Europe vs US: Old age and treachery overcome youth and beauty

[magnet]

Interesting article explodes the Sick Old Man of Europe myth...



1. The sclerotic European economy is incapable of leading the world.

Who're you calling sclerotic? The European Union's $16 trillion economy has been quietly surging for some time and has emerged as the largest trading bloc in the world, producing nearly a third of the global economy. That's more than the U.S. economy (27 percent) or Japan's (9 percent). Despite all the hype, China is still an economic dwarf, accounting for less than 6 percent of the world's economy. ...

2. Nobody wants to invest in European companies and economies because lack of competitiveness makes them a poor bet.

Wrong again. Between 2000 and 2005, foreign direct investment in the E.U. 15 was almost half the global total, and investment returns in Europe outperformed those in the United States. "Old Europe is an investment magnet because it is the most lucrative market in the world in which to operate," says Dan O'Brien of the Economist. In fact, corporate America is a huge investor in Europe; U.S. companies' affiliates in the E.U. 15 showed profits of $85 billion in 2005, far more than in any other region of the world and 26 times more than the $3.3 billion they made in China. ...

3. Europe is the land of double-digit unemployment.

Not anymore. Half of the E.U. 15 nations have experienced effective full employment during this decade, and unemployment rates have been the same as or lower than the rate in the United States. Unemployment for the entire European Union, including the still-emerging nations of Central and Eastern Europe, stands at a historic low of 6.7 percent. Even France, at 8 percent, is at its lowest rate in 25 years.

That's still higher than U.S. unemployment, which is 4.6 percent, but let's not forget that many of the jobs created here pay low wages and include no benefits. In Europe, the jobless still have access to health care, generous replacement wages, job-retraining programs, housing subsidies and other benefits. In the United States, by contrast, the unemployed can end up destitute and marginalized. ...


No surprises for QT3 readers across the pond, I suppose.

[Matthew Gallant]

1. The population of the EU is close to 500 million, the US 300 million. The US does have over twice the land area that the EU does though. But in terms of converting people into trade power, the EU is lagging.

2. The reason why "nobody" wants to invest in Europe is that China and Central/South America are growing faster. Way faster.

3. Genuine good news.

[bago]

I thought it was old age and guile vs youth and a bad haircut.

[Tim Partlett]

1. The population of the EU is close to 500 million, the US 300 million. The US does have over twice the land area that the EU does though. But in terms of converting people into trade power, the EU is lagging.

Yeah, but 100 million of that population was taken on only recently, and consisted of many populous countries that are as poor as Mexico, like Poland and Romania. These countries are posting dramatic growth figures and are catching up with the rest of the EU rapidly.

Germany is a classic example of the east west divide. People often see German as a economically sick country, because of a high unemployment rate and relatively low economic performance. What they don't realise is that if you took western German states, like Bavaria and Hessen, would be among the richest countries in the world if independent of the country as a whole.

I think East Germany is a good example of how not to integrate a poor country with a broken economy into existing economic system. They have been flooded with billions in subsidies and investment, and have failed to become competitive.

The rest of Eastern Europe had a much harder landing, but it has toughened them up and they are developing much healthier, stronger, robust economies with a population that is educated and motivated.

Considering Europe posts such good figures in spite of Eastern Europe, language barriers, different currencies, and a non-unified government, the future definitely looks bright as these issues look set to be broken down over time.

[Midnight Son]

Lets not forget: Octoberfest!

[Aeon221]

The figures for the US are probably a ton better if you include all of North America. We do have NAFTA, we're almost as unified =D

[Hanzii]

Interesting article explodes the Sick Old Man of Europe myth...



No surprises for QT3 readers across the pond, I suppose.

No, we're living it.
And while a lot of it has been happening within the last decade, it's not really news - just a US newspaper catching up with reality and putting some misconceptions to rest.

But since this is P&R I'm sure somebody will pop along and tell how they've heard from somebody they know in France that Europe is being overrun with moslems, that will first bring democracy and then our economy to a crumbling ruin...

[Tim Partlett]

Language is an interesting aspect of European advancement. It's a real barrier to economic integration but it's rapidly breaking down. Currently over half of the EU population speaks English, either as first or second language. In some countries they are almost native speakers, like Netherlands and Sweden.

In many of the other countries you will notice immediately when you visit that the younger population has a much better grasp of English than the older generations. In much of Eastern Europe I can get by with English or my bad German. English for those under 40 and German for those over 40.

