4 ms·

Citations needed. As someone who works in an international environment and routinely taveles between sites run by international conglomerates workers in Europ

Citations needed. As someone who works in an international environment and routinely taveles between sites run by international conglomerates workers in Europe for example are not better protected than workers in the US, they've simply ceded more control to government. The real difference between European and US workers is in sheer productivity. Sure, Americans work more hours but they also get more done in those hours. The difference in regulatory and cultural overheads is significant.

dopidopHN 4y ago
> Citations needed I come to that at this end. I will start by giving the at-will contract example of poor US worker protection. Those at-will contract are not contracts. They describe in great lengths that you don't have any relationship with your employer. No string attach! Great, I wonder who benefit more from it? That has deep consequences, and the result is when I work in the US i feel a Damocles sword upon me, while in Europe I feel deeply secure. ( for the The why comes down to those questions. - Can you be fired without cause and not get compensated? - What is your level of compensation if you do get fired ( with or without cause)? For how long? - Does your employers have to contribute to your retirement funds? - What happen to your retirement fund if the economy goes to shit? Where was the money all along? - What are your recourse in case of a disagreement with your employers? Can you realistically exercise those resources on a tie budget and limited time ( eg: single mother working full time for minimal wage ) --- The fun part : > Sure, Americans work more hours but they also get more done in those hours. No. Pretty sure you are mislead. From memory the most productive place on earth is some western European country like Luxembourg or Belgium. They work less but produce a similar output of GDP. Let me find a source on that. Yeah. GPD per hour: https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/most-productive-countries https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/most-prod... The US is just behind France. In 8th position. French workers contribute $79.70 to the GDP (PPP) per hour worked. France’s workweeks are the fifth-shortest among OECD countries at 38.9 hours. France’s productivity is about 25% higher than the OECD average and EU averages. While US workers contribute $79.60 to the GDP. American full-time employees work 41.5 hours per week, and about 11.1% of employees work over 50 hours per week. So, that for productivity, seems comparable in term of GDP. But then ... A macdonald worker has 5 week vacation / years, per law in France. That's a starting point. The work week is 35h/week, per law. ( people work 40h, but they get 5h/week of extra vacation on top of the mandatory 5 weeks ) So, to build on that example, French work less but the holy-GDP per hour worked is slightly better than the US. And they get slightly more respect show to them in the form of predictable, enforceable and protective contracts. I don't know what's wrong with the US. I looks like diminishing return on pressuring your worker into more work?
- HideousKojima 4y ago
  The PPP adjustment is doing a lot of heavy lifting there. Real (non-PPP adjusted) GDP per capita in the US is ~50% higher than France's.
  - dopidopHN 4y ago
    Correct. In the context of productivity, I think a 'per hour' metric is more appropriate. France and western Europe in general have comprehensive social nets that will allow a larger part of the population to be idle/unemployed. A GDP per capita will be lower for all those places. I think we don't really care if a country is deciding to support non-productive citizen. Here, we want to compare the productivity of people who do work. And that the 'per hour' metric I choose for that. Looking at the 'per capita' ranking, you see a lot of tax haven like cayman islands, Bermuda or Macau that are weeded out in the per hours view.
    - HideousKojima 4y ago
      Yes, but even your "per hour" metric is massively distorted by being adjusted for PPP (i.e. local cost of living, etc. which is somewhat subjective and why you'll find drastically different indexes for PPP from different sources. Even if it could be reliably measured it's still different then a measure of raw production). The average American only works ~7% more hours per week than the average Frenchman, but the GDP output per capita (without adjusting for PPP) is about 50% greater, which means American GDP per hour worked is way higher than French GDP per hour worked.
      - dopidopHN 4y ago
        Sorry you lost me there. Can you point that out in the numbers? Also I realised that I don't understand what you mean by PPP adjusted. I thought we were talking about adjusting GDP per capita vs per hours. Oh, Purchasing Power Parity. I see. Well, I disagree here but that out of my depth. I think without adjustment those metrics would measure how your currency is faring on the currency market. Not the house you can buy, the food you can put on the table and so on. But I see your point, if we talk about productivity, we should compare Apple to Apple and not "Adjusted Apple" to "Apple". It also depends who is seen as the repository for this productivity. The worker? Or the economy. If it's the later we should talk in USD with a date on it. I agree. If it's the worker, well, I care about what I can buy with the money deposited in my bank account, not what I could buy if I was living in Hungary or Japan. Then PPP make sense. It's also common practice in statistic to harmonize your data in order to make meaningful comparison. Last thing on your last comment, I really think the GDP per capita make little sense here. Labour input is defined as total hours worked of all persons engaged in production. A GDP per capita is not measuring that. > the GDP output per capita is about 50% greater Let find the same thing per hours worked, without PPP adjustment. Well, PPP is apply to every data I found. But this more recent trend might make you feel better. On 2010-USD + PPP, france went to 102 while the US is at 107. ( On the 2017-2021 period ) https://data.oecd.org/lprdty/gdp-per-hour-worked.htm https://data.oecd.org/lprdty/gdp-per-hour-worked.htm --- Here is my anecdotal and personal experience. I spend half of my life in France, and the other in the US. Quality of life is comparable. French works less. Their country is not crumbling. Heck, it's in pretty good shape infra-wise. They have billionaire and large mega corporations as well if that's a metrics. I pay similar taxes here and there. Maybe french are annoying enough to get away with it? Maybe they are living on credit. Idk. But also maybe the US worker are being abused and stretch tin for diminishing returns. Is that worth it for such a slim difference?

