For those of you who know both country - continents, is the EU richer than the USA from the point of view of the general wealth and well being of the majority of the population ?
I know the statistics say the US is very rich, but the real day to day life of Americans seem much poorer from a real life experience point of view. Am I wrong ?
I list why :
Free health care in the EU, don’t have to worry too much if you get sick.
In the US if you are laid off you may lose health insurance that doesn’t even cover all things, so constant fear and worry. And many companies want to get rid of all health expenses, so you pay all in the end which could be more than 200 dollars a month etc.
Job security is higher in the EU, the unions have more power, the system seems to have more protection, the hire , fire system is much softer in the EU. In the US anyone can get fired at any moment for any reason at all, even no reason. So the system is very “free” as hire and fire, but takes a high toll on stress, etc.
College education is almost free, costs very little. In the US you pay much more compared to the EU, at least 2,000 dollars a year. Then there is never any guarantee that your “skills” aren’t worthless and “out of date”, hence back to school, etc.
Taxes in the US are actually quite high and just about as high as EU. Property taxes, and others do add up to the Eu of almost 30%.
The US pensions are lower, even much lower and there is no security in what you will get. The US may give 1,000 dollars a month for 30 years labor (social security), the EU is higher, maybe 1,300 dollars.
Home prices in the US are coming close to being as expensive as the EU. In the EU an average house is about 250,000 dollars and the US is about there. With much worser build quality of European homes. US McMansions seem to almost fall apart because of bad build quality, the EU is all stone - concrete (but much smaller homes).
No vacations for American workers, the EU has almost 2 months. The American workers fear being a slacker and getting fired - laid off if they take any time off hence worry - stress.
Just some ideas, but all and all the EU seems to have a higher standard of living working less hours and enjoying. I know it is a complex debate but do any of you know both places and have any ideas ?
There are no starter homes in the EU. They start at 250,000 dollars up, in the UK they start at 500,000 dollars up even for one bedroom.
In the US you can find starter homes for 100,000 dollars 2 bedroom, maybe far from work (one hour commute).
I think the US is living a cultural inertia, the world is no longer what it was in the 1960s to the 1980s. The myth of “hard work”, “you can make it”, “top education” is no longer valid. Companies hose people even with PHD in Physics and Engineering everyday. They are laid off, not needed, can’t find anything and work at WalMart. The idea of competition is a farce, in the US the US is rich for those that already are. The Americans still buy into all these fairy tales and get ripped off continuously, no job security, no health care, 80 hour work weeks etc.
The worse thing you can do to America is kill its culture of “hard work”. The technological revolution has practically eliminated the need for any work at all, let alone “hard work”. The US is a victim of its own success, the automation of work has destroyed all work and it is a nightmare for Americans, so they invent all kinds of wacky “services” like “financial services” that produce crappy subprimes, “health care” parasites that produce loads of useless bureaucracy, etc. The worst thing is that it is all “personality” based, you can’t measure the value of work, the only thing you can measure is “time at work”, the boss has to see you there even at 10:00 pm, etc. We want “winners” to work for us. A bunch of BS.
The rest of the world is not so naive, hence they will become richer than the US. The US has not had any increase in wealth for the majority of the people in 20 years I would say, the cultural inertia keeps on feeding fairy tales.
Interesting response. I would say that not enough attention has been giving to how much “less work” technology is really creating. Economists always tell us the fairy tale of “there will be more work in Research - Technology” etc, I think it is evident that this is not how it turned out.
Work is more and more based on “people interaction” on selling vacuum, on selling perceptions, feelings, arbitrary value based on personality based on “perceived” value; in short most companies have to sell fluff, imaginary products like Windows Vista.
This creates more job instability since no real product is being produced, it can’t be measured, the “value” of people can’t be measured and is indeed arbitrary, hence I’ll lay off the guy I don’t like and keep my friends. The guy you layed off has a PHD in Math, yeah but I really don’t need it since I am really not producing anything but useless meetings and perceived imaginary products etc.
