| |
| ▲ | logifail 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > The US system is built to support entrepreneurship while the EU system broadly is to support the consumer and employee I disagree: the EU system broadly is there to support _the incumbants_ "Regulatory capture" is the less kind way to put it. | | | |
| ▲ | bloppe 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | In a healthy market economy, entrepreneurs are meant to support the consumer, and they do so partly by competing with one another for talent, which requires supporting the employee. We could argue ad nauseam about the health of the US's market economy, but ultimately is has resulted in unignorably higher wages than in Europe, even at the lower end of the economic ladder. This probably also has a lot to do with it's much tighter market integration than the EU, although they seem to be finally addressing that issue with the 28th regime. A popular theory of Europe's historic economic outperformance relative to the rest of the world, leading up to the industrial revolution, relies on competitive market theory: constant warfare spurring innovation, as well as relatively free movement of the best and brightest to seek greener pastures elsewhere on the continent. These days, the most ambitious Europeans tend to move to America to raise money and find talent, and it seems many EU countries are finally waking up to the fact that they need to do better to support entrepreneurship. | | |
| ▲ | throwaway-blaze an hour ago | parent [-] | | I would posit that many EU citizens are still living with the idea of their historic economic outperformance even though it has not been true for many years. |
| |
| ▲ | keiferski 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I think this is a false dichotomy. Consumer return policies, customer service, etc. tend to be much better in the US than in the EU. I would characterize it rather that the US is pro-business and pro-consumer, but somewhat anti-average worker. | | |
| ▲ | 9dev 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Is that so? In Germany for example, you have a legal right to return anything you purchased via a remote means of communication - so e.g., the internet, or a phone call - free of charge, within two weeks, and it must be simple to do so; if a vendor tries to obfuscate how to cancel a purchase contract, you can simply write them an email. | | |
| ▲ | keiferski 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | yeah most US companies have return policies of 30 days or more, no questions asked. | | |
| ▲ | pwinnski 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | The word "most" is doing a lot here. Europe guarantees consumer rights by law, while the US relies on companies adopting the practices voluntarily. Most do, but larger companies more universally than smaller, and it's by no means universal. | | |
| ▲ | keiferski 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | It's the reality for the vast majority of larger companies. Quibbling with word choice is really not a good argument. | | |
| ▲ | jeromegv 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | We are talking of entrepreneurship and new companies, what small business are required to do for returns/refunds in the US is definitely not ahead of Europe for consumer protection. It's not word choice, you are just making the wrong argument. | |
| ▲ | lompad 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Try canceling your NYT subscription. | | |
| ▲ | r4indeer 40 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | Let me support your argument by telling you what you just reminded me of... I was briefly subscribed to the NYT from Germany. To my surprise, I couldn't cancel online, but had to call. (The EU has a law which requires that if you can subscribe online, you must be able to cancel online.) They have national numbers for many countries, but they're just forwarders to the same call center, with notably mangled audio quality presumably due to multiple lossy compression algorithms applied at each hop of the call. Additionally, there was lots of background noise when I got connected to a rep. Over this barely usable line, I was now asked to spell out my email address, which naturally took multiple attempts of painfully slow spelling before the rep was able to locate my account. (My very limited knowledge of the NATO alphabet didn't help.) Of course, I then had to go through the spiel of declining alternative offers and providing a reason for my cancellation (all of which I never had to do in Germany before) before they finally confirmed it. Yeah, I'm glad about consumer protection law in the EU. | |
| ▲ | Saline9515 an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | The same exists in the EU, French Le Monde (NYT local equivalent) required you for a long time to send a registered letter costing 7€ and a trip to the post office to cancel your subscription. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | tyg13 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | most large companies, maybe, but small-to-medium-sized businesses can and will tell you to take a hike. there are no consumer protections in the US regarding returns beyond the goodwill of the company |
| |
| ▲ | WarmWash 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | One of the major reasons US consumers shop with megacorp over small business is because of the no hassle returns. | | |
| ▲ | 9dev 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Exactly my point. In Germany I can order from the smallest of webshops without even reading their return policy, because I am guaranteed favourable terms by law. | | |
| ▲ | ahlCVA 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | This isn't without downsides though: As somebody with a niche technical hobby, it is hard for me to order from many suppliers because they understandably don't want to deal with consumer protection laws and thus exclude B2C transactions outright ("Verkauf nur an Gewerbetreibende"). I would be fine with waiving my right to returns but this is not possible on purpose, so my only options are to shop somewhere else (often not possible) or found a company (not possible because it would be Liebhaberei - "Running a company without intent to make profits"). | |
| ▲ | toast0 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | In the US, if the remote merchant doesn't accept a return (or is non responsive), a credit card chargeback would be in order. The customer almost always wins those. And the merchant always has to pay a fee for the chargeback, even when they win, so they're incentivized to avoid them. The merchant agreement isn't as effective as a well enforced law, but it's pretty close. | |
| ▲ | frugalmail 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | So the person that wants to sell that ultra-unique item that isn't produced by mega-corp, and the person that wants to buy that ultra-unique item despite unfavorable return policies never gets their needs met. | | |
