Having lived and traveled both “places” (and speaking in jest):
America’s cities are vastly more uniform than European ones, especially the mid-size ones. The approach goes big box stores > strip malls > suburbs > trendy strip malls > abandoned downtown > highrise downtown complex. In Europe, it’s more quaint medieval village > commercial area > medium density living > high density living > medieval city core
America’s landscapes are vastly more uniform than European ones, outside of a few highlights. Driving cross-country is city > farm land > more farm land > desert > National Park (yay!) > desert > farmland > city. Europe is more city > shrubs > border wait > mountains > border wait > lake > valley > border wait > city
Europeans think of any European country as an equivalent to America as a whole. That’s simply stupid. America as a whole is equivalent to Europe as a whole, and American states roughly equivalent to European countries. States are on average half as big as countries in Europe, but America as a whole is roughly equivalent to the EU. So, yes, a European should know what the capital city of Florida is if they expect an American to know the capital of Poland. (Only Germans and people from Montana can reliably tell you the state capital of Montana, though.)
American regional cultures are almost as diverse as European ones. Europeans seem to think that it is the language barrier that keeps regional cultures intact and diverse, but an American from California and an American from Texas use the same language but might as well be from different universes. People from Utah think drinking coffee is sinful and drown their uncaffeinated selves in thinly diluted sugar while next door in Colorado climbing 14ers (4300 meter mountains) is a social event that requires crowd control and permitting.
American regional cultures are almost as diverse as European ones.
Not even close. Almost every European country has it’s own language (sometimes more than one), and often times regional dialects within countries aren’t even mutually intelligible.
In Europe, the differences in traditions and expectations for how to act are massive, with different stories, different educational systems and different political systems. Half of Europe even lived in a different economic universe with the Soviet union just up until 40 years ago. Many European peoples still retain traditional crafts and lifestyles - it’s not “quaint little villages”, it’s a living heritage that it takes both specialized skill and understanding to maintain.
Spain is its own cultural universe spanning the globe, with media that never touches the English-speaking world; Albania and others have been Muslim-majority for 500 years (to say nothing of Turkey); Russia borders Finland in the West and Japan in the East. I could go on but I really think you’re vastly under-estimating how different European countries are from each other, and exaggerating the differences between American states.
That’s not to say that America doesn’t contain diverse cultures, but it’s your minority cultures within and across states that provide the flavor. But put succinctly: do think Minnesota is to South Carolina what Denmark is to Slovenia?
Americans watch the same TV channels. They shop in the same national retailers. There are some small differences in regional cuisine, but burgers, pizza, tacos, fried chicken, etc. are common everywhere. The same musicians are popular everywhere. The same 4 sports are the popular ones everywhere.
There are regional festivals celebrated in Europe that have been celebrated since before Europeans set foot in the Americas. The regional foods are completely different. Even though football is the most popular sport in most places, the number 2 sport varies greatly. There are bands and singers that are popular across Europe, plus a lot of American cultural exports that are popular too. But there are lots of regional kinds of music that are popular within certain countries.
The fact that Mardi Gras in New Orleans is so popular shows just how homogenous the culture is. To Europeans, Mardi Gras is just a very typical American-style festival. And yet, it draws Americans from other states because it’s considered to be so unique.
Of note, Minnesota and SC are almost twice as far away from each other as Denmark and Slovenia 😂 I live in the US and the idea that our cities’ cultures are as diverse as those found among all the nations of Europe is laughable. There’s plenty diversity within the US between cities, but it’s a totally different beast, and every city is also surrounded by homogeneous suburbs
That’s what I was trying to get at. And I don’t want to take anything away from America, there are reasons why some of the best cultural exports in terms of music, sports, film and books come from the USA and I think the multiple swathes of cultural incubators that cut across geographical boundaries help a lot with that.
Europeans think of any European country as an equivalent to America as a whole. That’s simply stupid.
It is stupid. Many European countries are culturally more diverse than the entire US.
American regional cultures are almost as diverse as European ones.
Not even close. This is laughable and, honestly, proof that the cliché of the American knowing nothing about world geography and foreign cultures is alive and well.
