The problems with America that nobody notices... 

Apologies for being inactive for so long... I really just needed a break and had to find the joy for making videos again. And I've found that now, so you should expect to see many more videos coming out in the near future! I'm glad to be back, I've missed making videos for you guys

Worth noting that those 250 bucks you pay as a student in Germany often go in large part to a transit ticket. Which means all local trains (i.e. non-express) in the federal state, plus trams and busses. This means millions of students are living in cities with no need for a car at all. And the liberty to visit places at no cost. I was so broke at one point that I took a train to a neighboring city to go to the blood bank that paid best. However, Germany just instituted a cheap nation-wide subscription ticket for public transit, so that may shake up the student ticket meta somewhat. This was started in reaction to the Ukraine War, to lower gas consumption and push traffic into the public transit system where possible. Also as part of a major green project to move from cars to public alternatives as a credible alternative for as many people as possible.

8 parking spaces per car in the US is what happens when you tell a store that they need to have enough parking space for every single person that could fit into your store at once, regardless of the fact that the megamall next door has enough parking space for you to park there instead.

When I was abroad in Europe and Asia I quickly noticed just how well-designed they are and how convenient it is to get around and get the stuff you need while only having to walk. I sure miss all that convenience

I’m a Texan and I’ve never been on a train, or subway in my entire life.

I'm an American who has lived overseas for most of the last 20 years, mostly in Europe. I would tell a European to not think of America as an extension of Europe, and I would tell non-Americans in general to think of the United States as a plural, countable noun, rather than as a singular entity; actually, it's even messier than that because most of the cultural, as well as some legal, differences are within, not between, states (often urban vs. rural). The U.S. Constitution grants most powers to the states, as it is a federal system; this is often referred to as states' rights. That's a better place to start if you want to understand my country.

My class went on a music tour in east germany last month. My favorite thing about it was the trains. There were trains going to many cities, both high speed to transport between cities, and light rails within the cities. We went to 10 cities, all by train, except for a bus early one morning to the airport in Frankfurt. We also took light rail in the cities. Another thing I noticed on the train is that even in the rural areas we passed by, there were still bike lanes and sidewalks and many trails everywhere. In America, that's completely non existent in rural areas, except for historical/tourist areas. In the suburb I live in now, there's only 3 walking/cycling trails, but you have to drive a car to get there, and they're only used for recreation or exercise, as they go nowhere. So germany proved that the city population size doesn't matter. Even people in rural areas there had people cycling on the trails in the middle of nowhere. Germany isn't perfect, some cities still had some heavy car traffic in some areas(though nowhere near as bad as the US), but it's FAR ahead of the US in almost every way when it comes to city design and infrastructure and transportation. It's easy to live there without a car, but nearly impossible in most of the US. As an American flying back home to get in my car, I was very jealous.

In response to your last bit about how state laws differ, picture America as the eu that's a bit more federalized, states are meant to be countries and thus have their own armies, laws, etc... It's like asking why the tax laws are different in germany compared to denmark when all I did was drive across the border, not even needing to show my passport.

12:00 more decentralisation is good honestly. Centralisation means less democracy, more corruption and less following the need of the people. Thats why the EU should and must not get more power. The commission already is authoritarian enough

American: a 15 minute today is impossible. I wouldn't dare walk that far Meanwhile: parking lot is 7 minute trip to building

Surprised to hear that Los Angeles has such a low public transport ridership despite having a population of over 3 million. Over 12 million if your counting the metropolitan area.

Different states have different laws because it allows for experimentation to see what works and what doesn't. Plus, it allows for versatile changes according to geographical, social, and year-by-year changes.

I was shocked of the fact that states count their residents only once in 10 years. Having an official, close to real time system for counting residents has been something I've taken for granted /Finn

