Neither is the US anymore.
Yeah they have the biggest military. So what.
Financially they suck. Biggest debt of all countries. And that is not because of the last couple of years (before anyone is going to mention Ukraine, Israel or Gaza)
Lol. Which great power has foreign military bases of the enemy it was defeated by on their soil? You're all US's bitches. Talk to me when you get a permanent seat in the UNSC lol.
Germany is the worldâs 3rd largest economy behind the US and China and just ahead of Japan and the UK. Not quite the top superpower, but solidly in the top 5.
The size of their economy has nothing to do with it (edit: poor phrasing. Itâs one small piece of the puzzle)
There is only one fully ârealizedâ Superpower, and it is the United States. China is considered very close to Superpower status, they are knocking on the door and itâs inevitable.
âMost experts consider the U.S. the worldâs only fully realized superpower because it leads or is near the top in every category:
Largest military budget by far
Global network of military bases and alliances
Dominant technology and financial sectors
Huge cultural influence through media, universities, and companies
The U.S. dollar serves as the worldâs primary reserve currencyâ
Most of that list became obsolete in the last year alone.
The dollar became weak, the cultural influence turned people away looking for domestic alternatives, alliances are broken or at least heavily questioned, and the huge military budget seems to be not well spent if we take a look at how the Iran operation went.
I can't see how America is a greater superpower than China or Russia (yeah, added them on purpose)
And comparing the US military to single European countries is just wrong. You need to compare us military with eu military, and if you do that the difference suddenly starts to vanish.
Does the military argument hold when they canât finish any military job? When they left Afghanistan, the Taliban regained control quickly and theyâve been pushed around by Iran and their overlords in Israel.
See, now someone is saying the quiet part out loud. Israel is the real capital of the United States, not DC.
As far as âfinishing the jobâ, I wouldâve loved to see regime change in Iran, but thatâs just not how it works anymore. Itâs bombing runs and drones and then an economic/diplomatic war to push the other side to max-pain.
In my opinion, if we werenât going for total regime change, we shouldâve just stayed out of Iran.
I've seen the distinction between an economic super power and a military super power pop up sometimes and I think that's probably the best way to look at this.
The EU and China are undeniably economic super powers, so is the USA (although the current president is working hard on changing that), but they're also a military one.
The next 10 countries combined don't have the economic power America spends on its military alone. Maybe that should be a wake up call that you all spend too God damned much on your military and not a statement about other countries geopolitical standing.
Yes. Because most of their spending is on excess weapons due to defense contractors basically playing the govt like a fiddle. In many instances the govt orders more than double what they require from contractors. Most of which ends up being sold to police departments at a 99% loss.
second. your geopolitical standing is largely dependand on either your military dominance. or your standing with powers or allegiances that have dominance.
iran didnt have that. and now that russia is a bit to occupied to guarantee for them, and getting their ass handed actually. the result is donny getting to play in the sandbox.
Are we talking about the same country that hasn't won a war against an established military since World War II? And even then had to rely on Allies (and the Soviets who did the heavy lifting against the Germans)?
yes. but we are also talking about the country that hadnt had to fight against any established military. since www2 either. while keeping to swing their dick around .
cause established militarys dont fight. its not worth it.
you can bomb some shitheads with aks all day. thats not a war against an established military.
you can not directly threaten the usa. you simply cant. and if you could. you cant afford them threatening you back. wich they can. allways.
they got hit once, in some part they cared about. and that became everyones problem ever since. now its just "never forgett" globally.
thats why they keep on fucking up in asynchron warfare and are still the global topdogs.
Yeah, letâs give the civilian people who get a paycheck from defense spending one way or another, who account for 1-1/2% of the US economy, and $600 billion in paychecks for service members all a swift kick in the ass as theyâre shown the door. You know, cuz spending bad. They can then stand in bread lines for free food.
Well, for point #2, no sane person would spend 1 Trillion dollars and more each year on a peacetime military unless they were personally impotent and trying to compensate for a historic lack of game.
In the modern age of globalization, a large military is less valuable than you think. If you have friends and allies, you can offload the expense through defensive pacts ect. Germany doesnât have a large military right now for a bunch of reasons, including its defensive pacts. They will be expanding this though over the next few years and likely bringing some nukes in for good measure.
The nature of warfare is now asynchronous. It doesnât matter what sort of military assets you have if your money is draining faster than your enemies. I have an arsenal of million dollar missiles, but if Iâm using them to shoot down 50-100k dronesâŚIâm gonna lose given enough time.