This creates poverty in the long run, it produces a fragile society where you can’t climb any social ladder anymore unless you have rich friends.
Economy in the end is simply a fight; a fight between people for resources. There is no general good, there are only winners and losers, strong and weak. No matter how complicated its symbols and “denotations” are, ultimately it is dog eat dog. You are payed more if you know which secret bit of software must be configured, etc. That is a bunch of BS, you may be payed for a short time, then some new secret formula must be known, and the new generation will be payed more and the older one hosed. The whole idea of economy as a machine that works is flawed, that there are cycles where “general” wealth is created is flawed.
What we have witnessed in the last 100 years is a fluke, the economy will just become what it always has been, a small group of rich and a large mass of poor slaves. There is no progress, only change, only different and unique ways to rip off and hose slaves of all types, and even slaves with PHDs.
The EU has a strong euro now, and the dollar is weakening. Something can be said for that. I don’t think that europe has a perfect system though.
Interesting point about technology and work. I really don’t think there will be less work. For me, technology is a means to make life easier, so that one day there will be less work because it’s easier. I feel that the corperations just gain the benefits and make the workers do more as a result of better technology.
Study Anthropology: work doesn’t exist, it is a cultural system of activities, it is totally based on values, religions, arbitrary behaviors, very little of all the activities is really based on survival.
Our western civilization notion of work has been formed by the Industrial Revolution that is tightly related to capitalism etc. We like to count things, number things, produce big number of things. We take these numbers as production - productivity. I think we have a very limited and flawed view of the entire human experience. Some old tribes laughed at our concept of money, at measuring how much of something one took, on subdividing goods equally: some tribes would give the white man loads of stuff for nothing in return and laugh, they didn’t even measure things, they didn’t have the concept of value as related to quantities and numbers.
It is almost all a behavior system, almost a body language or sign language system. I mean even the Japanese salaryman stays up to 10:00 pm in his office because the work he performs is the symbol, message he transmits to his boss: I am here, sacrificing myself for you, you are the boss. What he actually does (which is mostly nothing at all) is totally irrelevant. Alot of work is simply a variation on this theme. In the sense that if only the end product is important, alot of work could be done at home, could be almost completely automated etc. Agriculture is probably the most important product countries produce, in the west it is almost all automated, the real bulk of work is done by very few people.
Anyways the slight differences between EU and US are mostly cultural - anthropological.
sell that 30 sq meter hole of a house in London for 500,000 US dollars;
Invest 400,000 of those in the most conservative financial plan any bank can offer, you will be sure to get at least 1% interest a year from that, therefore 4,000 dollars a year;
Got to the USA and rent any much larger and nicer house in any of the hundreds of splendid American suburbs, not too close to the big cities where the rat race is going on, With the interest on those 400,000 dollars you can pay for the first 4 months of the rent;
the remaining 100,000 dollars can be used as a monthly salary. A thousand dollars a month for a guy that doesn’t have to work and commute and all is quite alot in the USA.
If you have health problems, go back to the UK and get cured for free in the UK.
The best of both worlds, and you don’t have to ever work again for the rest of your life. After you do this, you can give me a token value of 10,000 dollars for the bright idea.
Take the subprime mess. I don’t know of any place in Europe or Japan where thousands of workers have been layed off from banks as in the US. Why ? I think it is a kind of cultural “superstructure” that is on top of the economy. The US has constant hire - fires, constant changes in companies, this provokes many moves, winners and losers etc. This actually contributes somewhat to the GDP. But if you look at Japan and the EU, they have a GDP that is not too far behind that of the US but without so much turmoil and stress on the individual workers as in the US. Why ? because maybe the economy is a kind of “automatic” machine, given a certain level of wealth many of the cultural artifacts that economists like to talk about do not influence the economy anymore. The idea of “hard work”, of research and development etc. of “competition” seems just excuses to hose workers in the US. The economy is an automatic machine determined by its level of technology and infrastructure.
99% of work in these economies is in mostly average activities like stores, constructions, nurses, teachers etc. These are similar throughout the world.