9:19 The reason why we have the Electoral College is because we are a Democratic Federative Republic, not a Unitary Republic. The difference is like if the E.U. federalized into a singular country. The E.U. would be a Federal Republic, versus say, France as it stands now is a Unitary Republic, however, if it were to enter the Federal E.U. country, it would cease being a Unitary Republic and become a State (region) within the Federal Republic of Europe. The reason why the Electoral College exists is so that the less populous States (regions) within the United States don't get politically dominated by the larger States with the result of the smaller States mattering less than the large ones and thus being neglected. At this point it no longer makes sense to be in a political union (Federation) with the other larger States, only an economic one similar to how the E.U. is now. For example, why would a nation such as Romania want to further the integration of the E.U. into a political union (Federation) without a guarantee that it's problems and desires will actually matter to the central government? Why would they join, only to be ignored? It would be better just to have the E.U. remain an economic union instead. This is why the United States has an Electoral College system at the Federal level, and a direct election system at the State level. Because it wouldn't make sense for smaller states to be in a political union without a guarantee that their voice will at least matter to some extent. The bigger states knew this and still decided to join the union anyway because they still benefit from it economically even if they suffer representationally at the federal level. This makes sense when you consider that when the United States was created, the Federal Government was not intended to be as important as it is today. You can see this in the Tenth Amendment: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." This means that any power not specifically given to the Federal Government should be delegated to the State Governments instead, and thus "the people" because "the people" were intended to be primarily governed by whichever State they chose to reside in, not the Federal Government. I hope this helps clear up the confusion about why the American people don't elect the President via direct vote or through Parliamentary vote and do it instead through the Electoral College. ~Nick

Proportional Representation doesn't work as mentioned in the video! PR Systems distribute seats in accordance to which votes where gained overall. Gerrymandering is impossible in a PR system since all votes count, not just those that end up winning the district. Thus, districts can be drawn however one wants, since in the end it will all be proportional anyways.

As an American, overall I agree with pretty much everything said with the exception of state law and federal law. Overall this is something that is quite good despite the oddities that you mentioned. It allows for a state to do something that its residents want but may not be popular enough to change on a federal level. (I hope we get trains man im down bad cars are expensive)

8 spots for overflow cus you can't expect even distribution of cars throughout the nation

Key Corrections? Thanks for your video. The Acela train is pronounces a-sell-a. In the United States, the federal government has (in general) purview over trade, foreign policy, defense, communications, most financial regulations and a few other areas. Each state is sovereign except in those areas controlled by the federal government. So each state and its legislature and citizens decide what laws should be for them. As an example, I live in Texas, a very large state with some long desolate freeways and 3 very large metro areas. Our statewide maximum speed limit is 85 and is reflected in the fact that we want to go faster to get to where we are going. However in Pennsylvania, a mostly mountainous state, they have a lower speed limit of just 65, likely for safe driving in more difficult terrain. For such a large country, what works for one area does not necessarily work in another. This is also why there are different gun laws across the 50 states, and why you can turn on red in some states but not others as you pointed out in your video. Because many things that affect our daily life are decided at the state, county or city level, we get a set of laws which reflects the citizen's wishes in each area, rather than laws set down by a federal government that can be 2,500 miles away and lacks understanding with local issues and needs. Is this a perfect system? No. But does it work for us?, yes.

Thanks for this thoughtful video. Regarding your surprise at states having varying laws, this goes back to the founding of the nation. The original states were independent colonies, essentially mini-countries. The design of the country is an effort to balance the interests of those individual states with the need for a central government to take care of things states cannot do well on their own. It *is* messy but it also seeks to respect the right of people to govern themselves by devolving many decisions to the local level. As an American who has lived abroad for almost two decades, I can clearly see the flaws of the system but I can also see that the design is a feature of the system, too.

People love to ignore Canada, Mexico, Brazil, and Australia etc where they also have car cultures.

Whoever got you thinking the Acela was pronounced that way I'd goofy Af

back then .. 18 years ago i didn't understand the electoral college either .. see it as something like .. every european country votes on their favorable representation in the european parliament .. so every country according to their size can put a certain number of representatives into the EU parliament .. to go by a "democratic" majority vote means 2 population strong countries could dictate over everyone else. a serious problem every us State has on a state level .. cities can dictate what's happening in the countryside trough outnumbering the population and vote against the interest of rural people .. i.e. what happenes with river water .. voting it away from farmers holding it exclusive to cities

I live in Canada and it is the same problem in here, the difference between provinces is mind boggling......

why would I want to walk around when it is 98F outside and rains hard every day?

Let me know when you can handle -37C in the winter while Copenhagen's lowest recorded temp is -16.5C.

You have some great points. The thing about the varying state laws is that we have a system of government called Federalism where the 50 US states have differing laws on a number of issues. The benefit for us is that there is not a one-size-fits-all. People do move to different states for different benefits especially on tax issues. But we have different laws on education, the use or non use of the death penalty and even different laws on whether you can purchase alcohol the latter of which is actually on the county level. Personally I think the US is too big in area and population for all the laws to stay at the federal/national level. But it does get confusing.