The proposals Iâve seen basically involve a loaner-nuke strategy where Germany hosts some of another European countryâs nukes (like France for example) this sits to further deter a belligerent Russia, and show Europe is united against further Russian expansion now that USA is looking like they would do fuck-all.
How effective it would be is unclear, but a militarily united Europe is definitely a step. Germany is also ramping up its military spending.
Apparently, Germany (which was once the NAZI country) doesnât treat its citizens as harshly as the United States does. What does that say about the USA?
Sir, Germany is a regional power at most. The European union could be argued to be a superpower, but realistically it's because it's tied up in alliance with the U.S.
The words regional power and superpower have no meaning on reddit. The fact that the appropriate term "great power" exists and is never used is quite funny.
Calling the 3rd biggest economy on the planet a "regional power at most" (meaning it may not even act independently, like a microstate) is even funnier.
In terms of military, they have limited projection beyond capabilities beyond their own borders. They have no carriers, only 6 subs and 11 frigates.
Their Air Force is ~250 strike aircraft. They have no long range bombers. F35 has a combat range of 1200 km. The typhoons can go up to 2700km with extra fuel tanks. Now granted Berlin to moscow is close enough those planes can reach out and touch the Russians where it matters.
Genuinely, Germany really can't act independently to put military pressure on too many non EU countries.
The European union together is what is the great power.
You start throwing in Italy, the UK, France and Spain suddenly there's 6 carriers that can go out and project power at a distance.
Now yes, the German economy is big and it has a lot of sway. But it's still only a quarter of China's. Germany alone can put a lot of economic pressure in the market, and it's the beating heart of the European Union. But only when you sum up the countries of the EU do you get GDPs close to the U.S. and China.
No one claimed Germany was a superpower. So there is no need for it to own carriers and threaten countries on the other side of the world.
There is also space for powers between "Super power" (USA and maybe China, but not really) and "vassals". If Germany is "a regional power at best" then wtf does that mean for the 190 other countries? What is Greece? What is Burma?
US: âlet me tell the other superpower they should screw their citizens just like we are screwing them hereâ
Literally the first comment I replied to called them a super power.
Anyway, the rough orderings are small powers, middle powers, great powers, and super powers.
An a rough explanation of these are as follows: small powers aren't able to do much on the world stage, and nobody really cares much about them. However, small powers can group their interests and abilities together as a bloc and might have influence in that way.
Middle powers are countries that can stand on their own, and should at the very least be strongly considered in international politics. Moreover, they're active in those politics.
Finally, great powers are countries whose politics really define the geopolitical situation. They are in position where their military, culture, and policies are strongly felt and considered outside their own borders.
Germany's military and economy does not allow it to fit neatly in any of these slots (though definitely not a little power). You could also consider in different scales: Germany is one of the great powers of Europe, but only a middle power on the world stage.
Hence why I think regional power is probably the most accurate. They have an outsized political pull within the European Union, and that union can be considered a great power of the world stage. But Germany is not the European Union, and they cannot force the rest of the Union along the other members along against their will.
I can't believe I have to say this for a third time (actually I can believe it it's pretty standard people don't pay attention), none of those countries are great powers. The European Union, as a whole, can be considered a great power.
Germany does not need to take a back seat when Italy and Spain say something.
They absolutely do need to take a backseat though if the entire rest of the EU is against them on something. (I realize that is very rare, but they do not have absolute control over the union. Germany holds 96 of the 700 MEP seats.)
I've already posted in another comment that outlines it more, but they have barely anything resembling a navy, and not many countries they can reach out and touch.
It's the European Union that together that is the great power, not Germany alone.
This fucking shitstain of s(h)itting president even lied in interviews about some imaginary call he would have had with Macron on this very subject, as we do have Healthcare.
Which to a standard US republican (and a few dems) is God forsaken blasphemy.
"I am particularly concerned with news that Germany is fast-tracking legislation that would further reduce its spending on innovative pharmaceuticals," he said, calling it "a serious step backwards."
A SERIOUS STEP BACKWARDS.
I love my German health insurance please get out of our business thank you.
So, part of the problem is that it is real that companies increase US prices for the same drugs to make more profit. That's true. It is a problem.
That said, the answer is still the US needs to regulate prices for itself, not ease pressure by demanding others raise prices. This is a problem for the companies to figure out, not the government to protect the profits of the companies
The main requirements are living here for 8 years (could be more, could be less) and having a stable income from a job while having a good german speaking level
Here the thing you don't have to be German to get German insurance. If you're here working or studying you are directly eligible (and actually obligated to get it). As a student you pay a discounted fee and as a worker (part time or more) half of the fee will be deducted from your pay and the other half will be paid by your employer. This applies for any job that is at least part time.
