4 ms·
There's two things wrong with your argument. 1) Minneapolis, Minnesota 2) Immigrants to Europe You don't have to be some slick banker type moving to London t
by progressive_dad 10y ago
There's two things wrong with your argument.
1) Minneapolis, Minnesota
2) Immigrants to Europe
You don't have to be some slick banker type moving to London to want your salary to keep pace with the cost of living. Lack of options in a small european country means less chances to negotiate what's only fair.
America’s population is growing about .8% per year (. 5% from births minus deaths and .3% from net migration). Thus 2% of overall growth produces about 1.2% of per capita growth. That may not sound impressive. But in a single generation of, say, 25 years, that rate of growth leads to a gain of 34.4% in real GDP per capita. (Compounding’s effects produce the excess over the percentage that would result by simply multiplying 25 x 1.2%.) In turn, that 34.4% gain will produce a staggering $19,000 increase in real GDP per capita for the next generation. Were that to be distributed equally, the gain would be $76,000 annually for a family of four.
Ask yourself if the GDP of Sweden is growing and if you're likely to see that as a raise.
Are you going to be able to negotiate a 3000$/yr raise for yourself? 12,000$/yr for your family of 4? (distributed according to the current breakdown of wealth held in the US for the pay range of a computer programmer)
Because that money is going to go SOMEWHERE. And if you can't negotiate for it, it will go to the top. And you will go down. Its that simple.
- hackuser 10y agoThe U.S.'s GDP might be growing, but only very few are benefitting. For the vast majority, their wages haven't increased in 30 years while costs of housing, health care, and higher eduation have skyrocketed.
- progressive_dad 10y agoIts worse in Europe and no one is talking about because "hurr de hurr socialism" while wages are stagnating.
- hackuser 10y ago> Its worse in Europe I'm pretty sure that's not true. I've read many times that the U.S. is at or near the top (i.e., the worst) in inequality, and that economic mobility also is higher in Euripe. A quick search found the following: * See the map at the top which shows current inequality (it would take too long to read through the table and figure out historical change): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_equality https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_eq... * "Income inequality is high in the US, but the support of social welfare programmes is low. In Europe, income inequality is low and the welfare states are generous." http://voxeu.org/article/perceptions-inequality-europe-and-us http://voxeu.org/article/perceptions-inequality-europe-and-u... * "Towards the end of the 2000s the income distribution in Europe was more unequal than in the average OECD country, albeit notably less so than in the United States" http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/economics/income-inequality-in-the-european-union_5k9bdt47q5zt-en http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/economics/income-inequality-in-...
- maxerickson 10y agoGDP growth in Western Europe moderately outpaced the US between 1973 and 2003. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_regions_by_past_GDP_%28PPP%29_per_capita https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_regions_by_past_GDP_%2... I readily concede that such numbers are not very concrete, but economic growth in the EU is quite similar to economic growth in the US.