The author needs to remember that the USA is a Federal Republic. While inconvenient at times to have differing laws across state lines, it is a feature not a bug. The founders rightly recognized that centralized governments tend to bloat and acquire more powers over time, so having some powers reserved to the states does help put some kind of limits on Federal power. It probably helps prevent some mistakes from being committed at continental scale and allows for wider experimentation in state laws. The electoral college is also an intermediary weighting system that gives a bit more power to individual states while still having a strong popular element to presidential elections. (Low population states bat a little above their weight and aren't completely ignored in presidential politics).

Except for the Electoral College and the Interstate Highway System, these weird problems aren't the result of "design." They've just taken root over the decades and centuries. Sure, the US train "system" is obsolete and needs upgrading, but in how many European countries does a train ride between the two largest cities take 3 days, and a drive take even longer? Still, there's no excuse for not upgrading the Northeast Corridor--the only passenger route in the US that pays its own way.

Agree with all the points you made except state specific laws in the US. With such a large population as you mentioned each US state is comparable to European countries - so it makes sense for the states having some degree of freedom to legislate and enforce their own laws. Otherwise it would be like asking every country in Europe to follow the exact same laws. Countries the size of continents and with large populations need to provide some legal flexibility.

The wierd thing is that there are many private schools that are cheaper than the state flagship universities (think University of State Name).

Moving from the us to a non car centric country, the difference is huge and it makes it very hard to ever come back.

The thing which addresses most of your concerns toward the end, is you must remember America is not a Nation State, it is 50 Nation States wearing a trench coat, holding a sign saying I'm the United States.

I don’t understand how people who don’t live here complain how you need cars to go everywhere. Clearly it isn’t an issue for those who choose to live here

You think American roads are falling apart, you haven't seen nothing! In Canada many rural communities (reserves) have no year round roads (winter roads only), or potable water, and our urban infrastructure is so sprawled out that our roads are constantly potholed and busted. Combined with infrastructure funding competing with health care and the standard of larger yards (1/2 acre in suburbs is pretty normal) it's no wonder our infrastructure is falling apart at a rapid pace. At least our bridge inspections are taken pretty seriously. Edit: I live in Winnipeg where our climate and soil conditions are especially hard on roads. They're better in BC where the climate is better, and in AB where there's oil money flowing into public funds.

The problem with traffic is that unlike a lot parts of the world the u.s does not live near where they work

There’s a few similarities to Australian as well. Each state has different laws, incomes and life expectancy

The electoral collage is a feature not a bug .America is a federation of states but some states have far more power than others and a small group of states pulling inone direction could over rule the majority to keep the president in one party for decades without the collage to prevent it.

With intercontinental ballistic missiles, it's less meaningful now, but still important: America's "design" is blessed with two great admirals -- Admiral Atlantic and Admiral Pacific.

I find it particularly funny how so many people like to complain about how horrible America is all the time, but millions upon millions keep coming here from every corner of the world.

I like hearing an outsiders perspective on these things. Sometimes the laws here feel weird and disjointed for sure, but thats the price of getting 50 mini-countries to co-operate i guess

While I agree on the weird structure of our cities and our government, I think the level of autonomy we give to states is just fine. If you see the US's history it's a nation built by immigrants, and in its early days they they would entice immigrants to live on on a piece of US territory, and when enough immigrants or settlers were living on that territory they made it a state and said "this is yours to control as long as you follow the constitution," and that was that. I don't think people over in Europe fully grasp that the United States is just that, a decentralized confederation of states. Its so decentralized that states pass legislation that goes against federal law all the time and the federal government usually doesn't bother them about it (unless it violates the constitution or an important bill). The US in terms of land is almost the size of Europe and has 330 million people, it would be pretty hard for a single centralized government to effectively control all of it, many of whom are of various ancestry, ethnicity, religion, and even different morality. Where as European countries are small, mostly homogenous countries with more manageable populations. But like I said, everything else in the video I agree with, however I admire how different some states can be from one another even down to the architecture and the laws.

