6 ms·
The argument is the US system is more extreme. In the US those 2-3 Scandinavian millionaires would be worth 4 times what they are worth there. But then again so
by sandwich9 7y ago
The argument is the US system is more extreme. In the US those 2-3 Scandinavian millionaires would be worth 4 times what they are worth there. But then again some of your friends living middle class there would be poor and housing insecure.
- roenxi 7y agoThat isn't the argument, the argument is that if you adjusted for the non-linear effects of growing the population then the US has a better or equal system. The US has a lot of warts, so that may not be true at the end of the day - but it is a pretty reasonable argument. The population of Scandanavia is less than 10% of the population of the US and is part of a larger European region. Comparing the Scandinavian system to the US system is like running US Federal policy by assuming all 300 million Americans live and work in the nice half of California rather than the geographically and economically diverse reality. A high tech industry hub can only employ so many people. Hence that non-linearity of effects. And the politics of scaling up population aren't at all smooth (small is better for politics). [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28PPP%29_per_capita https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28PP...