I imagine that the number of English speakers will be near an overall majority within a generation, and those that don't speak English will be largely out of the workplace. Given the move to Spanish speakers in America, I wouldn't be surprised if there were more English speakers in Europe by 2025 than in America.

[Lum]

Given the move to Spanish speakers in America, I wouldn't be surprised if there were more English speakers in Europe by 2025 than in America.

Nativist propaganda to the contrary, most second-generation Latino immigrants (at least in my personal experience) speak English as a first or second language.

[Tim Partlett]

Recent stats that I saw suggested over 4% of Americans don't speak English very well, and that figure is rising rapidly. Then somewhere around 10% speak only Spanish at home, and rising. Over a third of Californians are Spanish speakers.

When whole communities, even entire states becomes majority Spanish speaking it's going to be very easy for people to stop speaking English entirely. And when you don't need to speak a language, it's very tempting not to learn it. I've lived in Germany for 3-4 years, and because I don't need to speak German my German skills are barely adequate for a conversation.

In an ironic way, the lack of homogeneity in European languages is helping push the population towards speaking a single language. The same with the immigrant population: they come from many different linguistic backgrounds, Slavic, Arabic, native African, etc. They all need to learn a bridging language to communicate, and that is English.

In America there are only two rival languages: Spanish and English. English won't die out, but if whole communities in the US become Spanish speaking, there will be no need to learn English, because there will be no need to learn a bridging language to communicate.

It's going to be interesting to watch things develop. The Spanish speaking world seems to have a large body of speakers, and a strong global culture, that allows them to avoid learning English even when others who don't need to speak the language on a daily basis do. I think this is why the Spanish in Europe are the least able English speakers in the EU, and the Scandinavians (who have a much smaller cultural body) are often better than native speakers.

[Hetzer]

And even if the old europe wasnt comparable in gdp to the us i would love to live in germany more than in the states:

1. I love my country (ok the same with you americuns i think)
2. Nobody is allowed to carry weapons but police and several security companies (so the chance to get shot in the street is practical nil anywhere in germany)
3. Even if i loose my job and have no possibility to earn money the state will provide money until my end to live

[Hanzii]

And even if the old europe wasnt comparable in gdp to the us i would love to live in germany more than in the states:

1. I love my country (ok the same with you americuns i think)
2. Nobody is allowed to carry weapons but police and several security companies (so the chance to get shot in the street is practical nil anywhere in germany)
3. Even if i loose my job and have no possibility to earn money the state will provide money until my end to live

1. I don't love mine. I like living here and I like how we do things, but being born here was just a coincidence and there's a number of countries I'd love to live in too if certain conditions were fulfilled.
2. The same and also a reason why I like it here.
3. The same - but many Americans seem to think this is bad (at least now we have an article to point them towards when they claim it's also ruining our economies)
4. I never get served sauerkraut. I win.

[Kalle]

5. I never had to learn to swallow all my consonants. I win.

[Jason McCullough]

When whole communities, even entire states becomes majority Spanish speaking it's going to be very easy for people to stop speaking English entirely.

I'm pretty sure you're wrong, entirely because the only other people I've heard say this are nutty nativists.

[Lizard_King]

It's going to be interesting to watch things develop. The Spanish speaking world seems to have a large body of speakers, and a strong global culture, that allows them to avoid learning English even when others who don't need to speak the language on a daily basis do. I think this is why the Spanish in Europe are the least able English speakers in the EU, and the Scandinavians (who have a much smaller cultural body) are often better than native speakers.
I hate to say it, but I'm going to have to agree with Jason on that one. Not that you're a nativist, but that your conclusions bear enough similarity to theirs to warrant suspicion. Again, not of racism, but just of the usefulness of their claims.

I hope you're right, though. Having Spanish as a first language hasn't helped me that much, and that polarized world you're describing in the US sounds like opportunity knocking!

[Tim Partlett]

I only said it was a possibility. I don't think it is racist or insane to consider it possible that large numbers of Spanish speaking immigrants could cause the US to become a bilingual state, kind of similar to how Canada is now.

You don't need a majority before the influence of Spanish speakers becomes enough to change the linguistic landscape dramatically. Once a large enough body exists, they can push for change. With a third of voters speaking Spanish, proposing that Spanish becomes an official language at state level becomes very popular.

