America Is Beating Europe
A popular narrative says Europeans are better off because of increased regulation. Reality paints a different picture.

America needs more rules to protect workers, say some from both parties.
Sen. Josh Hawley (R–Mo.) wants more rules empowering unions.
Former President Barack Obama's Labor Secretary says there's "no fairness, no equity, no concern for safety, no concern for children, even!"
European countries, they say, have more laws protecting workers, and so "Europe is better."
That's nonsense, says economist Sven Larson in my new video. He grew up in Sweden, but now says, "If you're a worker, you don't want to live in Sweden!"
One reason is that unemployment is 10 percent.
"If you get fired," says Larson, "there's no job out there for you."
Years ago, America's economy grew neck and neck with that of the European Union (E.U.). Then, about 15 years ago, Europe stopped growing.
Today, the USA is 50 percent richer—even though the E.U. has 100 million more people.
Europe is kind of like a big museum. Tourist money keeps it going, but there's so little growth that, per person, America's poorest state (Mississippi) is now richer than most European countries.
The reason is the very same policies ignorant Americans want to copy—like higher taxes on the rich.
"But what do you do when you run out of the rich?" asks Larson. "Tax the almost rich. Then you run out of them."
But some Americans today are absurdly rich.
Even "if you add up all the value these individuals have," he replies, "it's nowhere near enough to pay the obligations that the federal government has."
So, tax is taken from the average worker.
In Sweden, he says, "Average workers pay [a higher percentage of] taxes than you do if you make $400,000 here in the United States."
But at least their health care is free.
"No!" he replies. "You get the right to free health care, but whether you get health care is a different story. I have friends who died in the Swedish health care system because they couldn't get treatment in time."
Still, Europe offers generous welfare benefits.
"They take care of people!" I tell Larson.
"But it also entraps you," he says. "People get stuck in low-end jobs. They don't start businesses like we do."
One reason they don't start businesses is because Europe's rules meant to "protect" workers make it hard to fire lazy ones.
"You have to go through an extremely bureaucratic sequence," says Larson. "Government will decide whether you are right in saying this person is not doing his job.…Why would you hire anybody when you are essentially responsible for them for the rest of your life?!"
I wouldn't. It's a big reason why the unemployment rate in Europe is 50 percent higher than in the U.S.
I often complain about America's excessive regulations. But Europe has many more.
"Here in America," says Larson, "you can put a sticker on a pickup truck that says, 'Bob the carpenter,' and you have a small business. You can start making money. In Europe, you have to wade through fees…talk to bureaucrats."
E.U. rules also protect unions.
In Sweden, says Larson, "[unions] can act like a mafia, force utility companies to shut off power, stop garbage collections, stop banks from processing your checks."
They do. Unions punished non-union Tesla by refusing to deliver new license plates.
That union power, excessive regulation and high taxes are why Europe now has zero of the world's largest companies. The list constantly changes, but as I write, no European company is in the top 20. American firms lead the list.
I ask Larson, "Don't European governments see what this has done to their economies and change these rules?"
"No," he answers. "A lot of politicians thrive on having a population dependent on government because you get a lot of votes from a lot of people who depend on government. America still has this spirit of understanding that you can actually make life better for yourself, which I don't find in Europe."
We do have that spirit—now.
But it's challenged by the 300,000 bureaucrats who write and enforce regulation. And that's just federal regulators. States and cities employ even more!
That's a lot of people who believe that if they're not adding more rules, they're not doing their job.
Stop them before they make America as stagnant as Europe.
COPYRIGHT 2025 BY JFS PRODUCTIONS INC.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Notice the lackof actual statistics.
Oh, wait, there is one
Unemployment is 10 percent
Uhh, no John
5.8 in January
Yes, higher than the 4 percent in the US, but hardly shocking
HAve you ever made a doctors appoinment?
Maybe famous pundits get in right away, but regular 'mericans wait months for specialist appointments, if they can get a doctor to see them
Ever pay for your own health insurance, John?
reaching toward 4k a month plus out of pocket plus plus plus
leading cause of bankruptcy in the US, medical bills
Quick name the top 5 things Europe has done to benifit the world in the last 100 years.
You have a 1 min time limit.
5. Swedish fish
4.
3.
2.
1.
