe. The US already spends more per capita on healthcare than any european country so they could have a european style public healthcare system that would cost less money than the one they currently have, it’s just that they were trained by their media to hate it and believe insurance companies should get the money instead.
Putin annexed parts of Georgia in 2008 and then parts of Ukraine in 2014. That’s 8 years european countries should have used to cut off their use of russian gas or at least diversify. Once again our leaders betrayed us, cheap russian gas was good for economy and so they just pretended they did not see what was happening and did not even have a contingency plan ready. This is unforgivable. Schroder and then Merkel are the worst offenders. Schroder now lives in Russia and occupies a high position at Gazprom which is Russia’s state owned gas company.
Trump and his cronies are adamant that any kind of socialized healthcare that actually works to benefit the people it is supposed to benefits must not work because if American people knew how good it feels it is likely many would start demanding one. Insurance companies are a huge lobby with a huge weight in US congress and a ton of money, most of it is used to demonize european style public healthcare systems as socialist and unamerican.
12
u/flaretrainer Commiefornian 1d ago
That’s pretty much my and most of the people I know in California’s opinion as well
10
8
u/Unusual-Assistant642 Dalmatian 1d ago
tbh, i browse r/conservative fairly often since i'm interested in what their opinions on the current administrations moves are, and they (at least the ones who aren't constantly screeching about brigading and "fellow conservatives" at everyone who disagrees with them or Trump slightly) seem fairly unsupportive on both the blanket tarrifs and the way they're calculated, and both the greenland and canada shitshow
(although many comments are just straight up unavailable so i'm not sure how representative those opinions are of the sub in general)
so even there while they generally seem to agree with trumps policies on immigrants, DEI and the like, they also seem to be not very supportive (or at the very least sceptical/hesitant) of some more batshit insane policies being enacted
11
u/flaretrainer Commiefornian 1d ago
It’s sad because they complain about the administration but also immediately shut anybody down anyone who also complains if they aren’t conservative, and none of the sub members can figure out they keep getting scammed for votes by republican politicians
7
u/ItsACaragor Pinzutu 1d ago
On tariffs I would estimate it’s 2/3 of them who think they are awesome and will conjure manufacturing jobs out of thin air vs 1/3 who kinda know that this is going to backfire (the impression I got is that the 1/3 are the old school conservatives who actually somewhat understand how the world work).
A big majority of them are just sucking each other off about how cool Trump is.
Their main critics seem to be Musk’s buffooneries and the Greenland / Canada threats.
Most of them (I would say 80%) seem to eagerly support Musk purging the government to make investigations about Trump and himself disappear.
Overall the vibe I get from most of them is that of a weird personality cult that has very little formal education (especially on economy, the things I read there is insane) and no real clue how the world works in general.
7
u/swamperogre2 Pimp my ride 1d ago
Kudos on giving me a reasonable response to points 2 and 4. I actually didn't know about that TBH.
2
u/JoeyAaron School shooter 1d ago
Trump and his cronies are adamant that any kind of socialized healthcare that actually works to benefit the people it is supposed to benefits must not work because if American people knew how good it feels it is likely many would start demanding one.
This is not Trump's position.
Honestly, I'd wager Trump supports "socialized medicine." However, it would be a shitshow to get passed, and there's no guarantee the result would be any good. Any President who decides to try and change our healthcare system has to understand that this will take up his entire Presidency. Trump has other priorities in governing. He's not made healthcare a priority in any of his campaigns, other than to oppose Republicans who want to cut Medicare for old people.
14
11
u/McLovett325 Annoying Tech Bro 1d ago
I cannot answer all of these but as someone with a couple friends that are sliding right I hope I can shed some light on 2, and 5 at least.
They view the fact that we pay so much for the EU's defence via NATO as the SOLE reason the EU is able to have the social safety nets in the first place. That combined with 'but EU so small that's how they can afford the safety nets' they also feel that we don't get anything out of NATO besides military spending so it's not really beneficial.
The Americana mentality of "I got mine", crabs in the bucket, survivorship bias, selfishness i would hope are visible to the rest of the world by this point.