Unlike "nutty nativists" or whatever they are, I don't see this as something to fear. I don't think bilingual states are something to strive for, but countries like Canada show that it isn't necessarily a stumbling block to a stable political system and economic prosperity.

[Lum]

I live in a city which is about a three hour drive from Mexico, which has a not insignificant number of cars with Mexican license plates, and (at least the part of town where I live) which has most signs in English and Spanish. That being said there has never been an instance where I have been confronted with someone who did not speak at least serviceable English, even among people who speak Spanish as their first language. I live in a neighborhood with many Mexican migrants, and most of the local stores cater to English and Spanish speakers. Yet never once has a neighbor or a close-to-minimum-wage counter worker failed to smoothly switch to English when talking to an English speaker. Ironically, I ran across more people who couldn't speak English in Northern Virginia (lot of Koreans and Central Americans with poor language skills there) than here.

Not to say that non-English speakers don't exist; but that an English-speaker would be a foreigner in his own land, the spectre of cities in America where English isn't understood is ridiculous. Much like the rest of the globe, English is seen as a requirement for success, even in chiefly migrant communities. I don't know of a single city in America - including Los Angeles or Miami - where an English speaker would be confronted with an inability to communicate. People who state otherwise are simply trying to stir up anti-immigrant sentiment (usually for votes).

Just because immigrants prefer to speak Spanish among themselves or watch Spanish-language TV doesn't mean they'd prefer to remain in a Spanish ghetto. And their children (some of whom I work with) see themselves as Americans, usually of the unhyphenated variety.

And unless I'm mistaken (Canadians feel free to chip in) aren't the French-speaking parts of Canada significantly less economically developed than the rest? I had always heard that was why Quebec usually voted against independence-seeking parties.

[Tim Partlett]

Anecdotal evidence aside, the last US census (http://www.census.gov/prod/2003pubs/c2kbr-29.pdf) reported 28.1 million native Spanish speakers in the US, a 62% increase since the last census in 1990. Of those only about half said they could speak English "very well". Fully 8 million of them said they could not speak it well it or not speak it at all.

It doesn't seem all that surprising that as the number of Spanish speakers increases, the number of people choosing not to learn English also increases. Learning a new language is a pain in the ass. I can attest to the fact that if you work long hours and can get away with a bare minimum of the local language, there isn't a large incentive to learn it.

This is especially so for me. I work with English speakers. I have a large English language culture to draw on in terms of movies, books, etc. so I never feel alienated enough to want to learn German. Spanish people also have a large culture to draw upon, hence the relatively low rates of Spanish speakers in Europe learning English.

The only reason I bother to try and learn German at all is that I feel bad about living in a country and not speaking the language. There's certainly little need for me to learn it.

[Phil_Stein]

I think the chances of a Quebec-style, more or less permanent language split in the US are low, but not zero.

A lot will depend on political decisions made over the next decade or two. Various immigration possibilities may either increase or decrease the immigration rate (legal and/or illegal). If another 10-20 million Spanish speaking immigrants (not necessarily all from Mexico) arrived in fairly short order, and settled in a concentrated fashion in current areas with high numbers of Hispanics (i.e. parts of Florida, Texas, and SoCal), that would create a tremendous Spanish speaking majority in those regions, which might tilt the commerce equation somewhat away from Bilingual to Spanish-primary and perhaps even Spanish only for some businesses.

If schools also followed a bilingual course (either because of political pressure, judicial rulings, or some other factor), then the natural pressure for young folks to assimilate and learn English would be relatively low.

I don't consider the above scenario likely (near-term, anyways), but I think it's at least possible.

[Aeon221]

When I was working in the Dollar Star, I ran into a whole buttload of people who only spoke Spanish. They'd either bring their kid (who spoke English perfectly) or I'd do my best with sign language and generalizations from French and Latin.

It was actually pretty cool because I felt like an interpreter who was making a (tiny) difference in their lives, as opposed to a part time button pusher in a cheap ass store.

I doubt very much that the US will turn into this Spanish only wonderland, just because I met so very many young Hispanic kids who were fluent in both languages and interpreted for their parents, and I expect those multilingual kids to add a lot to our economy and culture in the very near future.

[Hetzer]

1. I don't love mine. I like living here and I like how we do things, but being born here was just a coincidence and there's a number of countries I'd love to live in too if certain conditions were fulfilled.
2. The same and also a reason why I like it here.
3. The same - but many Americans seem to think this is bad (at least now we have an article to point them towards when they claim it's also ruining our economies)
4. I never get served sauerkraut. I win.