To even suggest that some guy from Texas and some other guy from California are as culturally far apart, as, say, a Spaniard from a Finn… this is truly the dumbest timeline.
The second to last point makes no sense, since the capital of Montana plays no role in international geopolitics, so it’s useless information. Poland is not the biggest international player either, but at least it’s not just part of a federation
If you mean the point above that, then the comparison is between Poland and Florida. Florida’s large Cuban community has been a driver of the support of Republicans in Congress. It is both a reason why the President is a Republican right now, and why America is thinking of invading Cuba. So, yes, Florida is very important to international geopolitics.
if you meant Montana, then let me point out that the population of Montana is somewhere between Cyprus and Luxembourg and has the geopolitical clout of either.
But their point still stands that your state capitals have no real geopolitical influence. Outside of a few big cities there is absolutely no need to know the individual American cities on a global scale.
Leipzig has a really strong scene of zionists which is one of the reasons that the left party of Germany has a problem recognising the need to stop weapon shipments to Israel, but I don’t expect a random american to know that Leipzig exists.
It’s as a European that I say Europeans have to get over internal differences and stop thinking European countries are equivalent to the big players in the world.
The UK thought it was super special and better than the rest, and it got exactly what it deserves. We Europeans are probably better off forgetting the “geopolitical clout of Poland” and considering it embedded in that of Europe as a whole. It’s no coincidence that Europe’s enemies fan the flames of nationalism in European countries.
Just dropping in to say that I, as an American, also look at Europe as though it’s one country with individual states. I don’t think that’s a universal rule, but I think a lot of Americans do that, in part, because we mostly hear about politics in terms of the “European Union”.
Occasionally the news is at the country level… France’s nuclear reactors… Spain suggesting development in the military… Denmark starting conscription… but the regulations we hear about, such as regarding carbon emissions or GDPR are in terms of the EU as a whole.
Outside of a few big cities there is absolutely no need to know the individual American cities on a global scale.
I hate to be the one to tell you this, but this statement can be applied to pretty much every region in the entire world. Definitely also applies to Europe.
If you ever need to drive the point home, half of our states are only important to the people who live in them. Sure, California or New York is comparable to say, France or Germany, and impact the world stage; but our deep South or Midwest is probably more comparable to the Balkans or the Baltics, etc. I’m sure they’re lovely, of course, but… they aren’t exactly a focus.
I say that, given an American can probably pick correctly where Spain, France or Germany are, roughly, but fuck us to know where Latvia or Albania are. Europeans are forgiven if they can’t figure out which of our fucking rectangles is Wyoming.
Europeans think of any European country as an equivalent to America as a whole. That’s simply stupid. America as a whole is equivalent to Europe as a whole, and American states roughly equivalent to European countries. States are on average half as big as countries in Europe, but America as a whole is roughly equivalent to the EU. So, yes, a European should know what the capital city of Florida is if they expect an American to know the capital of Poland. (Only Germans and people from Montana can reliably tell you the state capital of Montana, though.)
I tried to make a very similar point in one of the European communities on Lemmy earlier this year (in response to a post about Americans being bad at European geography) and basically the whole community jumped on me for it. Watch your back. They’re rabid over there if you dare suggest that a US state is comparable to a European country. :P
They’re like states, if the states each spoke their own separate languages and had spent the bigger part of the last 2,000 years constantly at war with each other.
The issue was never about cultural differences or history (though I would argue that different US states have quite different cultures, too) - it was purely about geographical knowledge. In that case specifically it was Europeans ragging on Americans for not being able to find smaller European countries on a map. I tried to compare being able to point to a country like Moldova as a European to being able to point to Kansas as an American and that was apparently the wrong thing to suggest, let me tell you, but the point I was trying to make is that of course Americans aren’t going to be as well-versed in European geography as a European, because we simply don’t need to know where those countries are regularly. Meanwhile I’d wager most Americans can point to Kansas or Colorado on a map, but I wouldn’t expect Europeans to be able to.
I mean most American states are shaped as rectangles, have nothing notable in terms of geography or culture to tell them apart, and are under 2 million inhabitants.