What I also notice is the consequence of a car centrist society: the city density is really low and the density is abnormally concentrated in the center. I always see 6 lanes streets in neighborhoods that are low density, it's insane. 6 lanes streets and the buildings are maybe 3 floors tall. You can't scale anything if you have to give 1 car per 1 person. Here in Germany we rarely (actually almost never. We have a main street goes through city and it's just 2 lane normal street. But the 2 lane street have also a 2 lane tram and busses) see 4 lanes streets and we have 6-10 floors tall buildings. The difference is that in the US for 10 people you have to have 10 cars that's about 93 sq feet of space times 10 is already 930 sq feet or 86 sq m of wasted space, while a human is about 2.7 sq feet or 0.25 sq m. For 10 cars you can fit about 310 people, that's a scale of 1:31, so for each car you can fit 31 people. Lets say you have a business district for 1500 people a day. You now need about 1500 parking lots. That's it, you can't scale any further. But in Germany with good public transport you can scale up to 450,000 people a day in the same district.

8:45, so the EU parlamet actually does not have a real %-barrier, as long your party gets as many % in votes as would equal a seat, you will get at least that seat. The 5% barrier is in effect in e.g. Germany for parlaments here.

I live in Upstate NY. newly paved roads have all manholes that are at least 1 inch lower than the road. Many people drive slalom to avoid these manholes. I wonder if the cities call cousin Vinny to repair the roads.

Seems like so many people who don't live here, love to worry about America and it's design when even the American people don't put these issues at the top of things to worry about. America is not Europe please stop comparing.

designed badly but rich unbelievably

One important thing to remember is that, technically, America is not a single country. Rather, we are a collection of 50 semi-separate countries, all organized under a single federal government. It's basically a result of our origin, as we were colonies of the British Empire, and each colony was separately run, though each was under the greater rule of the British crown and parliament. We basically swapped out the crown and parliament for a president and congress, but the state divide still exists to this day, which is why each state is run by its own governor and state congress. This of course leads to the greater issue that each state runs things ever so slightly differently, and often you have all these irritating differences in laws and ordinances across borders. Also, as far as public transportation, a LOT of those projects were smacked down over the years by car and oil companies, who were eager for more people to drive so they made more profits. Heck, even a lot of our railway tracks in this country are owned by oil companies, and they won't allow passenger trains on their tracks at all, meaning we can't use existing infrastructure to actually revamp our system. Because while I live in a rural area and need a car to get around, I sure as heck would love if I could hop on a train to go visit friends and family who are a distance away.

My parents had been on the wait list to even be able to immigrate to the US, lucky we landed in NZ instead. We still have our own troubles here and even now I’m thinking of moving to another country as well, but I’m just thankful I grew up where I did.

Anyone who doesn't like parking lots doesn't understand how great they are. You go to a shopping mall, you park, you go into the mall, and you enjoy the mall. In downtown districts with limited parking spaces you end up driving around forever looking for a place to park. There are parking meters everywhere. Sometimes the place is full. So, you either go home, or park kilometers away from where you want to be. America has 9.8 million square kilometers of space. Most of it is empty nature even with the parking lots. I don't want to be driving around forever looking for a spot. I use more gas doing that.

On most points, we are in agreement except for transportation. Most Americans live in very low population-density states compared to European nations with good train systems. For the lower 48 (incl. D.C.) only 22% of the U.S. population in states having population density greater than France, 9.3% than Germany, 7.5% than the UK, 3.3% than Belgium, and only D.C. greater density than the Netherlands 0.21% of the U.S. population. So rail would have to be 1/.22 or five times more expensive to reach those populations.

Back in the sixties, proposals were made for a network of elevated freeways in Vancouver, British Columbia. Fortunately, that course was not followed, and an LRT system was built instead.

The American Electoral College ensures that each of the 50 states has a fair stake in electing the President. (The electoral college in only used to elect the President, not Senators or Representatives.) Each state gets at least 1 electoral vote for each Senator and each Representative in Congress. Each state gets 2 Senators and the number Representatives is based on the State's population. Remember that the USA is not a single country, it is a Union of separate States. And since some states are smaller in population, the Electoral College ensures that every State gets at least 3 electoral votes in the Presidential election. If we allowed the President to be elected by popular vote, Big cities like Los Angeles, California and New York, New York would always decide who the President is, and judging by the quality of the Governors of those states and the Mayors of those cities, I think the founders were very wise to not hand them the choice for President.

This topic was already done to death imo.