Yep that sums it up
And fuck off and die, the leading cause of bankruptcy is not medical bills, that comes straight from Liz the fether head Warren. And her claim is as true as her claim to her background.
Snus
Abba
Porn
Volvos (now owned by CCP and made in China)
Actually, Volvo is still a Swedish company but their cars were sold to Geely, a private Chinese company in 2010.
My sister had a Volvo, pos broke down every other week.
Porn is universal
Anyone who likes Swedish fish is not a good person. I stand by this belief.
https://www.forbes.com/2010/03/25/why-people-go-bankrupt-personal-finance-bankruptcy.html
commie rag forbes
don't let facts get in the way
Ohhh an article repeating the liar Warren's talking point good on you. Go kill yourself
Oh, find a fact
A 10 year old article?
From a 10-year-old intellect.
right back at you........is it untrue? no
Stossels article is a lie so there is that
Please don't insult 10 year olds.
5.
Swedish fishAngry Birds4.
3.
2.
1.
5. Sham-wow!
4. the Beatles
3. Rubik's cube
2. Benny Hill reruns
1. Royal family shit show
The Cornell University Law School research arm is a much better source than you are about the primary cause of personal, not corporate, bankruptcies. Several different sources corroborate the 66 percent figure. Senator Warren was one of the top US bankruptcy law experts before her election to the Senate. She was a Professor who taught it at top law schools including mine. Europe has made better high performance cars than the US for over 60 years, and has much better k-12 education whose graduates can spell.
https://www.ilr.cornell.edu/scheinman-institute/blog/john-august-healthcare/healthcare-insights-how-medical-debt-crushing-100-million-americans#:~:text=In%20an%20oft%2Dcited%20study,of%20the%20Affordable%20Care%20Act.
Cornell University? Do better.
Oh, this doofus is still around? Arpi, if you're paying 4k a month for insurance, you're doing it wrong.
You don't pay for your health insurance, do you?
Probably your parents do
My parents are retired. I'm 42 and work for a company that cares enough about its employees to offer a range of health insurance options, the most expensive of which is just barely more than $600 a month for family coverage. $250 deductible, $12,700 out of pocket max (with 100% co-insurance).
Like I said, you're doing it wrong. Feel free to consult your Leftist talking points again.
$600/month is not the cost. The cost is more like $1500 to $2000. The employer is subsidizing the difference. The employer is in turn most assuredly cherry picking the risk pool in order to transfer costs to others. You will become aware of that whenever the employer fires you at a certain age and you have to buy your own coverage. Alternatively, they select an administrator who simply denies all claims so that in fact you don't have insurance at all. You are simply ignorant of that
How does an employer cherry pick the risk pool, this is a BS statement.
You do seem a bit ignorant on this topic yourself.
That's weird, did anyone notice that grey box?
What happens when you get fired and have yo shop for new insurance?
Have you ever looked at the marketplace? Even at my current salary, with 0 subsidies, there is no health plan that costs $4k a month. Wonder if arpi and aron are the ones that get their plans paid for by their parents.
Obviously the gov't paid for your "education". Fuck off and die, asshole.
This has not been my experience. You must be doing it wrong.
Notice the lackof actual statistics.
Heres one:
Seems a pretty important one when complaining about the price of things.
Do you know of this thing passed by Obama called ACA?
He thinks waiting for a specialist appointment for non-emergencies is worse than dying while waiting for "free" treatment elsewhere.
Move to Europe.
And if you already live in that Peoples' Paradise, STFU.
"regular 'mericans wait months for specialist appointments"
You seem confused. Medicare is one of the few things that we're almost like Europe in. We're still behind Europe, especially the UK, though because Europeans die before the can get to see the cancer specialist let alone start treatment, and most Americans still get to see the cancer specialist and start therapy before they die.
So, why is life expectancy in most of those countries higher than in ours, if that is true?
Indeed by most measures people in Europe are healthier and longer lived than people in the US. But people like Stossel ignore inconvenient data.
The US healthcare system is a mess and the Republicans are making it worse. It may crash so badly that a total federal takeover might be the only way out. I am not happy about that.