It’s like if Europe had Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and then 15 more of that, but they’re all shaped the same and speak the same language and their capitals are made of cinder block and plaster.
You’re objectively right, I was being hyperbolic. It’s a lot of states that are rectangle-shaped with quite small populations though. I mean if I had given the cutoff of “4.3 million inhabitants”, then that would cover half of all states.
And easily more than half at least one 90 degree angle.
Europe also has a lot of small states to be fair, and I don’t think we can expect people in general to keep track of all these.
This isn’t really relevant to the conversation, but your comments made me curious and I’ve just discovered that San Marino is actually a full 61km2. I had no idea, I thought it was about the same size as Monaco. The other mildly interesting tidbit is that Luxembourg is about the same size as Rhode Island - and both fill the role of “vortex of unknowable financial hijinks” for their respective region. I wonder what it is about small regions that breeds both tax havens and a shockingly high density of chocolatiers.
Yeah these small independent states are really strange. At least Rhode Island isn’t landlocked, but Luxembourg depends on all of its neighbors using it to launder money, and I’m not sure why that’s tolerated. Maybe it’s the chocolate.
Appreciate the warning! I think the real problem is that Europeans never accepted they are becoming a single political entity and still don’t necessarily consider themselves European. I think that’s sad, as Europeans are extensively closer to each other than to nations outside of Europe. Also, the EU is a decent model for how smaller entities can work with larger ones without being suffocated or absorbed.
Europeans think of any European country as an equivalent to America as a whole.
Half of the problem with that phrase is that this line of thought is far more common from Americans than Europeans. No European think France = US in any other context than geopolitically, maybe. But a lot of US citizens do think that way. The phrase “Americans think 200 years is a long time, and Europeans think 200km is a long distance” is of US origin. It’s literally the result of US ignorance that compares the geographical distances of a single European state, like Germany or France, to the entire extent of the continental US. Europeans are perfectly aware that 200km are 200km anywhere on the planet. Whether you are driving to another country or another state, it is irrelevant.
The other half of the problem is that the political dynamics of the European Union are fundamentally different to the United States federation. Just by the fact that the US was forged in war while the EU is an economics first agreement. Their nature is vastly different and not comparable at all. Maybe one day in the future the EU will just be a federation of states, a single country with a single constitution, but today that’s not the case. There’s no executive power in the EU that can override a country’s authority. That alone sets them so very far apart.
Europeans are perfectly aware that 200km are 200km anywhere on the planet
There is a difference in the way distances are perceived; I was talking to a British person bemoaning that airfare was 200 lbs more expensive in Manchester than London, and treated the notion of driving just 4 hours as if it was crazy. I’ve heard similar stories about not visiting family because they’re just a few hours away by car.
The classic saying “In Europe, 100km is a long distance. In the US, 100 years is a long time” holds a lot more truth about perceptions in the respective cultures than you’d expect. I’ve had a very pleasant 100km daily commute - seriously, I quite miss that - and at the same time, there’s a building down the street that’s just been added to the historical registry and was built in the late 80s.
Meanwhile I’ve had German friends offer to book me a hotel when I went from Cologne to Essen to give them a visit (admittedly this might have just been learned pragmatism, I was taking the trip on DB…) and said hotel dated back to before my ancestors had a written language.
That really just depends on the scale they are personally used to though, for a fair few years I lived ~5 hours from my family (relatively far within the country), but it didn’t feel like very much because I/we visited my partner’s family on the other side of the continent at least once a year. Prior to that, I don’t think that I would have visited anywhere near as frequently.
The lack of Schengen and now EU membership may make British people more prone to being on the smaller side of this.
Sure, perception can change. When all you have is a car and a highway. It seems outrageous to want an alternative. When you are used to high quality public transport, driving there is a chore.
Driving four hours is an effort that you have to actively take. Plus costs for ownership or rental, fuel and lodging. Americans treat these factors as mundane (and the cultural romanticization of road trips that doesn’t exist anywhere else), but they have real costs. Sure, a plane or a train are more expensive. But it offloads a great deal of cognitive costs as well.