9:05 We are a Republic, so the electoral college is what was intended hundreds of years ago. People vote for Representatives to represent them in the government instead of voting in every single decision. The same applies to the Presidency. We vote for representatives to represent our vote in the college, and in most states its illegal to be an "unfaithful elector" which is voting for someone your constituents did not.

The laws are different by state because the US is a federation of states. The first 13 states were independent after the revolution and joined together under the Articles of Confederation. Some states, the state you apparently dislike do much, Texas, was a country before becoming a state. Do the laws change between countries in the EU even though the EU has laws governing all the countries within? Did every country decide to scrap all their own laws in favor of one set of laws? Same concept.

The US is a federation of states, like the EU but a little closer. It’s not surprising that different states have different laws. Do laws not differ between France and Spain?

There are different laws in different states because there are different 'needs' in different states. The US is a really big and diverse place. Does it really make sense to have all the laws you have to live by in your town decided by some politician all the way on the other side of the continent? That's why there are some laws decided at Federal, some at State, and some at Local level... And while it can get a little complicated, it actually makes a lot of sense for the protection of rights and the division/balance of government power.. It's also good for 'trying' things out in different states, and if something is 'successful' then the other states can see that and adopt it...

I think it would more to compatible to compare the US to the EU, not just to Demark itself. You'll see the similarities more than the differences. For example Greece is the European version of Mississippi and Denmark is the version of Connecticut.

a western developed country without universal healthcare or any social service is a terrible place to live

Thanks but have taken the weather into consideration? During summer time it gets extremely hot in the states (e.g., Texas).

Well I think the differences of each state is great since you can somewhat choose what kind of government you want to live under. If you value education, you can go to a state (and county) that funds education and taxes for that. But if you're not in education or have any kids that are, it would make more sense for you to live elsewhere, and you can. It's definitely not a perfect system but it gives people some choice. Though of course, moving is expensive, I think it benefits immigrants more since they're already moving in somewhere new and they have to look at all the pros and cons of areas.

People often compare US rail maps to Europe but extra credit would be comparing the same map of navigable waterways that reach the sea. You might notice where the rails miss in the US falls squarely in the Mississippi river system, which Europe has no analog to. Rails > roads but also, water > rails. There was never an economic impetus to build rail infrastructure in the US the way necessity dictated building it in Europe.

Yeah i mean the US always claims that they are great democracy, but they actually just rank place 30 in the democracy index

The USA and its political system is very complex. Both parties do stuff that is despicable and flagrantly against are the constitution. If you go by Thomas pain's logic the Government of the USA has not represented the citizens for most of my life if not my parents' lives as well. A little bit of insight from our founding fathers, each state was supposed to be its own unique country yet tied together as a union. The civil war ended this experiment mostly making the 10th Amendment void accept in rare circumstances. So one way to think about us is that we're supposed to be 50 "countries" united under one name, mind set and so on with loosely shared values and culture. Which is why you can go from one part of the country to the other and experience widely different aspects. Most aren't as different as, say Germany and France when comparing but closer to Canada and the USA accept for obvious government organization, rights and such.

00:11 "Terribly Design?" I guess you meant "terrible design" or "terribly designed?"

In the US and Canada, many places people live, require cars to get to work, school ect. Even people who would rather not own a car have no choice. Parking is thus a requirement. Europe has many alternatives. I feel this is at least partly due to a lack of space for parking given the density.

The reason why America has different laws in every state is competition. Each state enacts laws that it thinks are better than other state's laws. If they are right, then more people will want to live and do business in that state increasing state revenue. However if a state enacts bad laws, then it's residents will not want to live or work in that state and move to a state with better laws, and thus reducing that state's revenue and population, and also reducing the number of Representatives in Congress, and thus reducing it's power in Congress to pass Federal laws. Competition makes citizen's lives better by giving them the choice of who's laws they want to live under. This keeps state governments in check so they don't become tyrannical.

I look at the states as individual countries. You can do a very similar comparison in Europe between the different countries. In size the US and Europe is approximately similar

Country is too big to flourish, politics too aged to work properly. Idk how they gonna get outta this mess

Appreciate your perspective. Thank you for your thoughtfulness

You don't have a link to Part 1.

Different laws in different states allow for interstate competition over which place is best governed. It results in some quirks like you said, but overall is probably better. The electoral college exist so that large states don't completely dominate smaller states and smaller states have some influence, a bit like you said EU works. The implementation is just different, the main idea is the same (give smaller states or smaller countries some influence as well).

