4 ms·
It's not more relevant, because disposable income ignores things Norwegians get 'free' (because it is already deducted). Part of that 'deduction' pays for heav
by chmod775 6y ago
It'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.