"Why should we give everyone help? I was homeless and pulled myself up by the bootstraps and paid my college debt, you should too, if you don't that's not fair to me the person who already paid off the debt what do I get in return?"
& "why should my tax money go to pay for someone else's plastic surgery? I pay so much in taxes already!"
my personal favorite "Yeah well maybe the EU has universal healthcare but I don't want to bleed out waiting for my turn to get looked at the lines are sooooo long, and look at Canada their tax money goes to legal suicide!"
I hope this helps somewhat =/
1
u/d3s3rt_eagle Mafia boss 18h ago
- They view the fact that we pay so much for the EU's defence via NATO as the SOLE reason the EU is able to have the social safety nets in the first place. That combined with 'but EU so small that's how they can afford the safety nets' they also feel that we don't get anything out of NATO besides military spending so it's not really beneficial.
I mean, the largest part of what the US "pays" goes to Lockheed Martin & co, so it's also very beneficial for your industry. And well, the EU has 150mln inhabitants more than the US, so both points should be very easy to debunk.
8
u/beefaron Commiefornian 1d ago
no one believes that thats why millions are protesting today
majority americans dont want to leave nato
I hope you guys prove that we can have social nets and a strong military, it might make more action happen here
I think we all need to make sacrifices to keep our allies closer and our enemies far, if it was up to me I would cut off china completely with the US, no matter the consequences. Remember the Uyghurs, never forget. however things like heat and power are absolutely essential in the northern hemisphere so I can't really compare heat and power to cheap child labor hawk tuah temu tshirts
jealousy
6
u/Phosquitos Poor Rural Gang 1d ago edited 1d ago
Ok, let's make one thing clear. We don't have "free healthcare" in Europe. Every worker and every employeer must pay their part to the social security to finance it, and that can be as low as 250 euros (minimun wage) up to a few thousands of euros per month, depending of the country. The difference with the US is that if you become unemployed and have no money, healthcare still covers you and your family, and however, it gets sick. But that healthcare has been paid for from workers and employees. In the US, workers and companies pay private insurance. In Europe, it's mandatory that we pay to the public healthcare system.
Also, because the US dollar is the global currency, it exists a continuous demand of dolars from other Central Banks, financial institutions, and companies around the world that allow the US to emit debt at low interests rates, and that allow US to have cheap money to finance their army. But even with those facilities, the US has a huge debt that can be exarcerbated if countries start to ditch the dollar.
2
u/thebannedtoo Sheep shagger 1d ago
crickets.
5
u/Suave_Kim_Jong_Un Can’t Drive for sh!t 1d ago
He’s preaching to the choir. He’s complaining about a grand total of 2 possibly even 2 and a half people on this sub. Basically all of the yanks here are (US) liberals.
2
u/Caratteraccio Pizza gatekeeper 19h ago edited 19h ago
5) the problem with USians is that
- they suffer from a superiority complex, they imagine themselves as temporarily broke billionaires for whom having universal healthcare is an economic loss for them
- they suffer from a persecution complex, for which they think that everyone wants to take advantage of them, taking universal healthcare even at the cost of hurting themselves
- they get horny for billionaires, who in reality would be both those who support universal healthcare with their taxes and the beneficiaries since the health of the people who are in reality their customers/consumers depends on it
- they never analyse anything, they don't think that with the cost of their health system they are damaging their own economy
3
u/arock121 Rat Person 1d ago
I’ll give it a shot since no one else is.
Tariffs are a negotiating tool, the EU is sending negotiators this week. Some industries do benefit from protectionism. The US is an ally but still its own entity, our economic interests do not always align.
NATO agreed to spend 2% of their GDP on defense in 2014, it’s been over a decade and even if you are catching up now it’s only because of Ukraine. The US isn’t advocating to leave NATO, individual politicians are.
Europe could build up both but they aren’t. The social safety net is what you often point to as the reason. Europe is in significant debt, Germany had to declare a type of emergency to fund their new buildup. You can’t brag about the benefits of your tradeoff while ignoring the costs.