Are things really that bad in Europe? In Japan, non-HSR is cheaper than driving, in China HSR is slightly cheaper than gas, and in vietnam I can even put my motorcycle on the train for less than it would cost to drive.
Trains being more expensive than driving sounds like what happens when you have politicians trying to kill your train system.
Totally depends on the country and the route. I don’t live there but have family. They say some train lines are comparable to a plane ticket. Some are cheaper, some are more expensive. The most expensive ones are usually the ones that cross national borders. Though overall the train will always be considered a tiny bit more expensive, it will also be a lot more comfortable. Since the airlines with tickets cheaper than trains usually offer the tiniest seats with zero amenities.
Some countries are better than others as well. In England, trains can get you almost anywhere relatively comfortable and fast (yes, some caveats exist). Spain is rather good in the central regions but many places have spotty coverage. While in Switzerland you can go virtually everywhere except the alps without ever sitting in a car.
The big comparison, that most people fail at, is not just the price of gas. Cars are taxed heavily almost everywhere in the EU. And the tight emissions regulations also require a lot of regular maintenance. So the train will always be more expensive than just the gas, but not more expensive than the bigger picture of car ownership. Plus, if you drive, you’re the sod stuck driving the whole way.
I meant like paying someone else to drive the plane/train/bus. Not the AI kind.
Having to drive everywhere makes people misserable.
Edit: we take for granted the infrastructure required to support a society that drives everywhere in personal cars. That is what is actually driving the species to extinction via climate change.
Being trapped and anxious makes people miserable; lots of people are scared of driving (because they’re bad at it and/or have attached anxiety), and sitting in traffic is frustrating. There’s lots of very good reasons to choose mass transit. The unwillingness to be engaged with the task of driving a car for a few hours is not a good reason, it’s a symptom of a totally cooked attention span.
Having lived and traveled both “places” (and speaking in jest):
America’s cities are vastly more uniform than European ones, especially the mid-size ones. The approach goes big box stores > strip malls > suburbs > trendy strip malls > abandoned downtown > highrise downtown complex. In Europe, it’s more quaint medieval village > commercial area > medium density living > high density living > medieval city core
America’s landscapes are vastly more uniform than European ones, outside of a few highlights. Driving cross-country is city > farm land > more farm land > desert > National Park (yay!) > desert > farmland > city. Europe is more city > shrubs > border wait > mountains > border wait > lake > valley > border wait > city
Europeans think of any European country as an equivalent to America as a whole. That’s simply stupid. America as a whole is equivalent to Europe as a whole, and American states roughly equivalent to European countries. States are on average half as big as countries in Europe, but America as a whole is roughly equivalent to the EU. So, yes, a European should know what the capital city of Florida is if they expect an American to know the capital of Poland. (Only Germans and people from Montana can reliably tell you the state capital of Montana, though.)
American regional cultures are almost as diverse as European ones. Europeans seem to think that it is the language barrier that keeps regional cultures intact and diverse, but an American from California and an American from Texas use the same language but might as well be from different universes. People from Utah think drinking coffee is sinful and drown their uncaffeinated selves in thinly diluted sugar while next door in Colorado climbing 14ers (4300 meter mountains) is a social event that requires crowd control and permitting.
I’m no german, not american either (pheeew) and even I can tell you the capital of Montana is Hannah
it has its show, it has its Linux distro. it’s basically common knowledge by this point
YOU CRIMINAL are the reason the neighbors complain about my crazy laughing! 😀
my pleasure, kind sir / maam
Not even close. Almost every European country has it’s own language (sometimes more than one), and often times regional dialects within countries aren’t even mutually intelligible.
In Europe, the differences in traditions and expectations for how to act are massive, with different stories, different educational systems and different political systems. Half of Europe even lived in a different economic universe with the Soviet union just up until 40 years ago. Many European peoples still retain traditional crafts and lifestyles - it’s not “quaint little villages”, it’s a living heritage that it takes both specialized skill and understanding to maintain.
Spain is its own cultural universe spanning the globe, with media that never touches the English-speaking world; Albania and others have been Muslim-majority for 500 years (to say nothing of Turkey); Russia borders Finland in the West and Japan in the East. I could go on but I really think you’re vastly under-estimating how different European countries are from each other, and exaggerating the differences between American states.