I read that the Japanese tried to imitate the american style of meritocracy amongst workers, the better and more skilled worker gets ahead, the others are left behind etc. for some time but found it “unsatisfying”. It didn’t make their country richer but just created more stress and conflict between workers. They reverted back to their traditional heirarchy salary man (aka “slave”) model with the guys showing their presence in the office until 10:00 pm without actually producing anything. The fact is it didn’t change anything, either way. Now that is interesting, how economies reach the same level of wealth independently of the way the workers “act”.
No, but we can and should discuss averages as well as the general conditions of life. There are some fantastically wealthy people in Saudi Arabia, but I wouldn’t use that as a metric for the wealth of the nation. Likewise the Congo has its share of hyper-wealthy individuals, but I wouldn’t hold up the Congo as a wealthy nation because of this.
Quality of life, Gini index, as well as GDP and per capita income need to be taken into consideration when describing the “wealth” of a nation. I’d go so far as to include things like literacy and lifespan too.
That example can be used to counter your suggestion that we should discuss averages because the “fantastically wealthy people in Saudi Arabia” can lead to useless statistics that make the average <insert arbitrary social criteria here, with or without any justification for the choice look fantastically wealthy.
Sure.
The trouble with statistics is that they are easy to misuse. Statistics are popularly quoted and considered without any considerations of the methodology of data collection or bias.
Furthermore, the market for statistical analysis is rarely without political bias.
Ahhh, but you see I care more about the general conditions as opposed to the specific conditions. A few people living in mansions surrounded by abject poverty does not a wealthy nation make.
It greatly decreases the GDP of the EU. When you have private health care (USA) you have a large exchange of money between hospitals, insurances, lawyers etc. You have alot of movement, conflict, alot of bureaucratic work being performed, alot of extra paychecks for insurance offices, hospital offices, alot of extra work for everyone hence increase in GDP. The EU should privatize it completely and charge 200,000 dollars for some operations and stays in the hospitals as the USA does, give the very spoiled citizens of the EU a taste of how the USA works.
I would ask you to provide documentation supporting this position but I fear you’ll selectively seek out the documentation that does.
Makes you wonder why the richest nation on earth cannot provide health care and a more dignified standard of living to its citizens much poorer nations can.
It makes you wonder as to how this nation is now giving us all lessons in democracy.
But if you offer any criticism you’ll be accused of jealousy.
Because there’s just so much to envy in that nation’s culture, isn’t there?
Universal Free health care in both the EU and Japan, why does the US have the short stick ?
In the US if you are laid off you may lose health insurance that doesn’t even cover all things, so constant fear and worry. And many companies want to get rid of all health expenses, so you pay all in the end which could be more than 200 dollars a month etc.
Job security is total in Japan and high in the EU. Those spoiled brats of French are protesting against retiring at an older age! In the US you have no security and get very little when you retire. Again: why does the US have the short stick ?
In the US anyone can get fired at any moment for any reason at all, even no reason. So the system is very “free” as hire and fire, but takes a high toll on stress, etc. No protests in the US, no Unions, you have to work, no privileges. Why don’t they layoff all those useless salarymen in Japan ?
College education is almost free in the EU and Japan, costs very little. In the US you pay much more compared to the EU, at least 2,000 dollars a year. Then there is never any guarantee that your “skills” aren’t worthless and “out of date”, hence back to school, etc. Again: why does the US have the short stick ?
Taxes in the US are actually quite high and just about as high as EU. Property taxes, and others do add up to the Eu of almost 30%. Again: why does the US have the short stick ?
The US pensions are lower, even much lower and there is no security in what you will get. The US may give 1,000 dollars a month for 30 years labor (social security), the EU is higher, maybe 1,300 dollars. Again: why does the US have the short stick ?
Home prices in the US are coming close to being as expensive as the EU. In the EU an average house is about 250,000 dollars and the US is about there. With much worser build quality of European homes. US McMansions seem to almost fall apart because of bad build quality, the EU is all stone - concrete (but much smaller homes). Again: why does the US have the short stick ?