Trump publicly called for divestment while president after Crimea, Europe led by Merkel doubled down. It was a policy choice that you were on the wrong side of which is especially rich since we warned you about it.
The issue isn’t with social safety nets, it’s that you committed to fund a military and chose not to instead. Turkey has a terrible system, but they meet their military commitments.
7
u/swamperogre2 Pimp my ride 1d ago
the EU is sending negotiators this week
Source because not even Google is showing me news on this
The US is an ally but still its own entity, our economic interests do not always align.
Okay but how exactly is tarrifing exports gonna help you in any way?
individual politicians are.
One of those politicians is your president
The social safety net is what you often point to as the reason.
Again citation needed
Europe is in significant debt
So are most countries, the US has trillions in debt actually.
8
u/beefaron Commiefornian 1d ago
"erm source" ok jokes aside he is just coping because we just shot ourselves and burned bridges with our allies
-2
u/arock121 Rat Person 1d ago
I heard it in a wsj podcast, they interviewed a German MEP who is participating. I’m sure it’s relatively low stakes, I doubt Trump would about face so quickly. Tariffs raise the cost of imports and raise revenue. All the anti tech action that the EU has done is targeting US corporations. Trump is a NATO sceptic, he has never called or moved to leave NATO. You are Irish, you aren’t even in NATO. If you want to pretend you’ve never heard the cost of social services is used as a reason to not fund defense you can, look up Merkel quotes if you want a leader to attribute it to. The US is the world reserve currency and gets uniquely favorable interest rates, Europe seriously struggles with its debt financing.
I don’t really get the point you are trying to make, if you think the tariffs are a bad idea you can, either way they happened and you have to act accordingly.
1
u/Head_Complex4226 Barry, 63 17h ago
Trump is a NATO sceptic, he has never called or moved to leave NATO.
"By the way, NATO is dead, and we will leave, we will quit NATO" -- Trump
[Nikki Haley] told CNN that Trump "talked many times about getting out of NATO behind closed doors and publicly. So that’s just a fact."
Do we need more examples?
f you want to pretend you’ve never heard the cost of social services is used as a reason to not fund defense you can, look up Merkel quotes if you want a leader to attribute it to.
I've not been able to find that, but I did find Merkel contradicting Jens Spahn to say defence spending would be increased without affecting social spending
-1
u/arock121 Rat Person 15h ago
His private opinion doesn’t matter, his government has reaffirmed his commitment. Merkel didn’t hit the 2% goal dispute herself agreeing to it.
If you’d rather live in a world where everything is attributable to malice rather than selfishness go ahead, but it’s a lot simpler to take things as they are
1
u/Head_Complex4226 Barry, 63 14h ago
His private opinion doesn’t matter,
You're trying to have it both ways when there are two mutually exclusive possibilities:
Either, Europe was warned, because what the US president says in diplomatic meetings has weight and substance. That means when Trump says "You need to understand that if Europe is under attack we will never come to help you and to support you," to European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, that does mean the US is reneging on mutual commitments, after the US had got others to uphold them in blood.
Or, what the US President says is personal opinion with no importance for US policy...so Europe was not warned.
If you’d rather live in a world where everything is attributable to malice rather than selfishness go ahead, but it’s a lot simpler to take things as they are
You're the one attributing reasons: I just quoted Trump saying the exact thing that you claimed he "never" said.
1
u/arock121 Rat Person 14h ago
You’re just guessing his opinion based on half sourced political gossip. De Gaulle spent his presidency railing against NATO and never actually left. If you want to say he’s left NATO you are free to act accordingly. Everyone is talking about hypotheticals, but nothing happened.
I am trying to have it both ways and I get to have it both ways, strategic ambiguity. The US doesn’t have a defense agreement with the EU, it has an agreement with individual EU members. He is a master at saying the technical truth and not letting himself get nailed down.
I recognize you are frustrated, but I would look to your government, Starmer has full confidence in Trump.
1
u/Head_Complex4226 Barry, 63 9h ago
De Gaulle spent his presidency railing against NATO and never actually left.