That’s not to say that America doesn’t contain diverse cultures, but it’s your minority cultures within and across states that provide the flavor. But put succinctly: do think Minnesota is to South Carolina what Denmark is to Slovenia?
Yeah, that’s an absurd claim.
Americans watch the same TV channels. They shop in the same national retailers. There are some small differences in regional cuisine, but burgers, pizza, tacos, fried chicken, etc. are common everywhere. The same musicians are popular everywhere. The same 4 sports are the popular ones everywhere.
There are regional festivals celebrated in Europe that have been celebrated since before Europeans set foot in the Americas. The regional foods are completely different. Even though football is the most popular sport in most places, the number 2 sport varies greatly. There are bands and singers that are popular across Europe, plus a lot of American cultural exports that are popular too. But there are lots of regional kinds of music that are popular within certain countries.
The fact that Mardi Gras in New Orleans is so popular shows just how homogenous the culture is. To Europeans, Mardi Gras is just a very typical American-style festival. And yet, it draws Americans from other states because it’s considered to be so unique.
Of note, Minnesota and SC are almost twice as far away from each other as Denmark and Slovenia 😂 I live in the US and the idea that our cities’ cultures are as diverse as those found among all the nations of Europe is laughable. There’s plenty diversity within the US between cities, but it’s a totally different beast, and every city is also surrounded by homogeneous suburbs
That’s what I was trying to get at. And I don’t want to take anything away from America, there are reasons why some of the best cultural exports in terms of music, sports, film and books come from the USA and I think the multiple swathes of cultural incubators that cut across geographical boundaries help a lot with that.
It is stupid. Many European countries are culturally more diverse than the entire US.
Not even close. This is laughable and, honestly, proof that the cliché of the American knowing nothing about world geography and foreign cultures is alive and well.
To even suggest that some guy from Texas and some other guy from California are as culturally far apart, as, say, a Spaniard from a Finn… this is truly the dumbest timeline.
The second to last point makes no sense, since the capital of Montana plays no role in international geopolitics, so it’s useless information. Poland is not the biggest international player either, but at least it’s not just part of a federation
The Montana mention was a joke. The capital is Bismarck.
(Psst, that’s North Dakota, Helena is the capital of Montana)
I think that was another joke
But what was the first one?
The first one was earnestly serious, I’m sure of it.
The last point does not mention Montana?
If you mean the point above that, then the comparison is between Poland and Florida. Florida’s large Cuban community has been a driver of the support of Republicans in Congress. It is both a reason why the President is a Republican right now, and why America is thinking of invading Cuba. So, yes, Florida is very important to international geopolitics.
if you meant Montana, then let me point out that the population of Montana is somewhere between Cyprus and Luxembourg and has the geopolitical clout of either.
But their point still stands that your state capitals have no real geopolitical influence. Outside of a few big cities there is absolutely no need to know the individual American cities on a global scale.
Leipzig has a really strong scene of zionists which is one of the reasons that the left party of Germany has a problem recognising the need to stop weapon shipments to Israel, but I don’t expect a random american to know that Leipzig exists.
Whose state capitals? I am European.
It’s as a European that I say Europeans have to get over internal differences and stop thinking European countries are equivalent to the big players in the world.
The UK thought it was super special and better than the rest, and it got exactly what it deserves. We Europeans are probably better off forgetting the “geopolitical clout of Poland” and considering it embedded in that of Europe as a whole. It’s no coincidence that Europe’s enemies fan the flames of nationalism in European countries.
Just dropping in to say that I, as an American, also look at Europe as though it’s one country with individual states. I don’t think that’s a universal rule, but I think a lot of Americans do that, in part, because we mostly hear about politics in terms of the “European Union”.
Occasionally the news is at the country level… France’s nuclear reactors… Spain suggesting development in the military… Denmark starting conscription… but the regulations we hear about, such as regarding carbon emissions or GDPR are in terms of the EU as a whole.
Tbf you also get very little international news in total
Reuters, BBC, Le Monde, RTÉ … All are available on line.