Hey, i like sauerkraut so i guess i win ;)

[bigdruid]

Unlike "nutty nativists" or whatever they are, I don't see this as something to fear. I don't think bilingual states are something to strive for, but countries like Canada show that it isn't necessarily a stumbling block to a stable political system and economic prosperity.

Agreed. The other thing working against the spread of Spanish as a primary language are the cultural factors - Spanish is primarily the language of the underclass in America, and there's basically zero chance that a child raised in America is going to pick it as their primary language no matter how dense of a barrio they are raised in.

This was not the case in Canada - there's no stigma associated with speaking French.

[Kyle Wilson]

And even if the old europe wasnt comparable in gdp to the us i would love to live in germany more than in the states:

1. I love my country (ok the same with you americuns i think)
2. Nobody is allowed to carry weapons but police and several security companies (so the chance to get shot in the street is practical nil anywhere in germany)
3. Even if i loose my job and have no possibility to earn money the state will provide money until my end to live

1. My country's okay. If there was a country that offered significantly more personal freedom, I'd be happy to move there. I hear New Zealand's quite nice, but it's awfully far from friends, family, and pretty much everything else.
2. I live in Maryland. Nobody is allowed to carry weapons but police and several security companies. Despite this, the homicide rate in Baltimore is 35 times the homicide rate in Germany. I'm glad it's working for you guys, though.
3. I'm willing and able to work hard, so the welfare state is pretty irrelevant to me.

[Hanzii]

3. I'm willing and able to work hard, so the welfare state is pretty irrelevant to me.

I called it.

[Hetzer]

3. I'm willing and able to work hard, so the welfare state is pretty irrelevant to me.


Sure, but what if you lose an arm and be a construction worker? or you lose eyesight as an it specialist? then you would perhaps be willing but not be able.

[Machfive]

Sure, but what if you lose an arm and be a construction worker? or you lose eyesight as an it specialist? then you would perhaps be willing but not be able.

That's what AFLAC is for.

[Ephraim]

This was not the case in Canada - there's no stigma associated with speaking French.

While technically true, this is not the full story, subtle prejudices have and still exist revolving around accents and heritage. Even inside Quebec, prior to the passage of the infamous "Bill 101", Quebec's Charter of the French Language, by the Parti Quebecois government in 1977, French was not the language of business ANYWHERE in Canada, including Quebec. This meant that in order to get a good job outside of the blue collar world, you needed to speak English. Young Francophones used to speak anecdotally of the hardships they'd encounter trying to enter the business world in Montreal. This has since changed, as Bill 101 made it mandatory that all Quebec businesses above a trivial size operate fully in French. The old boy's network of Anglo business owners/managers has either moved down highway 401 to Toronto, or disappeared.

As for Lum's comment about the French speaking parts of Canada being less developed, that's not true. Quebec is really the only French speaking part of Canada, aside from a few scattered pockets of Franco-Ontarians and Franco-Manitobans, and some Acadiens in New Brunswick. And Quebec is and always has been a very strong part of Canada's economy, with a diverse array of industries ranging from the Canadian money-tree of resources (e.g. forestry, mining) but also with a strong knowledge worker economy, most recently in the area of Game Development (e.g. Ubisoft and EA both have major offices in Montreal). Many European companies see Quebec as the gateway to North America, and its French-language dominance, with bilingualism prevalent, has proven to be more of a boon than a detriment, economically.

I also don't really see the Quebec and American Spanish situations as analogous. In Canada, the original settlers (excepting the true Aboriginals, of course) spoke French. They got conquered, but in a show of mercy, were left alone culturally. This is not really the same situation as what the US is facing. The scale of things is radically different, as is the cultural machinery that makes English the powerhouse language it is today. I have no fear that Spanish-only speaking "provinces" or mini-states will emerge out of heavily Hispanic-immigrant areas in the US. It's too advantageous for new immigrants, especially their children, to adopt English. The only way that Spanish in the US will ever rival French in Canada is if strong laws upholding Spanish over English are passed, similar to Bill 101. That will never happen, not even as more Hispanics become voters. Because they will be assimilated Hispanics, and they'll see English as valuable because they had to learn English.