Put a beat under that and its one of the most brutal distracks I have ever heard

Its 5% of urban land not 5% of the entire country if they had 5% of their land as parking lots that would be 450,000km2 or germany plus another 100,000km2.

That entire issue with the US and state laws is very much also a thing in other countries. Generally, countries can be categorized into either central or federal states. The distinction is the following: In a central state, such as France, the basic assumption is that all legislative capacity rests with the top level government unless it agrees to hand this power over to a lower level of administration (a decision it can revoke at any time). So in essence, if there is no law on the matter, the central government must either make one itself or tell the states "You know what, i'll leave this one to you." In a federal state, such as the United States or Germany, by contrast, the understanding is that the states can do whatever they want, at least until the federal government passes a law that contradicts what they do. Essentially, the difference is that one system decides that the states cannot pass laws unless the federal government decided that is a matter that they can pass a law on, whereas the other decides that the federal government must assert its right to legislate something, otherwise that right lies with the states.

The interstate highway is the pragmatic solution for a country where population is more widely distributed. It is cost prohibitive and restricting to have interstate rail. Rail makes sense in high density areas such as the Tokyo metro that connects other metros. Tokyo metro is the biggest in the world. A simple look on Google Maps shows you how sprawling and vast the interstate highway system and state highway system is none of them have the density of the Tokyo metro. The only thing comparable is the North East US. The California rail while noble in intentions at best case scenario would break even in revenues. California does not have the density or the geography to connect to the two largest metros that competes with airlines. Good for people in valley I guess. State laws make sense because each state has their own cultures and geography. Even cities have their own laws. It is more pragmatic way of governing instead of doing everything on a federal level. Without the electoral college only a few states and their cultural preferences will decide the outcome for the rest of the country. I don't think somebody in Idaho wants California laws. The two largest states, California, and Texas, for example, have different cultures. Their economies are different. How they collect taxes are different and how they lose revenue happens in different types of business cycles. Texas generates substantial revenue, profits, and jobs from fossil fuel extraction, petrochemicals, terminals, and an extensive infrastructure to move those thing across the state into ports and into other states. Texas has it's own market-based electrical grid that operates differently from other national grids which has its advantages and disadvantages. The main reason why Texas is rapidly developing renewable energy at a much faster rate than other states is because of its so called "deregulated" grid. Permitting is faster, cheaper, and grid connection takes a couple of years instead of a decade or more stuck in a queue in other states. Having uniform laws makes regulatory sense in that every place you go to has the same regulations but a lot of those regulations are more subjective than people think and restricts innovation in the regulatory environment by doing that. For example, why couldn't a municipally owned utility company not spend on other things not directly or even remotely associated with the role of a utility company? Is it better to have a utility to be a regional monopoly or should there be competition in picking utilities? What is the best way or ways to create affordable housing? What is the best way to tax the economy?

Hey i 100% agree with your points in the video, but it would be nice if you actually explained any sources you used for how the US is today and what its like there. Is it from personal experience or did you read books or articles?

So if I had like a 2m Bong, could I fill it up in north Bristol, step over the border and the hit in the south? Or is the smoke also illegal? And if so, is it illegal to smoke right north of the border if the wind is blowing the smoke south?

In the US, the original idea is for each state to kind of be its own country that shares a constitution, with the federal government to protect all states against foreign or domestic threats and enforce the constitution in each state. The USA is not a democracy, the USA is a constitutional Republic. These days the federal government has over reached its power and a lot of people have become dependent on the federal government. This has been done by design to grow the power of the federal government. As far as laws differentiating per state, the people of each state may have different values, some states are more religious, some states are not, some states are more liberal, some states are more conservative. Just like you may have different laws in the city then you would have in the rural area. In the city you can't have an open fire pit, but in the rural areas you have have a full blown bonfire. Another example would be People in TN don't believe in legalizing marijuana, so therefore the peoples representation have made it illegal , they also manage their budget better or have other ways of collecting taxes (tourism ect. etc) to make their budget, so they don't have an income tax.

No no, you are right, almost all of the differences in laws between states of the United States (united?) are silly and just make life annoying, and could be resolved by having national policies. And I DON'T MEAN the controversial issue we all shout at each other about, I mean the little stuff that just might be what is making us so irritable!