I hate to be the one to tell you this, but this statement can be applied to pretty much every region in the entire world. Definitely also applies to Europe.
If you ever need to drive the point home, half of our states are only important to the people who live in them. Sure, California or New York is comparable to say, France or Germany, and impact the world stage; but our deep South or Midwest is probably more comparable to the Balkans or the Baltics, etc. I’m sure they’re lovely, of course, but… they aren’t exactly a focus.
I say that, given an American can probably pick correctly where Spain, France or Germany are, roughly, but fuck us to know where Latvia or Albania are. Europeans are forgiven if they can’t figure out which of our fucking rectangles is Wyoming.
Why, it’s easy! Wyoming is the rectangle above the Best Rectangle!
You know, I think the fact I live here and I still had to look up which one you meant is just one fucking stellar example of their point.
Some good stuff. Some not so good stuff. Hard to tell where the jest and bad info meet.
I tried to make a very similar point in one of the European communities on Lemmy earlier this year (in response to a post about Americans being bad at European geography) and basically the whole community jumped on me for it. Watch your back. They’re rabid over there if you dare suggest that a US state is comparable to a European country. :P
They’re like states, if the states each spoke their own separate languages and had spent the bigger part of the last 2,000 years constantly at war with each other.
I’ll explain. People get annoyed because you are proudly ignorant of 2000 years of history and tons of cultural differences.
The issue was never about cultural differences or history (though I would argue that different US states have quite different cultures, too) - it was purely about geographical knowledge. In that case specifically it was Europeans ragging on Americans for not being able to find smaller European countries on a map. I tried to compare being able to point to a country like Moldova as a European to being able to point to Kansas as an American and that was apparently the wrong thing to suggest, let me tell you, but the point I was trying to make is that of course Americans aren’t going to be as well-versed in European geography as a European, because we simply don’t need to know where those countries are regularly. Meanwhile I’d wager most Americans can point to Kansas or Colorado on a map, but I wouldn’t expect Europeans to be able to.
A better comparison to Moldova would be Belize.
I mean most American states are shaped as rectangles, have nothing notable in terms of geography or culture to tell them apart, and are under 2 million inhabitants.
It’s like if Europe had Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and then 15 more of that, but they’re all shaped the same and speak the same language and their capitals are made of cinder block and plaster.
Objectively false!
Objectively false!
I don’t know why anyone is upvoting you
You’re objectively right, I was being hyperbolic. It’s a lot of states that are rectangle-shaped with quite small populations though. I mean if I had given the cutoff of “4.3 million inhabitants”, then that would cover half of all states.
And easily more than half at least one 90 degree angle.
Europe also has a lot of small states to be fair, and I don’t think we can expect people in general to keep track of all these.
This isn’t really relevant to the conversation, but your comments made me curious and I’ve just discovered that San Marino is actually a full 61km2. I had no idea, I thought it was about the same size as Monaco. The other mildly interesting tidbit is that Luxembourg is about the same size as Rhode Island - and both fill the role of “vortex of unknowable financial hijinks” for their respective region. I wonder what it is about small regions that breeds both tax havens and a shockingly high density of chocolatiers.
Yeah these small independent states are really strange. At least Rhode Island isn’t landlocked, but Luxembourg depends on all of its neighbors using it to launder money, and I’m not sure why that’s tolerated. Maybe it’s the chocolate.
NIMBYism, but for financial criminals? Oh well. At the very least they’re not boring, I suppose that counts for something.
Appreciate the warning! I think the real problem is that Europeans never accepted they are becoming a single political entity and still don’t necessarily consider themselves European. I think that’s sad, as Europeans are extensively closer to each other than to nations outside of Europe. Also, the EU is a decent model for how smaller entities can work with larger ones without being suffocated or absorbed.
Half of the problem with that phrase is that this line of thought is far more common from Americans than Europeans. No European think France = US in any other context than geopolitically, maybe. But a lot of US citizens do think that way. The phrase “Americans think 200 years is a long time, and Europeans think 200km is a long distance” is of US origin. It’s literally the result of US ignorance that compares the geographical distances of a single European state, like Germany or France, to the entire extent of the continental US. Europeans are perfectly aware that 200km are 200km anywhere on the planet. Whether you are driving to another country or another state, it is irrelevant.
