3 ms·
Yeah, because it's completely underfunded. In terms of % of GDP spent on public spending on the labor market, US ranks near the bottom. When you look at spendi
by smallnamespace 10y ago
Yeah, because it's completely underfunded.
In terms of % of GDP spent on public spending on the labor market, US ranks near the bottom. When you look at spending on job training directly, US spends 0.03% of GDP, while Germany spends seven times as much as a fraction of GDP [1].
[1] https://data.oecd.org/chart/4IID https://data.oecd.org/chart/4IID
- hueving 10y agoFraction of gdp isn't a good metric because the US has a large GDP. It's like implying that a billionaire hasn't spent much on housing because they only bought a 100 million dollar house. A better comparison would dollars per unemployed person.
- smallnamespace 10y agoIsn't it the other way around? Looking at fraction of GDP controls for size of the country, since large countries have more unemployed people because unemployment rates don't differ by orders of magnitude. The unemployment rate in the US and Germany are very similar (4-5%), so Germany spends 7 times as much training per unemployed person.
- hueving 10y agoNo, the problem with percent of gdp is that it doesn't account for gdp per capita differences.
- smallnamespace 10y agoBut all the countries we're comparing to are developed economies with similar GDP per capita.