dopidopHN 4y ago

> Citations needed I come to that at this end. I will start by giving the at-will contract example of poor US worker protection. Those at-will contract are not contracts. They describe in great lengths that you don't have any relationship with your employer. No string attach! Great, I wonder who benefit more from it? That has deep consequences, and the result is when I work in the US i feel a Damocles sword upon me, while in Europe I feel deeply secure. ( for the The why comes down to those questions. - Can you be fired without cause and not get compensated? - What is your level of compensation if you do get fired ( with or without cause)? For how long? - Does your employers have to contribute to your retirement funds? - What happen to your retirement fund if the economy goes to shit? Where was the money all along? - What are your recourse in case of a disagreement with your employers? Can you realistically exercise those resources on a tie budget and limited time ( eg: single mother working full time for minimal wage ) --- The fun part : > Sure, Americans work more hours but they also get more done in those hours. No. Pretty sure you are mislead. From memory the most productive place on earth is some western European country like Luxembourg or Belgium. They work less but produce a similar output of GDP. Let me find a source on that. Yeah. GPD per hour: https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/most-productive-countries https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/most-prod... The US is just behind France. In 8th position. French workers contribute $79.70 to the GDP (PPP) per hour worked. France’s workweeks are the fifth-shortest among OECD countries at 38.9 hours. France’s productivity is about 25% higher than the OECD average and EU averages. While US workers contribute $79.60 to the GDP. American full-time employees work 41.5 hours per week, and about 11.1% of employees work over 50 hours per week. So, that for productivity, seems comparable in term of GDP. But then ... A macdonald worker has 5 week vacation / years, per law in France. That's a starting point. The work week is 35h/week, per law. ( people work 40h, but they get 5h/week of extra vacation on top of the mandatory 5 weeks ) So, to build on that example, French work less but the holy-GDP per hour worked is slightly better than the US. And they get slightly more respect show to them in the form of predictable, enforceable and protective contracts. I don't know what's wrong with the US. I looks like diminishing return on pressuring your worker into more work?

HideousKojima 4y ago
The PPP adjustment is doing a lot of heavy lifting there. Real (non-PPP adjusted) GDP per capita in the US is ~50% higher than France's.
- dopidopHN 4y ago
  Correct. In the context of productivity, I think a 'per hour' metric is more appropriate. France and western Europe in general have comprehensive social nets that will allow a larger part of the population to be idle/unemployed. A GDP per capita will be lower for all those places. I think we don't really care if a country is deciding to support non-productive citizen. Here, we want to compare the productivity of people who do work. And that the 'per hour' metric I choose for that. Looking at the 'per capita' ranking, you see a lot of tax haven like cayman islands, Bermuda or Macau that are weeded out in the per hours view.
  - HideousKojima 4y ago
    Yes, but even your "per hour" metric is massively distorted by being adjusted for PPP (i.e. local cost of living, etc. which is somewhat subjective and why you'll find drastically different indexes for PPP from different sources. Even if it could be reliably measured it's still different then a measure of raw production). The average American only works ~7% more hours per week than the average Frenchman, but the GDP output per capita (without adjusting for PPP) is about 50% greater, which means American GDP per hour worked is way higher than French GDP per hour worked.
    - dopidopHN 4y ago
      Sorry you lost me there. Can you point that out in the numbers? Also I realised that I don't understand what you mean by PPP adjusted. I thought we were talking about adjusting GDP per capita vs per hours. Oh, Purchasing Power Parity. I see. Well, I disagree here but that out of my depth. I think without adjustment those metrics would measure how your currency is faring on the currency market. Not the house you can buy, the food you can put on the table and so on. But I see your point, if we talk about productivity, we should compare Apple to Apple and not "Adjusted Apple" to "Apple". It also depends who is seen as the repository for this productivity. The worker? Or the economy. If it's the later we should talk in USD with a date on it. I agree. If it's the worker, well, I care about what I can buy with the money deposited in my bank account, not what I could buy if I was living in Hungary or Japan. Then PPP make sense. It's also common practice in statistic to harmonize your data in order to make meaningful comparison. Last thing on your last comment, I really think the GDP per capita make little sense here. Labour input is defined as total hours worked of all persons engaged in production. A GDP per capita is not measuring that. > the GDP output per capita is about 50% greater Let find the same thing per hours worked, without PPP adjustment. Well, PPP is apply to every data I found. But this more recent trend might make you feel better. On 2010-USD + PPP, france went to 102 while the US is at 107. ( On the 2017-2021 period ) https://data.oecd.org/lprdty/gdp-per-hour-worked.htm https://data.oecd.org/lprdty/gdp-per-hour-worked.htm --- Here is my anecdotal and personal experience. I spend half of my life in France, and the other in the US. Quality of life is comparable. French works less. Their country is not crumbling. Heck, it's in pretty good shape infra-wise. They have billionaire and large mega corporations as well if that's a metrics. I pay similar taxes here and there. Maybe french are annoying enough to get away with it? Maybe they are living on credit. Idk. But also maybe the US worker are being abused and stretch tin for diminishing returns. Is that worth it for such a slim difference?