De Gaulle refused to put French forces under joint NATO command; and took France out of the NATO command in 1966, meaning France was not a fully integrated member of NATO for 43 years.
So, in reality: De Gaulle stated his intentions and then took action in line with those intentions.
Everyone is talking about hypotheticals, but nothing happened.
Except things did happen, because NATO exists because of hypothetical scenarios, and a good part of security of the alliance is the confidence those inside and outside NATO have in it.
The benefit of NATO to the US, is that is enables the US to take investments in military preparedness that it was already making, and repeatedly resell the same assets in the form of security guarantees to accumulate and maintain soft power on a global scale.
So, what has happened is the US president has succeeded in massively reducing the value the US gets from its armed forces.
The US doesn’t have a defense agreement with the EU
US did sign an agreement with the EU on defence cooperation a couple of years ago, so it's not true that the US only deals with individual EU members on matters of defence.
I am trying to have it both ways and I get to have it both ways, strategic ambiguity
Otherwise known as "not giving a warning but covering your arse about it".
He is a master at saying the technical truth
I sincerely hope you are shitposting, because Trump's behaviour reminds me intensely of a family member's dementia symptoms.
Starmer has full confidence in Trump.
In British politics that almost inevitably goes something like: "The British minister responsible for financial services and fighting corruption resigned on Tuesday...Prime Minister Keir Starmer said last week he had full confidence in her."
2
u/Straight_Block3676 Chiraqi Terrorist 1d ago
I suspect some of these “viewpoints” may be Russian bots
MAGA isn’t usually articulate with a coherent ideology
It’s more like a religion
1
u/Suave_Kim_Jong_Un Can’t Drive for sh!t 1d ago
Only thing I’ll open the discussion about is #3. But in a conceptual manner rather than a comment about how anybody currently runs their country.
Yes, it is possible to have a strong military and social net. However, when you’re at maximum capacity for spending money as a nation, spending all money that would go to the military on social programs is going to be much more beneficial to spend no money on military and as much as you can on social programs.
At maximum capacity, money spent on the military is money not spent on bettering the average well being. There are reasons to keep a military, but it’s better to have that not be your problem and to then spend everything for public betterment.
1
u/Confident_Row7417 1d ago
1 Who wants to put tariffs on their exports?
Been trying to get Europe to beef up their military for decades, what short notice? And we haven't left NATO.
Don't want to bother with this one.
NATO exists mainly to protect from Russian expansion, if 2014 and earlier were not a clue. Why would it be a good idea to have energy dependency on them? How many decades have they been blackmailing you with their pipelines before now?
Don't care how you choose to live, wish you happiness.
1
u/Hendrick_Davies64 Smug Smartass 22h ago
There are people like that on this sub?
I haven’t seen any non liberal Americans on this sub unless they’re getting downvoted to high hell
1
u/JoeyAaron School shooter 1d ago edited 1d ago
- The importing country automatically comes out ahead in any trade war, assuming that country has the ability to replace the imported product on their own. To take one example, more European made cars are bought in the US than US made cars are bought in Europe. The result of ending these sales might hurt individual companies, but the end result will be more cars produced in the USA by American workers.
- The US has been asking our NATO partners to up their spending and take the lead on European defense for over a decade. Obama wanted Europe to up their spending so the US could "pivot to the Pacific." Trump was President from 2016-2020. Many of his actions toward our allies come from his experience in dealing with them back then. Very few of them took his complaints seriously, and were unwilling to work as allies to address those complaints. The US is not forming close ties with Russia.
- Obviously every government has decisions to make on how much public spending to make and where that spending should go. According to the OCED, the US actually spends more as a % of GDP on social welfare programs than countries like Canada, Australia, Switzerland, Ireland, the Netherlands, Iceland, and others in the Western World. I'm sure if European countries prioritized defense spending, they could choose to fund their welfare states and national defense.
- The argument is that Europe was warned by the US for decades to stop relying on Russian energy. Specifically, Trump consistently told Europe to buy from the US instead.