The US healthcare system was not a mess until Medicare and Medicaid were implemented. Not only did it fail to reduce medical costs, but it collectivized medical providers on a massive scale not seen since Stalin collectivized the kulaks. Applications to medical schools plummeted from ten-to-one down to two-to-one over the ensuing twenty years and the shortage of medical providers has increased to about 100,000 currently. But by all means continue to blame the boogey man and pretend that the federal government that caused the problem can fix it if only they took it over one hundred percent instead of the seventy percent they currently dictate.
Jason doesn't know what infant mortality is, or how some countries lie by omitting the death of newborns from their life expectancy statistics.
Because young gang bangers in big blue cities don't shoot each other and innocent bystanders to death in turf wars in Europe. Dying of gunshot wounds at a very young age contributes a HUGE bias to the life expectancy tables. But you wouldn't know that unless you actually studied epidemiology so that you could have a meaningful contribution to complex discussions.
You should reread the article as you seemed to have missed most of it's salient points.
The leading cause of bankruptcies statement is NOT TRUE.
The study only counted IF medical bills were included in the bankruptcy, NOT if they were the cause!
Accurate facts make for better opinions
The study only counted IF medical bills were included in the bankruptcy, NOT if they were the cause!
The retardedly disgusting thing is, on the part of the media, if they were actually responsible for the accounting involved, this would be no-shit misappropriation and/or otherwise criminally liable.
Beyond Gell-Mann Amnesia it's like Gell-Mann psychopathy -
Story 1: "Bernie Madoff is a terrible, terrible human being who illegally ripped off a lot of people, especially the elderly on fixed incomes who need it the most."
Story 2: "Really, more elderly people on fixed incomes should get involved in pyramid schemes. Here's how..."
He was speaking of Sweden.
https://ycharts.com/indicators/sweden_unemployment_rate
9.7% in Jan 2025.
So Mexico is better off than the US. It has had lower unemployment rates for over a quarter century. Currently it is one third lower than the US even after six years of far left rule.
Denmark, Switzerland, Norway, Netherlands, and Ireland all have lower unemployment thsn the US as of the latest statistics.
You do understand that in those countries people get multiple jobs, don't you?
With that in mind, it makes Sweden's unemployment percentage all the more embarrassing.
But it's challenged by the 300,000 bureaucrats who write and enforce regulation. And that's just federal regulators. States and cities employ even more!
The saints of american (D)emocarcy. How dare you disparage their noble work!
Regulations have no cost. Only tariffs do. Or so it appears to many liberaltarians.
Well, that's an unusual thing for a conservative Republican populist to say. And I can't help but notice that it's unsourced in the article. Maybe there's some sort of quote or attribution in the video?
He has a new bill. I'd link to his webpage but Reason. Anyway per his site it's:
Teamster- endorsed legislation to speed up first contracts for new unions.
Go to Hawley's .gov website. An article describing the legislation mentioned is the top article on the site.
Did you notice who Trump's Labor Secretary is? Union shill through and through. It does not bode well.
That's what happens when a campaign makes a special effort to try and lure the votes of millions of union members. You think that only your portion of the Trump voter base deserves to get what it wants from the Trump administration? That the other voters he made promises to don't matter?
Seems to me they are already getting a good deal and once again are doing what Unions do, demand too much. So here's my counter offer:
You can leave the socialist economic policies back with the Ds or you can go back to them - and their cultural marxism, heavy industry killing environmentalism, can't build shit, don't know what women are..- bullshit agenda.
Your counter offer is exactly what I was thinking you meant. They voted for Trump, now their job is just to enjoy having America Made Great Again according to what you MAGA true believers think should be done.
I voted for Javier Millei, not Trump.
Cultural Marxism isn't a thing.
Lying to yourself doesn't change reality, charliehall.
Well, that's an unusual thing for a conservative Republican populist to say.
It is true that conservative Republicans typically have negative views of unions. But conservative Republicans are not a majority of the electorate. Even among people that said that they were Republican or lean Republican, but that they were also moderate or liberal, a slim majority said, shortly before the election, that labor unions have a positive effect on the country.
When only 41% of all Americans say that labor unions have a negative effect on the country (compared to 55% positive), then maybe always having an anti-union stance is not a winning electoral strategy.
I’m not sure if any of this is going to matter to the Caliphate.
Do you think Klaus Schwab will convert?
A popular narrative says Europeans are better off because of increased regulation. Reality paints a different picture.