From WC USA, My wife and her sister were both born and grew up in Germany. My sister-in-law stayed in Germany, my wife married me and after my service in Germany, we moved to the USA, first to Florida, which proved to be too hot in the summer, then to Northeast Tennessee where the weather and the landscape is more like Bavaria and we love very much! You can only move around here by car, however, we have two good Interstate highways here to go where we want! Now to my wife’s sister, she lives in a city of about 150,000 thousand people in Bavaria! They have two Autobahns, North-South and East-West, they have mass transit in the city as well as Good local as well as high speed trains to where ever they would like to go, including her boyfriend here. Now what do they use? They use their cars for everything, it is true that at times to find parking is a challenge, but here they have great mass transit but they use their cars! Are they normal Germans, I don’t know! Now to switch back to to US, our son moved to Atlanta Georgia many years ago and as a perk he was allowed to use MARTA, their mass transit system for free, he chose to go back to his car a deal with traffic because he said it was dirty, and the possibility of getting robbed or killed was high! That might be one reason most US citizens stay with using their cars!

A common misperception we take here in Europe is, to consider the USA as one country. It is called "United States" and that is for a reason, otherwise it would be called "State of Union" or so. You should think of it more like if the EU became one internationally united entity as it is now. Both your and my head of government would be Roberta Metsola. Our head of state would be Ursula von der Leyen. And why do then traffic rules change when I drive from Germany to Denmark? Why is it suddenly mandatory to have daytime running lights or switch the headlights on? Why do I have to pay different tax rates? And why don't you even have the same currency as we?

Well its in the name United States. Instead of it being a single country/nation, the United States is a group of countries/nations that can be independent from each other. The only thing right now is that those States' people consider to work together as a single entity composed of different nations under one flag.

Some good points but also some standard silliness from a European point if view. America is huge and the states are so different that they will need different laws to function best for the kinds of people living in them.

Germany does that with the states, too, for example itn Baden-Württemberg the rules regarding opening hours of stores are laxer than in Bavaria, so if you live in Ulm and cross the danube to Neu-Ulm shops close instead of 10pm at 8pm

Mississippi may have a GDP on par with Germany, but only because they have lower taxes, and because they have a far worse social safety net, their health and wellness outcomes are far below that of Germany. So, I'd live in Germany any day, over Mississippi, and I say that as an American.

Keep them coming buddy, love your work

thank you OBF for video! 11:40 yes the traffic rule is kinda silly but tthe tax difference is what some people called tax competition. basically just to encourage business

I served in the Army in Germany and you didn't need a car. Catch the bus or A Streetcar was always convenient, my first subway ride in Berlin I want two stations in my Landmark disappeared. Arriving at the main train station in Frankfurt, a wide Express Subway took you to the main subway station that moved at high speed during rush hour and about 25 mph other times. After a night of fun with everything closing, the trains move slowly back out to the outskirts bringing us home as they prepare for the morning Rush Hour. Overnight trains to distant cities arrive at about 6:00 in the morning allowing time to freshen up and get to your destination. My friend's father had a standard Mercedes-Benz, his rule was one or two passengers we take the train, three or four passenger we drive, the financial sweet spot. Their electric trains are not subject to oil shortages and the price of fuel swinging, Holland's fast trains are powered by the wind, as they are now providing green power to the grid of Europe and quadrupling their efforts. The number one thing I miss are the trains, the basic human right of Transportation. The trains are packed with passengers needing less parking spaces that they don't tear blocks down to lay asphalt. It allows for a walking neighborhood and everyone to get around inexpensively, safely, minus the stress of driving.

11:23 as someone living in Massachusetts, it also seems weird to me that here it’s illegal to possess fireworks and certain firearms yet legal in a majority of other states

The author confused “terribly designed” with “I don’t understand the design.” Which is okay. I doubt most Americans have more than a basic understanding of the Constitution, and I guarantee that most have never read the Federalist papers. Thankfully, the author will never be forced to live under our laws. Just as thankfully, the ignorant condescension of a foreigner, however well intentioned, cannot change those laws against our will.

Even with bad design it still somehow manages to have the strongest economy and government. I'm impressed

Not sure why you find it so baffling to have different rules in different states. That’s what happens under a federation, exactly what we have here in Australia. It’s a federation of states that came together to form a federal government. Because all these states were run independently and differently prior to federation, it’s only logical that they have different rules and laws. I agree that some things like road rules should be consistent everywhere within the country, it’s actually good to have a diverse set of rules between states. It’s more decentralised and allows different people with different values and ideologies etc to have the freedom to live in a state that suits their needs and wants.

