6 ms·

Notice how the USA is the top country in the world for getting ahead. If you want to work hard and become rich, that's your spot. Places with "robust workers ri

Notice how the USA is the top country in the world for getting ahead. If you want to work hard and become rich, that's your spot. Places with "robust workers rights"? Not-so-much.

hyakosm 5y ago
Sources?
inter_netuser 5y ago
Switzerland and Luxembourg are way WAY richer per capita than the US, and have much robust employee rights.
- bananabreakfast 5y ago
  This is entirely due to their banking sector and not at all to entrepreneurship or innovation.
  - inter_netuser 5y ago
    3rd most globally competitive economy in the world. Sure, yeah. no innovation at all at Sandoz, Nestle, Novartis and Roche, and ~200 other companies in life sciences and another 300 in precision manufacturing. Zero.
    - durnygbur 5y ago
      Many are simply legal predators using their enormous funds for legal lobbying. Selling repackaged water, sweetened water, sparkling sweetened water, coloured sweetened water.
  - eertami 5y ago
    Interesting, because this sounds like wild speculation - yet you've stated it as if it is a cold hard fact. Do you have any sources or statistics to back this up? In 2018 the Swiss financial sector accounted for 9.1% of GDP. For comparison, in 2018 the US financial sector accounted for 7.4% of US GDP. To claim that it is _entirely_ banking is just plain wrong. To insinuate that there is no innovation elsewhere, (but there sure is in good ol' America), is just insulting. >Financial markets in the United States ... In 2018, finance and insurance represented 7.4 percent (or $1.5 trillion) of U.S. gross domestic product[0] >Switzerland’s financial sector ... as a share of gross domestic product (GDP). In 2018, it represented 9.1%[1] [0]: https://www.selectusa.gov/financial-services-industry-united-states https://www.selectusa.gov/financial-services-industry-united... [1]: https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/gdp_switzerland-s-financial-sector-losing-importance/44865968 https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/gdp_switzerland-s-financial-sec...
    - loeg 5y ago
      Somewhat more true of Luxembourg than of Switzerland. > Luxembourg remains a financial powerhouse – the financial sector accounts for more than 35% of GDP - because of the exponential growth of the investment fund sector through the launch and development of cross-border funds (UCITS) in the 1990s. Luxembourg is the world’s second-largest investment fund asset domicile, after the US, with $4 trillion of assets in custody in financial institutions. https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/countries/luxembourg/#economy https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/countries/luxembourg/... (2020)
      - inter_netuser 5y ago
        Sweden, Denmark, Finland and Iceland apparently all have higher median annual incomes than the US. Why is it that nice places to live have such horrible weather?
        guythedudebro 5y ago
        Bad weather incentivizes industriousness
        inter_netuser 5y ago
        Strong argument against global warming?
  - Valkhyr 5y ago
    I don't know if this statement is true or not. But let's assume it is: what does it matter to the Swiss people enjoying a good life?
- cscurmudgeon 5y ago
  They are both smaller than NYC in population and have very strict immigration policies.
  - inter_netuser 5y ago
    Could it be that NYC is simply garbage to begin with? Norway (lets ignore because oil, but really it's not oil), Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Iceland - also better? Longer vacations, better transit, definitely less hobos from what I remember, and no pervasive urine odour. And bigger median annual incomes. The weather is brutal in some parts of Nordics, I'll give you that. Not sure if I'd trade cold weather for urine vapours though. Very very difficult question, so I guess NYC isn't entirely hopeless just yet.
- adventured 5y ago