Ctrl+f 'Jones' - 0/0
Around here, the misleading narrative that says Europeans are better off because of more numerous regulations the speaker wants to conveniently ignore isn't far behind.
Josh Hawley is a Communist
'Europe is kind of like a big museum. Tourist money keeps it going, but there's so little growth that, per person, America's poorest state (Mississippi) is now richer than most European countries.'
If by a museum, you mean one of those living history parks, where people pretend to live in some extinct culture. And where the actors are all Islamic immigrants.
I have my doubts about, but also doubts about my doubts.
Occupational licensing says NO. Got a contractor's license? Some states have handyman licensing which limits how much you can earn in a day before you need the contractor's license.
There's also business licenses. The government doesn't let just anybody start a business.
But I know a lot of people who do that kind of work, without licensing. They just don't advertise and they certainly don't put signs on their truck.
I do also. Making a living without a license is common, survival by word of mouth. I talked by brother-in-law into doing it 40 years ago and then I hired him to build a patio cover for me that I didn't get a permit for. I did a lot in that house over 17 years that I didn't get a permit to do. Also, we had no choice of cable TV, just a monopoly, so I got mine illegally. I have lived a life of silent dissent, on principle, for 82 years, boycotting the income tax. I overcome my fear 60 years ago, and lived a free as possible.
"The strength and power of despotism consists wholly in the fear of resisting." - Thomas Jefferson
I have lived a life of silent dissent, on principle, for 82 years, boycotting the income tax.]
So, you refused government benefits all of that time as well? I'm not sure how you could avoid benefiting from national defense, federal transportation spending, law enforcement, and so many other things that it would be hard list them, even if you wanted to.
Or is it that your principles just allowed you to not have pay for the things you liked about government or that you benefited from while everyone else had to pay whether they liked or benefited from those things or not?
Do you at least pay state and local taxes? If not, your use of roads and water pipes, police protection, fire protection etc. are all parasitic on your neighbors.
And just how do you know that's the case? DOGE suggests that maybe the local and state taxes might really be used for something else.
JasonT20 - The only time I need national defense during my lifetime - on Nine-Eleven - national defense failed MASSIVELY. Law enforcement is far more likely to kill me accidentally or intentionally than it is to protect me. And as for the "so many other things" that you didn't list, NO THANKS!
The only time I need national defense during my lifetime - on Nine-Eleven - national defense failed MASSIVELY. Law enforcement is far more likely to kill me accidentally or intentionally than it is to protect me.
Uh, that is like a guy that throws away a shield because an arrow hit him in the leg. After all, it didn't protect him from that one arrow!
That's a thing that varies by state a lot. Many places you can just go and do carpentry. There is definitely too much occupational licensing, but it's not too bad in some states and generally better than Europe (though tons of people work under the table there too).
Years ago, America's economy grew neck and neck with that of the European Union (E.U.). Then, about 15 years ago, Europe stopped growing.
Today, the USA is 50 percent richer—even though the E.U. has 100 million more people.
I don't see any reference for where these numbers are coming from, but that is standard practice for Stossel. Here's what I found:
https://statisticstimes.com/economy/united-states-vs-eu-economy.php
Notice something important: The nominal GDP does seem to have slowed down, perhaps it could arguably be described as having "stopped growing" in a rough sense, but I always see "PPP" in these kinds of macroeconomic comparisions. PPP = "purchasing power parity", which is a fancy calculation that takes into account what people in those countries can actually buy with their money. It isn't perfect, of course, but it is going to be more reflective of what is really happening to people's ability to live and enjoy life than the nominal GDP changes, since that will be calculated using exchange rates between currencies, which can vary for a lot of reasons that aren't about the economic fundamentals.
Also, you know what else has been going on with the EU over the last 20 years? Prior to 2004, there were 15 members of the EU. There are now 27. (13 joined in 2004 or after, 1 left) And what nations joined in 2004 or after? Cyprus, Malta, and 11 former Soviet republics and Warsaw Pact nations. Most of those nations have actually seen much greater economic growth than they did prior to joining the EU, and for most, higher growth rates than the rest of the EU. Which isn't difficult to understand given where they started from, as formerly having communist governments and/or governments dominated from abroad by the communist Soviets. But that is still going to make it apples to oranges comparing the EU from 15 years ago, not long after those nations joined, to the present, and then to a U.S. that hasn't changed in its basic composition of which people and territories were part of it in over a century.