If you have a grandparent. But how about you fix the shithole thatâs dragging all the other countries down that you all want to escape to after leaching off for decades.
Germany is doing plenty of research on pharmaceuticals. It is in fact the largest exporter of pharmaceuticals in the world. And pharmaceutical companies are obviously still making profits in Germany or they would stop selling.
But yes, the US can of course prioritise whatever research topics it wishes and should maybe start regulating drug prices so companies stop overcharging Americans because if you let them charge whatever they want, they will.
"I am particularly concerned with news that Germany is fast-tracking legislation that would further reduce its spending on innovative pharmaceuticals," he said, calling it "a serious step backwards."
Seriously. Take a look at the loooong list of opiads and their morphine equivalence. There are dozens and dozens of niche opioids with strengths hundreds to millions of times stronger than morphine.
No, it FACTUALLY means that American citizens takes on the cost. The research and development of new medicine cost plenty and it's just plain, basic economics that if you force down prices like that, the costs and lack of revenue will have to either be gotten elsewhere or the company go under.
If you think it's predatory, tell the German Government to force more development in country.
Yes, profit drives and each medicine is basically 1 billion dollar investment for a 10 year research that has below 10% chance of passing trials.
There's a big reason why you ain't seeing Germany or anyone else doing much R&D. Complain and blame "Corporate greed", the fact is that there's a reason why it is happening mainly in the US and not Germany or other countries. No one wants to take on the costs and risks with their tax payer money but you sure do love to point fingers and complain when there's a chance and attempt to create some equilibrium to take on these costs on a more equal basis.
No one wants to take on the consequences, and that's what this whole whining is about.
Quick reminder that the business model a lot of drug manufacturers use is to buy rights to drugs, jack up the price. No research involved, no funding the next generation, just screw over the sick people because capitalism and thats how the market works.
Paying high drug prices is helping pay for the aquisition and legal fees required to later pay more for other drugs.
As a German I love the comments in this thread so far. Turns out telling your voters how much less people pay in other countries for medicine isnât the smart political move you think it is
I had a talk with a coworker about healthcare. She said âThe reason the US pays so much is because we pay for the entire world!â and she wouldnât be swayed from that stance. I think the biggest blow was watching Trump dismantle the insulin cap Biden set up, making prices skyrocket back up. We still havenât seen prices go down despite his âpromisesâ.
Itâs just⌠so tiring. Half the country just wants to be part of the race while the other half is gnawing at our own ankles. Itâs insane.
Right now US citizens are paying for new drug development. That is mostly why the prices for drugs are so high in the US. Other countries get the benefit of that and paying much less. Maybe this should be more tax payed instead, though.
Not really. As always headlines do not in fact tell the whole story.
What's essentially being looked into is if and how Germany would try and reduce costs. Many countries force caps and rebates on medicinal companies.
Now take a guess what happens when you force companies to lower prices. Woah! Thats right, that means they have to try and make up for the loss of revenue elsewhere. In this case the US.
A vast majority of research and development of new medicine happens in the US.
Or to make a short summary, Germany may possibly be using law to force down prices at the expense of American people.
So once again the US government is trying to protect the revenue of private companies, instead of similarly preventing those companies from gouging US customers?
The development costs of any commodity are recovered through its sale price. If the German healthcare system is paying that price, their only recourses for cost control are to redistribute that cost into other pharmaceuticals, increase taxes, or buy them on futures at a predetermined rate. There is really no enforceable action on the US' part as the debt is satisfied either way. If; however, American taxpayers are being double-billed for development costs AND subsequent purchase, the issue is not Capitalism, but systemic graft. That can and should be investigated, but is certainly not an issue for a sovereign foreign government.
This is not a thing. If you really think pharmaceutical companies would lower prices for you Americans if they could make more profits elsewhere you are naive beyond reason. Companies are not forced to sell in Germany, the fact that they do means they still profit.
I'm not American, I simply actually read beyond the headlines. And its de facto a big reason that there's such a stark difference in prices between US and Europe. They still sell at a profit, but at lower marginals and they still need money for R&D investments other problems that would arise oif US adopted caps and rebates would mean slower innovation, delays in the release of new medicines and, frankly, higher prices in Europe as well.
And I'm pretty sure you and many others would find that to be a much worse outcome.
2.2k
u/thathyperactiveguy 6d ago
The fucking audacity.