The other half of the problem is that the political dynamics of the European Union are fundamentally different to the United States federation. Just by the fact that the US was forged in war while the EU is an economics first agreement. Their nature is vastly different and not comparable at all. Maybe one day in the future the EU will just be a federation of states, a single country with a single constitution, but today that’s not the case. There’s no executive power in the EU that can override a country’s authority. That alone sets them so very far apart.
There is a difference in the way distances are perceived; I was talking to a British person bemoaning that airfare was 200 lbs more expensive in Manchester than London, and treated the notion of driving just 4 hours as if it was crazy. I’ve heard similar stories about not visiting family because they’re just a few hours away by car.
The classic saying “In Europe, 100km is a long distance. In the US, 100 years is a long time” holds a lot more truth about perceptions in the respective cultures than you’d expect. I’ve had a very pleasant 100km daily commute - seriously, I quite miss that - and at the same time, there’s a building down the street that’s just been added to the historical registry and was built in the late 80s.
Meanwhile I’ve had German friends offer to book me a hotel when I went from Cologne to Essen to give them a visit (admittedly this might have just been learned pragmatism, I was taking the trip on DB…) and said hotel dated back to before my ancestors had a written language.
That really just depends on the scale they are personally used to though, for a fair few years I lived ~5 hours from my family (relatively far within the country), but it didn’t feel like very much because I/we visited my partner’s family on the other side of the continent at least once a year. Prior to that, I don’t think that I would have visited anywhere near as frequently.
The lack of Schengen and now EU membership may make British people more prone to being on the smaller side of this.
Sure, perception can change. When all you have is a car and a highway. It seems outrageous to want an alternative. When you are used to high quality public transport, driving there is a chore.
Driving four hours is an effort that you have to actively take. Plus costs for ownership or rental, fuel and lodging. Americans treat these factors as mundane (and the cultural romanticization of road trips that doesn’t exist anywhere else), but they have real costs. Sure, a plane or a train are more expensive. But it offloads a great deal of cognitive costs as well.
The distance itself doesn’t change though.
Are things really that bad in Europe? In Japan, non-HSR is cheaper than driving, in China HSR is slightly cheaper than gas, and in vietnam I can even put my motorcycle on the train for less than it would cost to drive.
Trains being more expensive than driving sounds like what happens when you have politicians trying to kill your train system.
Totally depends on the country and the route. I don’t live there but have family. They say some train lines are comparable to a plane ticket. Some are cheaper, some are more expensive. The most expensive ones are usually the ones that cross national borders. Though overall the train will always be considered a tiny bit more expensive, it will also be a lot more comfortable. Since the airlines with tickets cheaper than trains usually offer the tiniest seats with zero amenities.
Some countries are better than others as well. In England, trains can get you almost anywhere relatively comfortable and fast (yes, some caveats exist). Spain is rather good in the central regions but many places have spotty coverage. While in Switzerland you can go virtually everywhere except the alps without ever sitting in a car.
The big comparison, that most people fail at, is not just the price of gas. Cars are taxed heavily almost everywhere in the EU. And the tight emissions regulations also require a lot of regular maintenance. So the train will always be more expensive than just the gas, but not more expensive than the bigger picture of car ownership. Plus, if you drive, you’re the sod stuck driving the whole way.
“Offloading cognitive costs” for the sake of convenience is ruining this species.
I meant like paying someone else to drive the plane/train/bus. Not the AI kind.
Having to drive everywhere makes people misserable.
Edit: we take for granted the infrastructure required to support a society that drives everywhere in personal cars. That is what is actually driving the species to extinction via climate change.
I wasn’t just talking about AI.
Being trapped and anxious makes people miserable; lots of people are scared of driving (because they’re bad at it and/or have attached anxiety), and sitting in traffic is frustrating. There’s lots of very good reasons to choose mass transit. The unwillingness to be engaged with the task of driving a car for a few hours is not a good reason, it’s a symptom of a totally cooked attention span.
My mother was from Montana which is why I know. I know Billings more though.