But hey, nuance and details just hinder a polemic that is designed to say European labor regulations are bad, U.S. protections for workers that are getting weaker ever day is good.
All of which adds up to: social democracies are not as bad as communist dictatorships, but not as good as heavily regulated but otherwise free markets, which are not as good as relatively unregulated free markets. The details you highlighted support rather than refute Stossel's polemic. But thank for the greater context, which I did find interesting, especially the "PPP" information!
The details you highlighted support rather than refute Stossel's polemic.
How so? I am not seeing an apples to apples comparison in any of those few statistics. You know, there are people that study economics as a profession. Maybe we'd both do better in trying to understand this by looking at the research instead of listening to commentators that don't even bother to ask those economists questions or cite any of their research.
Europe is a shithole made by clueless do-gooder socialists who know nothing about economics, history or running a business.
It is also the home of world wars, gulags, mass murdering dictators, and extermination camps.
Then Europeans wonder why sane Americans hold them in utter contempt.
What a bunch of morons
Not a fact among all the bobblehead posts
Stossel is an idiot, lies at every point in his post, and you lap it up like trumpski cum
Stossel consistently cherrypicks information that support his POV and ignores everything that would debunk his theses.
I could actually make his argument -- the EU really does have a pretty oppressive regulatory structure and it isn't very transparent. But Stossel isn't smart enough to explain the impacts because they are subtle. For example, there are far fewer startup businesses that get big because of the regulatory burden that protects existing Big Companies, even though though there are lots of small businesses. Europe could not have produced an Apple, Microsoft, Google, or Amazon. And the regulatory system doesn't allow the public input that the US used to require before Trump.
The Trump Administration is moving to be mlre like Europe in these bad ways. Its trade policies are designed to protect the already big. It will be contracting much of the federal government out to Big Companies like the ones Musk controls. And it is moving to eliminate public input on its many new regulations. The Executive Orders got none and RFK Jr. just ended public comment on HHS regulations. And Goebbels like, it claims it is reducing economic burden.
Europe could not have produced an Apple, Microsoft, Google, or Amazon.
I don't know, maybe that would be a reason to think that Europe has it right. None of those companies did anything so innovative that I would believe that we'd be much worse off without them. They all basically got super big by using their market share (once they got big) to buy up and squeeze out competition. You think that European regulations prevent small companies from competing with the larger ones. Maybe. That is certainly plausible. But monopolies or near monopolies are even more stifling to competition.
You're delusional. Those companies know how to run a good business and delivered on a product people liked.
For all the faults they have, I say we as a society are better off as a result of their efforts.
Hey, your boss now makes 10000 times what you make instead of 1000, and so the average of your pay and your bosses pay makes us all richer, even though he cut your pay
Or not
That doesn't change the fact the the situation is overall more successful.
Maybe your boss saw your performance, didn't think you did a good job, and demoted you. Has that ever occurred in your mind?
Cherry picking in this article is a sign of dishonesty. Stossel starts with a nation with nearly the highest unemployment rate in Europe to make his point, ignoring that neighboring Norway rate is 3.7 and Denmark, 2,5,
Now those poor overregulated Norwegans have 5 week paid vacations (such onerous regulations), free education thru medical school (in US< average grad owes $240,000 and that most burdonsome program, free healthcare. And how miserable they all are! The poor Danes are ranked the 2n happiest and the miserable overregulated Norwegians are way down at 7th. The Swedes, with their high unemployment rate are the 4th happiest. The poor Swedes only get unemployment benefits of 80% of their income and then only for 300 days. Sweden also has the 2nd highest employment rate in Europe...signaling that almost everyone wants a job, but the truth is that most of the unemployed are new immigrants who have yet to find their niche in the Swedish economy. Oh, those regulations, being forced to take a 5 week paid vacation each year, And how onerous is that 480 day maternity leave in Sweden....and that is only at 80% of pay for the first 390 days. Swedes can hardly stand it!
You left out the fact that none of those "benefits" are actually free. The tax rate is enormously high. We Americans rather spend our money the way we want.
If anyone else desires to refute ruffsoft, be my guest.