Many of those countries have smaller populations and economies than American cities. The EU as a whole has less than half the GDP per capita than the USA.
>Many of those countries have smaller populations and economies than American cities
We can take NY (the state) and the Netherlands for example. Comparable populations (18-19 million), but GDP is 2.17 vs 1.27 trillion in favor of NY.
What it translates to in practice -- what kind of nice things New Yorkers have twice as much? Could is as well mean that Dutch do half the work compare to New Yorkers?
GDP is a measurement of market value of goods and services. This hyperfocus on GDP is a societal disease, and all sorts of terrible policy derives from this hyperfocus.
There's a nice public park on my neighborhood. It's a very scenic place, with a river going through it, with trees along its course, there's also a playground for kids with a large lawn area where people do picnics and relax around. Very pleasant place.
That park generates 0 GDP. From a GDP standpoint, it would make more sense to remove the public park and turn it into a concrete hellscape for people to park their cars. Large cars preferably - huge SUVs or pickup trucks for that matter, no weakass economic cheap hybrids. GDP has to grow after all.
And if that came to pass, the lives of everyone here would be miserable. But GDP would be higher, so that wins.
Hey, I didn’t pick the metric, I was just responding to someone who had.
I’ve lived in both Europe and America, and if my personal situation allowed for it right now, I’d prefer to be in Europe. But I also do think GDP can be a useful metric, especially in the long run. I think Europe has great QoL, but I think it’s naive to not look at the growth rates of the major countries in the world and not be concerned about the long-term future of the European economy.
Edit: you’re also wrong about the park. Someone paid to create it, and someone pays to maintain it. Both of those numbers show up in GDP.