As for Europe: That's nice. But I agree with the sentiment that it would probably be more accurate to compare the NAFTA nations to the full EU when doing economic comparisons. So, let's factor in Canada and Mexico, too, when measuring economies. Though with that said, the EU is more than NAFTA in that it deals with political union, not just economic. But since this discussion is mostly about the economic, not political, advantages of the EU, a NAFTA comparison is more appropriate.

[Tim Partlett]

The EU and NAFTA are not comparable. Apart from the fact that the EU has its own parliament:

*Single currency: Most EU countries either share a single currency. Most of the others are working towards it. Only the UK isn't, and even the British government is committed in all but a stated declaration.
*Shengen: EU countries either have zero border control, are working towards zero border control, or have minimal border control between EU other states (UK).
*Freedom of workers: All workers in the EU are free to work in other EU countries without restriction. Most countries also share social security systems in some way, meaning fellow EU workers are covered by local health care, pensions and unemployment benefit.
*Shared standards: All EU countries have, or are working towards, shared standards for ease of business interoperability.
*Customs free: All EU borders are free of duty and taxes.

And that's just a few of the business oriented differences.

The relationship between Canada and America is more like the relationship between Germany and Morocco, than between Germany and France.

[Aeon221]

So I was writing up a post to partially rebut Tim* when I discovered this entity:

http://www.naalc.org/index.cfm?page=146

Whut? And don't act like it is common knowledge, because their ain't no Wikipedia entry.


* I'll include it anyway, but I'm not nearly as interested as I am in NAALC.


We essentially share the dollar, border crossings are minimally intrusive, we've got this NAALC thing for labor standards, and (other than agriculture) our goods are passed across tariff free. The biggest difference is that workers are not free to pick up and go while keeping their pre-existing support system.

While it isn't as close as the EU member nations, there is one hell of a huge difference between NAFTA and German-Morocco relations.

[Tim Partlett]

You essentially share the dollar? Do people in Montreal shop with greenbacks? What do Canadians think to the claim that they essentially share the US dollar?

How are the border crossings between Mexico and the US "minimally intrusive"? I'd like to hear the opinion of a Canadian who has travelled across the border to America who can compare that to crossing the border between Germany and France. Because when you cross from Germany to France the only time you realise you've changed country is when the road signs look different.

How is "we've got this NAALC thing for labor standards" the same as complete freedom of movement for labour? Workers in Mexico and Canada are not free to pick up and move to the US. At all.

and (other than agriculture) our goods are passed across tariff free

That's basically the same deal Morocco has with Germany (the EU) except we also have an "open skies" agreement. As that's the only thing in your list that is remotely comparable with the interelationships of EU countries, I think my comparison stands.

[Erlend Grefsrud]

5. I never had to learn to swallow all my consonants. I win.
6. Oil. We win.

[skedastic]

We essentially share the dollar,


Um, what?

[unbongwah]

In America there are only two rival languages: Spanish and English. English won't die out, but if whole communities in the US become Spanish speaking, there will be no need to learn English, because there will be no need to learn a bridging language to communicate.
No: Spanish and English aren't rivals. English is the de facto (and, if some people (http://www.us-english.org/) have their way, de jure) lingua franca of the U.S. There are specific regions in the country which accommodate large immigrant populations and their descendants (e.g., Japanese in Hawaii, Spanish in large Latino communities); and there have always been and will always be immigrants who don't learn English. But I can't imagine any immigrant in America doesn't realize that not being fluent in English is a huge disadvantage and doesn't want their kids at least to learn it. People may get very comfortable in their own ethnic enclaves, but I think they also realize that's a limiting factor as well. Most 2nd-generation descendants of immigrants are bilingual; and if they can only speak one language, it's usually English, not their native tongue. The main exception are folks who don't plan to settle in the U.S., but just want to earn some money before going home.

Europe is different: you have several small countries in close proximity, each with their own language, history, culture, etc. In a weird sort of way, you're like India: you have so many different languages, you need to choose an universal language if you're to unify as a political body. It is somewhat amusing that continental Europe and India have both chosen English, given that it's not native to either region. Though I guess it makes a weird sort of sense: force everyone to learn a non-native language so nobody has a leg up.

It's possible we'll reach the point where, say, the federal government mandates that Spanish-language services be made available. [Though the political climate would have to swing more sharply in favor of the Democrats before that happened.] And obviously, local and state governments can accommodate their immigrant populations as they see fit. But that doesn't mean Spanish would have parity with English; just that they would acknowledge that native Spanish speakers are a large enough minority to merit special consideration - i.e., political pandering. ;-)

[Chris Nahr]

That India chose English is not weirdly amusing, it's a consequence of India's colonial conquest by the United Kingdom. You can thank the British Empire for the eminent position of English in the world.

