[comrade1234]

"When we compare the European, or at least northern European, economy with that of the United States some points should be indisputable."

So is he comparing Europe to the USA or just Northern Europe? And is he including Switzerland, Norway, Iceland, etc or just the EU? It's rather confusing and I wouldn't even know where to begin in trying to do these comparisons.

I live in Switzerland and have worked on projects all over Europe and work cultures and efficiency are so different everywhere. I definitely have a better quality of life here though than when I lived in the USA.

[ZeroGravitas]

Europe has either been expanding to include, if you look at EU, or it has always included, if you take the geographical boundary, a lot of very poor southern and eastern European countries.

I think EU expansion is a good thing but it makes even well intentioned comparisons difficult if e.g. Germany re-absorbs East Germany, or other nations join the EU

Poland was about 20% of the USA by PPP in the 90s, 40% when it joined the EU and 60% now.

Is that a success or a failure? It can definitely make some stats look worse.

[weatherlite]

Well Italy for example is a founding member and joined in 1958. So not including it makes as much sense as not including Germany.

[bildung]

"(actually the euro area)", it says so multiple times in the article.

[noduerme]

Americans, who mostly have no experience living or traveling abroad, can be counted on to not be able to find any of the countries you mentioned on a map. They either view all of Europe as either a sort of socialist utopia with fancy prisons and decent healthcare, or else as a bureaucratic disaster of taxes and restrictions. Although some will also say it's merely a museum. (I personally think it's a bit of all those things).

To be clear, though, Paul Krugman doesn't need to be specific at all, because he's simply pandering to one specific audience in America who hold one specific one of those stereotypes.