  > Switzerland and Luxembourg are way WAY richer per capita than the US, and have much robust employee rights. When you say per capita, are you referring to median or mean figures? Hong Kong is richer per capita than Switzerland at the median and does not have nearly as robust of employee rights. The US is richer at the median than Germany and does not have nearly the worker protections. The US also has vastly more low skill labor immigration (for 40+ years now), which persistently debases its median figures. Why are German workers so relatively poor, if the claims about worker rights is accurate? Surely the dynamo of Europe, the German economy, combined with such potent worker protections, should lead to enormous median wealth. Luxembourg has 613,000 people. That's a pretty ridiculous comparison. You're comparing a giant country of 330 million to a modest size city like San Francisco.
  - inter_netuser 5y ago
    germany is only 10% or so behind the US in terms of PPP. They also have more vacation, fewer layoffs, cheaper housing, generally lower cost of living (by more than 10%), and many other things. Perhaps they made a different trade off, more leisure, less work? I've only brought up the two most obvious examples (there many others) that negate entirely that silly notion that somehow human rights are incompatible with technological advancement, which borders on hate speech. I mean, should we really go back to slavery to become space-faring species? Not the kind of future I want to live in.
munk-a 5y ago
I disagree with this actually - the effective savings rate is generally lower in the US compared to a lot of countries with "robust workers rights" if you're working in the US you end up losing a lot of wealth to problems that are generally societally insured elsewhere in the world.
- inter_netuser 5y ago
  This could also be a question of culture. Somehow Americans just spend more on silliest things, it seems. Anything can be sold in America.
  - munk-a 5y ago
    That's quite possible. Americans also lose a lot of money unnecessarily to utilities (the cellphone bills are ridiculous) and keeping-up-with-the-joneses expenses like a starbucks a day. I think it's pretty hard to distinguish those costs as we can see similar or higher standards of living elsewhere - but I do think the out of pocket expenses hurt a lot (and they hurt even more when you stop drawing an income - retiring in the states is a huge gamble).
    - inter_netuser 5y ago
      Starbucks and fastfood, etc, I don't see it as keeping-up-with-the-joneses expenses. I feel in the US there is a lot of subconscious decision making that's essentially about buying more time with money, but in an actual monetary transaction as opposed to some implicit trade off. They seem to be chronically starved for time.
- s1artibartfast 5y ago
  I would look into stats on social mobility by country. Social mobility in the US is still pretty good last time I checked. Most European countries have have lower income income inequality, but less mobility. Eg, the difference between the bottom and top 25‰ is smaller, but your birth class is more predictive of your future income.
Valkhyr 5y ago
> If you want to work hard and become rich, that's your spot. Maybe, maybe not. I'd argue there are far more who tried and failed than who succeeded, but I don't know if that ratio of success is better or worse than in other countries today (yes, today - not when the US economy was booming relative to other countries, or when immigration was easy, or in the early days of Silicon Valley, or back during the Gold Rush(es) etc). In any case, though, I would argue this argument applies to a narrow slice of the population, namely those whose main goal is to get rich. Not everybody wants to "work hard and become rich". Not everybody wants life to be a competition to get ahead. Plenty of people are not deeply invested in a career and simply want to work 40h/week for a decent salary and still be able to afford a decent life. Others feel a calling to a profession that will generally not make you rich, but is still valuable to society. Case in point: teachers. Extremely valuable to society and extremely badly compensated in the US. If I wanted to be a teacher, I'd much rather be in most European countries than in the US.

