This seems obvious, but choosing a poorer EU country when the commenter already left room for exceptions when the said “pretty much” to compare to the US is not an argument in good faith.
Well it's not exactly Massachusetts but it seems to be on par with Florida, Vermont, Michigan, Maine etc. if you look at GDP per capita (relatively). I don't think Czechia is somehow exceptionally poor (of course on the whole the EU is much poorer on average).
> there with a straight face that Czechia is basically like Florida or Michigan
Compared to the median EU country Czechia is basically like Florida or Michigan (e.g. it's GDP per capita is closer to that of the Netherlands the Michigan's is to Massachusetts etc.).
> Go tell someone who’s been there with a straight face that Czechia
The problem is that the EU is significantly poorer on the whole.
> It seems to squarely fall within the provided exception.
I don't agree.
> This is pointless.
I'm really not quite sure what are you trying to say. Economically only Switzerland, Norway and Ireland(*) really have a higher GDP per capita than the US only one of them is even in the EU. Denmark, Netherlands and Sweden (only 39 mil people in total) are not that far off, so are we supposed to ignore all the other countries in the EU because of that?
This GDP argument is useless. Before war Russia had GDP comparable to Italy, it should collapse in a few days after sanctions, and we all know how it went!
You can look at median disposable household income, rent/real estate to income ratio and many other indicator which tell a similar story. GDP per capita is just a proxy.
> Before war Russia had GDP
Well.. Russia had 2.3 times higher population than Italy so it's not particularly surprising. Also it wasn't really that poor compared to most other EE countries (about on par with the Baltic states prior to 2014).
