3 ms·
Disposable income seems like the more relevant number here, and in that California is higher ~(48k vs 38k USD, although numbers are a bit stale). https://en.wi
by rory 6y ago
Disposable income seems like the more relevant number here, and in that California is higher ~(48k vs 38k USD, although numbers are a bit stale).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disposable_household_and_per_capita_income https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disposable_household_and_per_c...
- chmod775 6y agoIt's not more relevant, because disposable income ignores things Norwegians get 'free' (because it is already deducted). Part of that 'deduction' pays for heavy tax-breaks and subsidies for electric cars in Norway. But then GDP is also an abhorrent metric to use for basically anything. If you use either GDP or 'disposable income' as a proxy metric to compare anything between countries, you should seriously re-evaluate what you're doing.
- allendoerfer 6y agoI don't have to re-evaluate anything. I just wanted to tell OP that Norway is a very rich country and not in any way poorer than California.
- rory 6y agoTeslas cost more (after those tax-breaks and subsidies) in Norway than in California. You're lacing the conversation with a lot of value judgements, but those aren't particularly relevant to the question of whether the people of California or Norway are more able to buy Teslas.