How are people preparing for the European century once again ?The US was merely a setback, and their 56% these days...

How are people preparing for the European century once again ?The US was merely a setback, and their 56% these days, so they will keep going down and down.

>being proud of your role as a cog in the german machine

how will ameripoors EVER recover!?

this

disgusting

This

Ahh your gdp per capitas shrunk alot in 2015-2016 so the huge growth is pretty normal

>EU grew faster than the US and Japan
Of course, EU is full of poor countries.

are you retarded?

I am not.

the uk left the union in 2016, that's why the gdp shrunk

Yeah I know it's one of the reasons of the, decrease, the new growth is just an adjustment especially for the rich European countries

Portugal isn't part of Europe but I'm sure than in the near future Europe will be strong enough to be a vital part in China's new silk road trade route. With the Chinese presence in Africa and the African presence in Europe, it should eventually open up the region to trade unlike has been for many, many years. Even moreso if the USA continues to adopt protectionist trade policies.

Wut Europe is pretty much open for trade since a long time

We are the leader of the free world!

>Of course, EU is full of poor countries.
That is the funny thing actually. The EU is yet to reach it's final form. Once it does there would be no one to rival it.

>german

>japan
>1.6%

japan is over

Lol it's actually you had a huge decrease in thse last years

Actually good*

When the EU becomes unironically imperialist outside of Europe I'm gonna die of laughter.

>European century

EU has less money but their growth is higher

>How are people preparing for the European century once again ?
hahahhahaha

Wtf I always thought Romania was some poor gypsy shithole. The only Romanian I knew was this kid who got adopted by two rich gay guys
as a toddler and grew up into a wigger.

Romania is richer than Russia actually

America
>320 Million people
>18.5 Trillion GDP
VS

Europe
>510 Million
>16.3 Trillion GDP

BTFO!!!!

1. Nobody gives a fuck
2. That's false, Russian GDP per capita is higher then Romanian.

>345m
What?

Mexicans aren't humans, user

It says right there "EURO ZONE" but you went to the English language Wikipedia article for the "European Union"

I was referring to the EU population.
The US is 320, not 345.

Well, forgive me for asking, but what the difference?

>the European Union was literally the biggest economy in the world between 2004 and 2014
how can Europoors EVER recover!!!

eurozone = cunts in the european union using the euro currency, excludes pip squeaks outside the european union using the euro
european union = cunts in the european union, includes those that don't use the euro

>european ceптury
Keк, liтerally.

>usd
This is where you went wrong. Little to no business is done in usd in europe.
When the exchange rate jumps a bit you get a line like that

XVIII - XIX were european centuries, they will NEVER recover and will NEVER become that glorious again.

their growth is higher in Africa-tier backwaters and countries with low population

who cares

Θα σε βρω kαι θα σε γαμησω, ανθευρωπαιε. Συμμορφωσου

More like XV to early XX, europe needed two world wars to lose its position as worlds leader.

η λέξη Ευρώπη δε δασύνεται, αμόρφωτο πλάσμα

XV century was more about incoming Turkroaches and shit. Well, yeah, from the age of Discovery, Europe began to dominate, but there still was huge independent powers in outer world.

>german machine
hum no sweetie

>when he doesn't support a federalized EU

not wanting to hurt you but this projection is already wrong.

Next time you will try to show us The Glorious French Army, please don't show Macron. He looks like cuck. Not mentioning his epic wife.

Nah, the ottoman empire never surpassed the "regional power" line. Meanwhile Portugal was bossing asia/mid east and Spain was conquering a whole continent with only a few hundreds of soldiers. Europe was the first continent to become relevant globally and it started at the end of the XV century. Maybe it would be a little more fair to say XVI.

I doп'т actually тake aпy projecтioп seriously, cause тhe world became тoo uпsтable and uпpredicтable. Posтed тhis projecтioп jusт тo тease eurocomrades.

the rot had set in by early XX imo

Im retarded, I read your comment again and I basically said the same thing as you, still as Europe started to project their power at the XV century while the rest was focused in their regional goals I believe that Europe dominance started in thw XV, but I think thats mostly my different view in the subject, yours could also be valid

Sucking gold from inkaniggers doesn't automatically make you Global Power. To be honest Spanish and Portugal history proofed it pretty good - you just had got some cultural boost, staying in the low economical and military level. Europe had to unite all its powers to deal with turks. They even almost took fucking Vien and fucking Malta.

BTW when Spain conquered the whole America with a few hundreds of Soldiers, Russia did the same in Siberia. Bad for us - Siberia appeared to be a shithole.
Hard to say if Russia in XVI could be counted European or not. Anyway, being "European" meaned nothing that time - it was more about being part of Catholic world. Or Protestant, or Orthodoxal.

