this post was submitted on 19 Jan 2024
91 points (96.9% liked)

Europe

8324 readers
1 users here now

News/Interesting Stories/Beautiful Pictures from Europe 🇪🇺

(Current banner: Thunder mountain, Germany, 🇩🇪 ) Feel free to post submissions for banner pictures

Rules

(This list is obviously incomplete, but it will get expanded when necessary)

  1. Be nice to each other (e.g. No direct insults against each other);
  2. No racism, antisemitism, dehumanisation of minorities or glorification of National Socialism allowed;
  3. No posts linking to mis-information funded by foreign states or billionaires.

Also check out !yurop@lemm.ee

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The article chooses to take a metric that you usually do not see much: GDP per employee and per hours worked, at purchasing power standards

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] HowRu68@lemmy.world 11 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

This is very good info, most US /EU comparison studies are US centric. And any comparison between these two, although interesting, is too different. This article compensates the difference by using Purchasing Power, finally.

But in this article, and this still bites me a bit, they are still comparing the US universities according to the US ranking and the Times ranking, in which they score lower. Other articles comparing education, state clearly that the standards for US/ EU education quality are different.

Also flinging in China's economy as a third party for comparison, won't help us much. The WTO ( iirc) just accepts any output figure Beijing gives them, but there is no accounting for it.

So let's keep this quality studies and info rolling, and see how it can enlighten us.

Added:

● par 2:" Frustrated with current university rankings – mostly commercial ventures that give greatest importance to research – the European Union is backing a new form of listing." link euroactiv 2013

● par 3:" How to measure China’s true economic growth? Mr Li confessed that the province’s gdp figures were “unreliable”. link economist 2023