Notice how the USA is the top country in the world for getting ahead. If you want to work hard and become rich, that's your spot. Places with "robust workers rights"? Not-so-much.

hyakosm 5y ago

Sources?

inter_netuser 5y ago

Switzerland and Luxembourg are way WAY richer per capita than the US, and have much robust employee rights.

bananabreakfast 5y ago
This is entirely due to their banking sector and not at all to entrepreneurship or innovation.
- inter_netuser 5y ago
  3rd most globally competitive economy in the world. Sure, yeah. no innovation at all at Sandoz, Nestle, Novartis and Roche, and ~200 other companies in life sciences and another 300 in precision manufacturing. Zero.
  - durnygbur 5y ago
    Many are simply legal predators using their enormous funds for legal lobbying. Selling repackaged water, sweetened water, sparkling sweetened water, coloured sweetened water.
- eertami 5y ago
  Interesting, because this sounds like wild speculation - yet you've stated it as if it is a cold hard fact. Do you have any sources or statistics to back this up? In 2018 the Swiss financial sector accounted for 9.1% of GDP. For comparison, in 2018 the US financial sector accounted for 7.4% of US GDP. To claim that it is _entirely_ banking is just plain wrong. To insinuate that there is no innovation elsewhere, (but there sure is in good ol' America), is just insulting. >Financial markets in the United States ... In 2018, finance and insurance represented 7.4 percent (or $1.5 trillion) of U.S. gross domestic product[0] >Switzerland’s financial sector ... as a share of gross domestic product (GDP). In 2018, it represented 9.1%[1] [0]: https://www.selectusa.gov/financial-services-industry-united-states https://www.selectusa.gov/financial-services-industry-united... [1]: https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/gdp_switzerland-s-financial-sector-losing-importance/44865968 https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/gdp_switzerland-s-financial-sec...
  - loeg 5y ago
    Somewhat more true of Luxembourg than of Switzerland. > Luxembourg remains a financial powerhouse – the financial sector accounts for more than 35% of GDP - because of the exponential growth of the investment fund sector through the launch and development of cross-border funds (UCITS) in the 1990s. Luxembourg is the world’s second-largest investment fund asset domicile, after the US, with $4 trillion of assets in custody in financial institutions. https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/countries/luxembourg/#economy https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/countries/luxembourg/... (2020)
    - inter_netuser 5y ago
      Sweden, Denmark, Finland and Iceland apparently all have higher median annual incomes than the US. Why is it that nice places to live have such horrible weather?
      - guythedudebro 5y ago
        Bad weather incentivizes industriousness
        inter_netuser 5y ago
        Strong argument against global warming?
- Valkhyr 5y ago
  I don't know if this statement is true or not. But let's assume it is: what does it matter to the Swiss people enjoying a good life?
cscurmudgeon 5y ago
They are both smaller than NYC in population and have very strict immigration policies.
- inter_netuser 5y ago
  Could it be that NYC is simply garbage to begin with? Norway (lets ignore because oil, but really it's not oil), Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Iceland - also better? Longer vacations, better transit, definitely less hobos from what I remember, and no pervasive urine odour. And bigger median annual incomes. The weather is brutal in some parts of Nordics, I'll give you that. Not sure if I'd trade cold weather for urine vapours though. Very very difficult question, so I guess NYC isn't entirely hopeless just yet.
adventured 5y ago
> Switzerland and Luxembourg are way WAY richer per capita than the US, and have much robust employee rights. When you say per capita, are you referring to median or mean figures? Hong Kong is richer per capita than Switzerland at the median and does not have nearly as robust of employee rights. The US is richer at the median than Germany and does not have nearly the worker protections. The US also has vastly more low skill labor immigration (for 40+ years now), which persistently debases its median figures. Why are German workers so relatively poor, if the claims about worker rights is accurate? Surely the dynamo of Europe, the German economy, combined with such potent worker protections, should lead to enormous median wealth. Luxembourg has 613,000 people. That's a pretty ridiculous comparison. You're comparing a giant country of 330 million to a modest size city like San Francisco.
- inter_netuser 5y ago
  germany is only 10% or so behind the US in terms of PPP. They also have more vacation, fewer layoffs, cheaper housing, generally lower cost of living (by more than 10%), and many other things. Perhaps they made a different trade off, more leisure, less work? I've only brought up the two most obvious examples (there many others) that negate entirely that silly notion that somehow human rights are incompatible with technological advancement, which borders on hate speech. I mean, should we really go back to slavery to become space-faring species? Not the kind of future I want to live in.

munk-a 5y ago

I disagree with this actually - the effective savings rate is generally lower in the US compared to a lot of countries with "robust workers rights" if you're working in the US you end up losing a lot of wealth to problems that are generally societally insured elsewhere in the world.

inter_netuser 5y ago
This could also be a question of culture. Somehow Americans just spend more on silliest things, it seems. Anything can be sold in America.
- munk-a 5y ago
  That's quite possible. Americans also lose a lot of money unnecessarily to utilities (the cellphone bills are ridiculous) and keeping-up-with-the-joneses expenses like a starbucks a day. I think it's pretty hard to distinguish those costs as we can see similar or higher standards of living elsewhere - but I do think the out of pocket expenses hurt a lot (and they hurt even more when you stop drawing an income - retiring in the states is a huge gamble).
  - inter_netuser 5y ago
    Starbucks and fastfood, etc, I don't see it as keeping-up-with-the-joneses expenses. I feel in the US there is a lot of subconscious decision making that's essentially about buying more time with money, but in an actual monetary transaction as opposed to some implicit trade off. They seem to be chronically starved for time.
s1artibartfast 5y ago
I would look into stats on social mobility by country. Social mobility in the US is still pretty good last time I checked. Most European countries have have lower income income inequality, but less mobility. Eg, the difference between the bottom and top 25‰ is smaller, but your birth class is more predictive of your future income.

Valkhyr 5y ago

> If you want to work hard and become rich, that's your spot. Maybe, maybe not. I'd argue there are far more who tried and failed than who succeeded, but I don't know if that ratio of success is better or worse than in other countries today (yes, today - not when the US economy was booming relative to other countries, or when immigration was easy, or in the early days of Silicon Valley, or back during the Gold Rush(es) etc). In any case, though, I would argue this argument applies to a narrow slice of the population, namely those whose main goal is to get rich. Not everybody wants to "work hard and become rich". Not everybody wants life to be a competition to get ahead. Plenty of people are not deeply invested in a career and simply want to work 40h/week for a decent salary and still be able to afford a decent life. Others feel a calling to a profession that will generally not make you rich, but is still valuable to society. Case in point: teachers. Extremely valuable to society and extremely badly compensated in the US. If I wanted to be a teacher, I'd much rather be in most European countries than in the US.