5 ms·

Since you present this number, then I assume you have read how this have been calculated, and can give some credible answer to e.g. why the low 10% in America a

Since you present this number, then I assume you have read how this have been calculated, and can give some credible answer to e.g. why the low 10% in America are considered better off than the bottom British, Germans, Australians and Swiss. Having been in several of these countries and knowing people who have lived there it simply does not strike me as believable. Maybe it is true, but I'd like to hear some articulated reason for it. Here are my counter points. We know that for all these other countries supposedly worse off than America health care access for the bottom is considerably better. Access to education is better. Crime levels are lower. So within what area is it that American's gain the upper hand? I've seen studies like this before giving poor Americans an upper hand and all to often it is due only focusing on material aspects. E.g. the poor in the US usually have bigger houses, more microwaves, bigger cars etc than the poor elsewhere. This is often given as evidence that they are better of while ignoring the fact that poor Americans have significantly worse access to health care and education than other people. Also Europeans e.g. spend a lot more on travel than on just accumulating stuff at home. So quality of life is difficult to asses exclusively by just adding up stuff.

bko 10y ago
Well certainly how "well off" someone is requires a value judgement. Everyone has preferences and one individual may prefer to be bottom 10% in one country as opposed to another. The scale is based off data compiled by OECD and includes the below: Housing Income Jobs Community Education Environment Civic Engagement Health Life Satisfaction Safety Work-Life Balance Another index includes EPI’s State of Working America Report [0] as well as research from World Bank economist Branko Milanovic [1]. I understand you might disagree with methodology or how they weigh certain aspects and that's perfectly fine. But if you come across some objective measure that tell me that people in the US are considerably worse off than other Western nations (in absolute terms), I would like to see it. [0] http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2013/06/01/astonishing-numbers-americas-poor-still-live-better-than-most-of-the-rest-of-humanity/#5c66f06b23c4 http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2013/06/01/astonishi... [1] http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/31/the-haves-and-the-have-nots/ http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/31/the-haves-and-t...
- coredog64 10y ago
  I would echo the NYTimes review of Milanovic's book. It is an outstanding read.
- jernfrost 10y ago
  Edit: I tried looking at the study and the factors and numbers they used. I find it very unconvincing. The numbers are very abstract and the weighting rather arbitrary. You'd have to correlate these numbers by sampling actual people in each country at the bottom and top half and see how they live. When you conclude that the bottom 10% of Americans all living on food-stamps are about as well off as the top 10% Italians then something seems very wrong with the methodology. It is actually very hard to come by studies and comparisons of these things, but one knows certain facts, which is that health care is not easily accessible to the poor in the US, while it generally is in other western nations. We also know that college costs considerably in the US if you are not especially talented and get a scholarship. Germany which is supposed to much worse than the US according to this study offers cheap health care and college to all citizens. So I am not saying this study IS wrong. I have no proof of that. It simply isn't believable to me unless somebody can offer a proper explanation for the way in which say poor swiss or germans are worse off than the poor americans. This would not be the first time I've come across dubious studies like this. There have been studies in the past where they claimed Mississippi was better off than Sweden. If you start looking into this assertion and talk to people who have been both places it becomes clear that the assertion is completely ridiculous. It is one of the many cases in which statistics can serve you a fat lie.
  - bko 10y ago
    Fair enough, but I would take several flawed studies over anecdotal evidence to the contrary. I would also point out the net migration numbers to the US suggest that it really is the land of opportunity.
    - AstralStorm 10y ago
      Why not get and provide true raw numbers? Or are these manipulated on purpose?

bko 10y ago

Well certainly how "well off" someone is requires a value judgement. Everyone has preferences and one individual may prefer to be bottom 10% in one country as opposed to another. The scale is based off data compiled by OECD and includes the below: Housing Income Jobs Community Education Environment Civic Engagement Health Life Satisfaction Safety Work-Life Balance Another index includes EPI’s State of Working America Report [0] as well as research from World Bank economist Branko Milanovic [1]. I understand you might disagree with methodology or how they weigh certain aspects and that's perfectly fine. But if you come across some objective measure that tell me that people in the US are considerably worse off than other Western nations (in absolute terms), I would like to see it. [0] http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2013/06/01/astonishing-numbers-americas-poor-still-live-better-than-most-of-the-rest-of-humanity/#5c66f06b23c4 http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2013/06/01/astonishi... [1] http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/31/the-haves-and-the-have-nots/ http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/31/the-haves-and-t...

coredog64 10y ago
I would echo the NYTimes review of Milanovic's book. It is an outstanding read.
jernfrost 10y ago
Edit: I tried looking at the study and the factors and numbers they used. I find it very unconvincing. The numbers are very abstract and the weighting rather arbitrary. You'd have to correlate these numbers by sampling actual people in each country at the bottom and top half and see how they live. When you conclude that the bottom 10% of Americans all living on food-stamps are about as well off as the top 10% Italians then something seems very wrong with the methodology. It is actually very hard to come by studies and comparisons of these things, but one knows certain facts, which is that health care is not easily accessible to the poor in the US, while it generally is in other western nations. We also know that college costs considerably in the US if you are not especially talented and get a scholarship. Germany which is supposed to much worse than the US according to this study offers cheap health care and college to all citizens. So I am not saying this study IS wrong. I have no proof of that. It simply isn't believable to me unless somebody can offer a proper explanation for the way in which say poor swiss or germans are worse off than the poor americans. This would not be the first time I've come across dubious studies like this. There have been studies in the past where they claimed Mississippi was better off than Sweden. If you start looking into this assertion and talk to people who have been both places it becomes clear that the assertion is completely ridiculous. It is one of the many cases in which statistics can serve you a fat lie.
- bko 10y ago
  Fair enough, but I would take several flawed studies over anecdotal evidence to the contrary. I would also point out the net migration numbers to the US suggest that it really is the land of opportunity.
  - AstralStorm 10y ago
    Why not get and provide true raw numbers? Or are these manipulated on purpose?