As a younger American I can say these issues are known and work is being done, However we suffer from what is basically a Generational Bias. Most of the leaders are stubbornly trying to run the areas they run like its still the 1960'-70's, with policies that MAY have work in those time frames. A key example is the "Federal Minimum Wage". Right now, employers are only required to pay $7.50 per hour. This is suppose to be the Minimum livable wage that the Roosevelt administration wanted to make into law during the 1930's. Right now, there is no place that can live on that (its literal be on the streets and starve to death). Yet policy makers and most employers flat out refuse to update this because either "mah Profits!!!" or "When I was your age I had two mortgages, a full time job, and went to college full time on 500 bucks a month! None of this fancy Duel Income Shenanigans!!".

5% of the US IS parking spots 😮 that’s insane

the public transportation system in America is awful. outside of the northeast like he talked about there is basically no reliable train network. the comparison to europe is also insane; there’s reliable trains between large population centers every one or two hours. american cities in the west are also very un walkable due to urban sprawl with no good metro or transit system, making it necessary to own a car or know someone who does. compared to cities like Munich or Brussels that have metros even into the suburbs.

You get paid to study in Denmark?! Man, Europe is OP

In Switzerland we have a saying: "From Kanton to Kanton different" for the different laws, school systems, kantonal police forces, etc.

The electoral college is intended to prevent the tyranny of the majority, to make sure the voices of rural dont get drowned out by the big cities. As someone who is has become an absolute minority in the country my ancestors built i envy the system.

Yeah, America is bad and every other place in the world is good. I get it. Many European cities were "designed" over 1,000 years ago, when horse and buggy was an elevated mode of transportation. Roads were narrow, cities were designed to be walkable because that was the only real option. Housing was built upwards (multifamily) rather than going the single family route for a number of reasons which reinforced walkability and co-locating business with housing. Space was also limited - there wasn't as much land available to build new housing and much land was consumed with agrarian pursuits. In the US there was a lot of cheap land and the automobile represented a level of freedom that many had not experienced before. Post-War America loved the automobile as it was a cost effective and efficient means of transportation. if comparing cities to cities, most older US cities tend to be more similar to European cities in the co-location of residential and business properties. The internal combustion engine also made it practical to efficiently transport agricultural goods to cities and suburbs from more distant farms. So, the "design" of European cities was driven by a much different dynamic than US suburbs. I'm not saying that US suburbs are well designed or convenient for those who want to do away with internal combustion engines and revert to walking and biking for all of their needs,. Then you bash America because it "hasn't figured out" how to build high speed trains. The distance between Rome and Copenhagen is about 952 miles and it takes as "little" as 23 hours for the trip via train. Traveling from Paris to Berlin - about 550 miles - via train will take about 11 hours. Paris to Marseille is about 410 miles and takes about 3 1/2 hours on high speed rail. So, basically, if you travel within a single European country, high speed trains can be efficient. The distance between Washington DC and Boston is about 450 miles and it takes about 7 hours for the trip via train. Boston to Miami is 1,257 miles, Boston to Seattle is 2,496 miles, LA to Washington DC is 2,294 miles. The longer trips in the US take several days on current passenger trains, but mere hours - at a much lower cost - via plane. The point is that in Europe, the distances are much shorter than in the US. This lends itself more to a train-centric transportation system than does the vast distances in the US. Using the speed of the French high speed train (calculated between Paris and Marseille) as the speed of hypothetical trains in the US, the trip from Boston to Miami would take about 11 hours, Boston to Seattle would take about 22 hours, and from LA to Washington DC would take about 20 hours. Compare those times with the speed of air travel and air travel would come out on top the vast majority of the time (especially considering the relative cost of tickets). So, it would take less time to travel the 2,496 miles from Boston to Seattle than to travel the 942 miles from Rome to Copenhagen on the vaunted European rail system - and it would still be more expensive and time consuming versus air travel. Sorry, but the business case just isn't there for a nationwide network of high speed rail in the US. I am a European citizen and not a shill for the US. One can certainly criticize the "design" of US suburbs as they leave much to be desired, however, ignoring basic facts and causal forces behind how nations develop is ignorant and misleads the audience.