[Ephraim]

To address more questions:

You can pretty much use US dollars anywhere in Montreal, they'll be accepted at par. A friend of mine who lives in the US recently paid for lunch with American money here in Montreal without the cashier even blinking, and this was in a small café with no signage indicating their acceptance of foreign currencies. It used to be the fact that they accepted the US dollar at par meant the payer was getting screwed. Now the merchant is actually the one getting slightly shafted :) That being said, it's not something that happens all that often.

As for border crossings, there is no comparison. Crossing into the US from Canada is a production, whether it be by land or air. There's an interview by a border guard, at the very least, asking about your purpose of travel, how long you intend to stay, whether or not you are bringing any gifts, especially alcohol or tobbaco, etc... Scanning of your passport when you fly is also de rigeur. Whereas crossing between EU countries is, as said here, effortless. You don't even realize you've done it other than the language changes. There is no question the EU is more integrated from a border/governmental/regulatory stanpoint. I'm not so sure about economies.

[MikeJ]

You can thank the British Empire for the eminent position of English in the world.

...and all because British ships get two extra first-strike chances.

[Tim Partlett]

No: Spanish and English aren't rivals.

When you have half a billion Spanish speakers on your doorstep, they kind of are.

It is somewhat amusing that continental Europe and India have both chosen English, given that it's not native to either region.

Err... it is native to the region. About 13% of the EU population are native speakers (in the UK and Ireland).

[Tim Partlett]

That India chose English is not weirdly amusing, it's a consequence of India's colonial conquest by the United Kingdom. You can thank the British Empire for the eminent position of English in the world.

The British Empire was a strong player in the making of English as a world language, but not the only one. It laid the foundations for the cultural phenomenon that was the United States entertainment industry. I don't think English would be the world language it is without either the British Empire or the US.

[skedastic]

You can pretty much use US dollars anywhere in Montreal, they'll be accepted at par.


Which hardly means that the U.S. and Canada "essentially" share a currency. The exchange rate between Canadian and U.S. currency fluctuates, and each country maintains its own monetary policies. Many stores in London accept Euros, too, but that doesn't mean that the U.K. is part of the EU currency union.

[unbongwah]

That India chose English is not weirdly amusing, it's a consequence of India's colonial conquest by the United Kingdom.
India gained independence from the British 60 years ago; had they wished, they could've purged English from their system. Instead, they made English the "subsidiary official language (http://www.rajbhasha.gov.in/preseng.htm)" of India over 40 years ago. So yeah, they have the UK to "thank" for forcing English on them, but they chose to keep it themselves.
When you have half a billion Spanish speakers on your doorstep, they kind of are.
on your doorstep != in your home

You might as well say Russian rivals English in the EU because Russia's right on your doorstep, there's an awful lot of them, and more than a few come to the EU.

Oh, and technically it's more like 370M Spanish speakers: Brazilians speak Portuguese and make up about 190M of Latin America's 560M people.
Err... it is native to the region. About 13% of the EU population are native speakers (in the UK and Ireland).
I did say "continental Europe." Unless Luxembourg is a native English-speaking country and I never noticed? :-)

[Tim Partlett]

on your doorstep != in your home

You might as well say Russian rivals English in the EU because Russia's right on your doorstep, there's an awful lot of them, and more than a few come to the EU.

Oh, and technically it's more like 370M Spanish speakers: Brazilians speak Portuguese and make up about 190M of Latin America's 560M people.

Well, Russian is a rival to English, just not a very strong one. It could be a bigger rival if there were more than couple of hundred million native speakers, and they weren't stretched out over two continents. Unfortunately for Russian speakers, English is just too powerful culturally, but Spanish holds its own a lot better than Russian.

I did say "continental Europe." Unless Luxembourg is a native English-speaking country and I never noticed? :-)

Yeah, you did say that in the quoted text, so that was obviously what you were thinking. My bad missing that. But you were talking about Europe in general when you opened the paragraph, which is where my mistaken understanding stemmed from.

[cliffski]

Europe has better chocolate than the US. We win.
Seriously, Belgian or swiss chocolate is teh best.

[Bwah]

6. Oil. We win.

High five!