- Europe can do whatever they want. I'm actually supportive of bringing lots of what Europe does regarding social programs to the US, though I think allowing able bodied people to sit around on welfare their whole lives is terrible.
2
u/Secret_Criticism_732 European Methhead 23h ago edited 23h ago
EU was warned and recommended to buy the Qatari (US) gas you mean?
We are not your kids to be told what to do.
At least Half of the NATO governments pay higher percentage of GDP than US? Did you know? How about you guys start fact checking? Although I agree we were lazy Iin This department. Not because we wanted to save. We just loved in peace. Our population did not want to support weapon producing. Your country didn’t have to suffer through so many Wars as we did.
Your government started something, which in their eyes would be good for the US, the fact is it will achieve the opposite. It has awaken our idiotic leaders. So we have to thank him in a way. It was us who were used. Used by Russia and its paid politicians in EU. Forced to buy an US made weapons, strong armed to deals we didn’t like, because we were divided. Now we are not. Thank you Donald
2
u/Caratteraccio Pizza gatekeeper 20h ago
assuming that country has the ability to replace the imported product on their own
this is exactly the problem.
In 1975 the T-shirt your relatives bought was made in your country by your compatriots, today it is made for example in Mexico by Mexicans and then imported, with the compatriot producer pocketing the difference between what it costs to produce it at home and what it costs abroad.
Bringing all the production for your country would mean
- closing the factories abroad causing a strong increase in unemployment elsewhere
- reduce the profit margin for the producers (by the way, where is the Nike or Reebok clothing for example that you buy produced?) that they imagine how happy they are
- destabilizing those countries near your country and
- pushing the people of those countries to emigrate to your country. Oooops.
more European made cars are bought in the US than US made cars are bought in Europe. The result of ending these sales might hurt individual companies, but the end result will be more cars produced in the USA by American workers.
Do you think that your country's car brands are philanthropic companies?
Is it impossible for you that when there is more demand for cars from your country they do not increase the price?
And again, are 100% of the cars sold in your country by your country's brands produced in your country?
Are there absolutely no cars that are produced abroad and then brought to your country?
The US has been asking our NATO partners to up their spending and take the lead on European defense for over a decade
if you need 4 eggs you go buy them at the supermarket right?
But if you need 4 billion eggs you go buy them at the supermarket or open a chicken coop, saving money and creating jobs in your country?
Replace eggs with weapons and you will understand why your politicians have never insisted so much, because a Europe that did not spend enough on weapons was a Europe that among other things gave money to the weapons industries of your country, plus a few more billion reasons.
1
u/JoeyAaron School shooter 6h ago
closing the factories abroad causing a strong increase in unemployment elsewhere
OK. I'm not in favor of using foreign cheap labor as a replacement for American labor any more than I'm in favor of importing cheap labor. I don't like any type of cheap labor.
reduce the profit margin for the producers (by the way, where is the Nike or Reebok clothing for example that you buy produced?) that they imagine how happy they are
I don't measure our economic health by the profit margins of the largest multinational corporations.
destabilizing those countries near your country and
Global "free trade" destabilizes countries. Strong national borders keep countries stable.
pushing the people of those countries to emigrate to your country. Oooops.
Allowing illegal migration is a political choice. Trump has shown that it can be cut to almost zero immediately. Japan doesn't have international migration despite being a rich country with tariffs. Europe is weak, as was the US before Trump. That's why international migration is allowed there.
Do you think that your country's car brands are philanthropic companies?
Is it impossible for you that when there is more demand for cars from your country they do not increase the price?
And again, are 100% of the cars sold in your country by your country's brands produced in your country?
Are there absolutely no cars that are produced abroad and then brought to your country?
Our car companies are not a cartel that sets prices. They are subject to supply and demand. Yes, there may be some adjustment in prices for certain vehicles. And consumers will be able to adjust easily. The point is to increase good working class jobs in the USA. If a small percentage of people have to either pay a little more for their car or buy a slightly lower standard of car as a trade off, that's a trade I support.
84
u/Creepy-Ad-4832 Former Calabrian 1d ago
You really believe those yankies who still support trump would read such a wall of text?