| ▲ | 9dev 36 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Why would that be the case? Maybe you’re thinking of customised or commissioned items, which are an exception explicitly called out in the law and require a defect by the seller to return (so you can’t just return eg a painting made for you on a whim, but if it arrives damaged, you can) |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | tchalla 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | What happens after 2 weeks? | | |
| ▲ | 9dev 38 minutes ago | parent [-] | | You loose the right to change your mind and return the goods without any reason given, but of course you still have warranty of 6 months; if anything breaks with the product in that time, you can request the seller to make up by offering a repair, replacement, or refund (whatever they deem most appropriate), and while the seller can contest that, they are obliged to prove it’s your fault, not theirs. After that timeframe, this obligation reverses. | | |
|
| |
| ▲ | sandcat_ 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | That’s not true. From mandatory refunds when selling online, to capped credit card fees, to longer warranties, the EU is clearly better for consumer rights. Some US businesses have realized that openly screwing your customers isn’t good business practice, but they’re somewhat of the exception I hear (and a lot of those companies offer the same policies, or better, in the EU, e.g. Costco) Apple is another good example. Their base warranty is two years in the EU versus one year in the US, and there’s additional protection on top in many EU countries that extends it to the expected life of the product, in some cases as long as 5-6 years. And again, all of these are backed up by the law, not just a policy that the company can revoke or decide not to enforce. | | |
| ▲ | keiferski 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | It seems to me that if there is some sort of law or regulation that can be passed, then that policy will be better in the EU. If the better service is a result of competition, then it will likely be better in the US. In general though, culturally, the US is much more "the customer is always right", whereas in the EU, it's considered a hassle to cater to customers that much. This mentality translates across the economy as a whole. At least that's in my experience of being American and living in the EU for the last 10 years. | | |
| ▲ | lazyasciiart 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | I have never received cash compensation for a delayed flight in the US, but I have in the EU. In my opinion, in the EU if the business screws up it’s their problem: in the US it is the customers, unless you shop somewhere large enough to voluntarily cover their mistakes. Which is, indeed, one reason that anybody can run a business with nothing in the US. |
| |
| ▲ | throwaway-blaze an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | And all of Apple's products are much more expensive in the EU. In Austria, a MacBook Air starts at EUR1199, and the same device starts at USD1099. At today's exchange rate, that European device costs USD1360, or nearly 20% more. We can argue about the consumer friendliness of the regulations in the EU but they also add demonstrably to the cost of tech products (and likely other categories). | | |
| ▲ | deaux an hour ago | parent [-] | | > We can argue about the consumer friendliness of the regulations in the EU but they also add demonstrably to the cost of tech product Nope, they don't. You'd have to compare with some countries that are 1. Not the US 2. Have less consumer protections than the EU. And guess what? Apple products are also significantly more expensive than the US there.
But hey, half your comments on here are this kind of EU bashing based on grade school reasoning. It's surprising to see on HN of all places people unaware that Apple products (and almost all other tech products) have been a lot cheaper in the US than elsewhere for decades. So much FUD here, same for the Bunny thread. It doesn't feel organic anymore. |
|
| |
| ▲ | echoangle 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > Consumer return policies, customer service, etc. tend to be much better in the US than in the EU. Maybe the ones voluntarily offered by companies, but not the legal ones. | | |
| ▲ | keiferski 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | Not sure if that matters much. Only the actual end result does. The better policies given by US companies is also likely driven by competition, so by definition they wouldn't be something that a government regulation could accomplish (other than to incentivize more competition.) | | |
| ▲ | echoangle 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | It does because for one you can go to court. If a company stops playing nice because they think you’re defrauding them if you tell them your package went missing during transit, company niceness doesn’t get you anything. (That’s a random example btw, I don’t know how this is handled legally in the US. The point is that there are situations where you actually want the law on your side). | | |
| ▲ | lazyasciiart 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | You don’t have to go to court even - there is usually a regulatory body that will enforce these for you. This is the whole reason why there is an image of America as sue-happy: they have chosen a regulatory system of “so sue them” instead of a functioning consumer protection system (or any authority with the ability to enforce the ADA, for example). | |
| ▲ | keiferski 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Suing people and companies is a national pastime in America. I really don't think the EU has an advantage there... |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | wbl 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Except every two weeks when he gets a bigger paycheck than most senior UK government positions | |
| ▲ | frugalmail 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | This is the result of the US embracing capitalism more than Germany. The market has set minimum expectations, but outliers with other benefits can have an opportunity to thrive until they have an opportunity to meet those minimum expectations. Although, this is rapidly changing. Places like California are putting in similar regulatory barriers and excessive minimum taxation. |
| |
| ▲ | danmaz74 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Even when the UK was in the EU, you could create a limited liability company (LTD) for something like 200 pounds or less, no capital needed. So it's not true at all that setting up a business at a low cost is somehow against EU legislation. | |
| ▲ | blks 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | 25k requirement doesn’t protect anyone, just prevents regular contractors from easily registering limited liability company. | |
| ▲ | petesergeant 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > the EU system The issue in question is a Germanic system, not an EU one. Outside of Germany, Austria, Luxembourg, most EU countries are far more sensible with capitalization requirements. |
|