No vacations for American workers, the EU has almost 2 months. The American workers fear being a slacker and getting fired - laid off if they take any time off hence worry - stress. Again: why does the US have the short stick ? The Japanese have this worse but they are completely brainwashed slaves anyways.
The point is with such a different system, you would expect that the US citizens be at least 3 times as rich as their EU or Japan counterparts. It seems the exact opposite. Is it that all these short sticks the US gets is arbitrary ideology to hose the US workers ? Is it that the other countries know that such a harsh system doesn’t produce wealth but maybe poverty ? Is the US naive ? Are the other countries naive and living in a fairy tale that will soon end and they will get EVEN SHORTER STICKS ?
Universal Free health care does not fall from the sky. Somebody has to pay for it.
Well, the alternative is to force employers to pay more to employ people.
Either that or companies hire less people. Take your pick.
Maybe for the same reason that people swim shark-infested waters to get to the US – it must really be a bad place.
Nobody is owed employment. The alternative is to force employers to be enslaved to the employees.
I disagree – according to my definition of “rich” Americans are better off than their EU or Japanese counterparts. I think the U.S.A. is an exciting place.
Who cares??? The way most GDP figures are calculated can be very ridiculous. For example: if a window maker has an increase in business, the GDP is calculated to increase regardless of whether the increase is a result of an increase in hooligans running around throwing rocks at windows.
Measuring “the general conditions” is exceedingly subjective and vulnerable to bias.
Have you ever collected statistics???
Actually, there really is no objective way to define the wealth of a nation.
This was sort of the point. The GDP is kind of a BS number, but since it is calculated the same way, some comparisons can be valid.
If the EU has a reduced number because of free healthcare, the indication is that healthcare costs less as a result. As noted, someone has to pay for it, so why not make it available with the least expensive method.
Like the purchaser paying sales tax instead of the seller, what difference does it make?
The western world, the developed EU, US, Japan hasn’t seen much growth in wealth in many years because once a country reaches a certain level of wealth (distributed in any way) it is very hard to get richer. It is easy for the poor ones to grow and get rich and hard for those countries that have reached their limits as the developed ones.
I agree that the US is not as bad as depicted, for most it is ok and many quite good, but there are differences with Japan and EU. Anyways the lowest worldwide salary is now about 100 dollars a month, and in the west 1,000 dollars a month. In a few years the lowest will reach the 1,000 mark (and notice how these 1,000 dollars a month are the exact same in the EU, US and Japan!) and those countries like China and Brazil will reach their limits. Profits are made by companies exploiting the differential in salaries, then it will get increasingly hard to make such good profits. Most companies should open factories in Nigeria and Congo , they could make loads of money off very low salaries for many years.
As a result of that, people in Nigeria and Congo will have jobs.
Whose welfare is more important???
The figures for GDP are not calculated the same way across nations. Even within a nation, there is no reason to trust numbers. The leaders of the old Soviet Union played games by misrepresenting statistics all of the time.
Statistics are not like measuring a physical property. They are generated by collecting samples of data and creating educated guess. There is always room for error and bias. As well, the people who compile statistics are often bureaucrats: not always accountable.
Because of free healthcare??
It is not possible to make such causal connection.
If you observe subway station, you will notice that hoards of people pass through twice a day during the two rush-hour peaks. Would it makes sense to say that the number of people passing through the subway is caused by the hour hand turning in the clock suspended from the ceiling? No.
A few things:
it is not always possible to know what the least expensive method might be
it is only fair to let people keep their money and choose for themselves
even if we do not want to be fair, the people paying for it may not want the choices that bureaucrats make – least expensive is not always desirable
Think of this: I like wearing $10 sneakers but most youngsters like to pay more than 10 times that much for their shoes. It does not make sense to have the government monopolize the shoe market and force everybody to pay for $10 shoes.
That is a poor analogy for a few of reasons:
the purchaser is still able to pick and choose the service
the amount paid by the purchaser is ZERO if the purchaser does not want the service
nobody has a choice to opt out of funding “healthcare” services