Στ'αρχιδια μου!!

uh are you stupid? OE literally had control of some of the most important, fertile, populous, and historically relevant regions of the world and spanned 3 fucking continents
how on earth is that a regional power you dumb moormutt

European dominance started even before the Roman Empire, from the days of Alexander the Great. During that period of time no other region projected it's power so far from its origins and so effectively. Only when the Ottomans took over Byzantium did Europe's presence in Africa and Asia end and within less than a century the Age of Discovery that you refer to had began.

>low economical and military level
What? Spain was for some time, the richest Empire in Europe and had a superior (albeit less capable/effective) fleet than even Britain and was militarily strong af. Portugal doesn't really count because they're tiny but then again they punched WAY above their weight considering the vast swathes of land they took and their extensive trading networks. Only the Netherlands can be compared to them in that regard and even they never captured as much land.

You are overstimating turks by a lot dude, they clearly were a threat for the balkans, and I guess Russia, so thats why you believe that, but for the rest of europe their greatest threats were piracy in the mediterranean, that was deal by Spain several times, their navy that affected mostly venetia, and still lost their greatest battle that was Lepanto, again were Spain had to beat ottomans, and blocking the silk route, and that was fixed by Portugal by going around Africa. Actually, it was turkey blocking the silk road what impulsed european mercantilism and conolianism in the first place.

>Portugal history proofed it pretty good - you just had got some cultural boost, staying in the low economical and military level

This is wrong in so many levels dude. The effects of colonial empires were so fucking great that the moment the other kingdoms realized they started taking whatever wasnt claimed yet. The reason of Portugal decline wasnt that colonial empires were shit or anything like that. Its decline was backed by the ferocious rivalry that started between colonial empires that would start taking everything as I said before, in Portugal case it was specially the dutch, and the fact that Portugal, as a tiny underpopulated country had stretched way more that it could reasonably had done by itself.

Oh, I guess I triggered a turk. The ottoman empire was great, no doubts about it, but it was unable to project its power outside of its borders, it had no colonial territories or anything like that and their empire spammed along 3 continents because it was right in the middle, it isnt as worthy as I dont know, the uk dominating Australia from across the globe for example. Its an argument almost as stupid as saying dude, my house is so fucking huge it takes 3 states, when in reality is a slighty larger than average house place just in the corner of said states.

Let's be real here, the Russian may be overestimating the Turks but you're underestimating them. They weren't just a threat for the Balkans. The Habsburgs came very close to failing to stop them in Vienna and the consequences of that would have been momentous for the rest of Europe.

>it had no colonial territories or anything like that
Wat. Literally all of it's territory outside Turkey was a colony and treated as such. The way they ran their territories was basically identical to how Europe ran its colonies.

But that was because it would've been borderline impossible to manage those areas with anything more firm than that. They were too heterogynous.

Well yes, that's true of the way any Empire has handled its overseas territories. This goes back to the days of the Roman Empire. Perhaps this Spaniard thinks the concept of a colony was invented in the XV century or something.

The only colonies I can think of that weren't run like this were the Ancient Greek ones, which seem to have been closer to the initial trading settlements that the Europeans established during the Age of Discovery, but I don't know enough about them to be sure of this.

It was richest, yes, but all this gold just made the price of it lower. Economical developement of Spain stood extensive.
And the fleet and army was the strongest, that's true, but the military domination in the whole world was not possible due to low technological level of that age. Yes, they can defeat savage countries, but had no chance in military influencing even Eastern Europe or Middle East. That's what I'm talking about. The Grand Armada is one of examples.
>You are overstimating turks
I don't. And I don't overstimate Europe. It's us to decide what is relevant and what is not, but anyhow even having the leading role, Europe was still not the only subject in the world. In the XVIII-XIX it was ONLY Europe to have independent decisions in the world. Even USA was very regional power until 1840.
No, Russia had alomst nothing to do with Turks until we made our shit together in the end of XVII and began to fuck with Crimea (as we always do when make our shit together).
>This is wrong in so many levels dude.
I don't mean that Age of Disovery is suddenly irrelevant, don't understand me wrong. I mean that first colonial powers like Spain and Portugal was not that inventive and productive as UK and Netherlands to become real Forge of the world, not just goldsucker.

I see that most of westerners when speak about power projection always mean fleet as it was in UK or now in USA. It's not that accurate for XVI. There was no "power projection" that time - all your "epic fleet" is just a floting trash which is useful only when you just bring shit from point to point, is can barely patrol ocean or bring and supply real army even at the distance of 1000 miles - see Grand Armada again.

The name of the baby born is Muhammad.

Europe is 18T with a higher growth rate

>chinese presence in africa and african presence in europe is going to open up the region for trade.

Please tell me more on how this works! I want frreeeeeeee trade