• ammonium@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    10 months ago

    Saved from a Russian invasion. It’s a bit exaggerated, but not entirely untrue I believe.

    • el_abuelo@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      10 months ago

      Europe has contributed more money than USA, so they can share a little less than half the credit.

      It’s basically the same deal as WW2 - sure, the USA has had a big impact - but Europe’s not exactly shirked its share of the heavy lifting.

        • Richard@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          21
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          10 months ago

          But don’t forget that the EU and US have very comparable surface area and population

            • CallumWells@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              12
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              10 months ago

              EU is slightly over 448 million people vs 332 million in the USA.
              4.233 million km² in EU vs 9.833 million km2 in the USA.
              91 billion USD equivalent support from EU (including the EU organization and EU members) versus 75 billion USD from the USA.

              91/75 = 1.213…
              448/332 = 1.349
              If you want per capita you get 0.203 (unit not given, they are the same for each comparison) per capita from EU, versus 0.225 per capita from the USA. The numbers based on area will be a lot worse for the USA.
              To be clear; yes, the USA has contributed a little more per capita, but less in absolute terms. There’s a maximum of 35% difference in the populations between the EU and the USA. That’s “very comparable” when it comes to such large populations.

              • Fenrisulfir@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                10 months ago

                Then there is a lot of varying census data. When I searched, the site said 780 million. I wonder if some sites still include the UK and others are maybe restricting the definition to the Schengen area.

                • el_abuelo@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  It’s because some people are using Europe in its proper continental usage, and some people using it really mean the EU. In this thread we’re discussing the EU because it’s a comparable entity to the US as covered in a previous reply.

                  FYI the UK is a shade under 70m population the last time I checked - nowhere near enough to add 300m to Europe’s population.

                • bitwaba@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  Any count of Europe’s population that is over 700 million is including Russia, which is 140~150 million that shouldn’t be included when trying to answer the question about who has contributed more per capita to fighting Russia.

                  If someone wants to give an explicit list of the countries that should be counted for populations regarding the question of “who has given more to help the war in Ukraine, the US or Europe?”, we can get to the bottom of this real quick.

                  • Zibitee@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    10 months ago

                    I mean, he’s right in that the population of EU seems to have two very different numbers. If you Google it, the first two results agree on over 700 million and it isn’t until the third result that you get 400 millon. Your argument literally goes either way depending on the definition of “Europe”.

        • shneancy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          10 months ago

          a continent united through trade, (mostly) shared currency, open borders, and a union that governs over member countries each having their own laws.

          Now compare it to the US, united through trade, open borders, shared currency, and a federal government that governs member states that each have their own laws.

          obviously there are major diffences between the two but for the sake of comparison in the “who put more effort into something” debate comparing US and Europe on the grounds of “single country vs many countries” is rather silly

          • Fenrisulfir@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            10 months ago

            Well the other person said you can compare based on surface area (wtf?) and population. Googling population of Europe gives me a number that’s twice the size of the USA. So per capita, assuming they’ve both given the same effort, the USA has given twice as much as Europe.

            Come up with a metric that’s not silly then.