4 ms·

Most of the countries 1-27 are homogeneous nations with populations below 5 million. They all have low wages too. The floor is raised a bit but the ceiling is l

Most of the countries 1-27 are homogeneous nations with populations below 5 million. They all have low wages too. The floor is raised a bit but the ceiling is lowered massively for what you can acheive. I don't want to live in a capped society. The US affords more opportunity; plain and simple. Look at the millions of people trying to get in every day, and the biggest foreign tech work force in the world.

Paul-Craft 3y ago
How are low wages a problem? Affordability is the problem, and in at least the top 20, it seems the affordability situation regarding housing, healthcare, and the other basics of life (see, e.g. the bottom levels of Maslow's heirarchy) are all accessible to everyone. You do also realize that you're saying the US somehow affords more opportunity than the 26 other countries that rank above it on the Global Social Mobility Index? I don't think you've fully understood the concept here.
- floor2 3y ago
  Limiting opportunity is directly causal to a higher social mobility index though. Preventing people from earning high wages or accumulating wealth will directly increase that metric. A country where everyone is in extreme poverty could have the top score for social mobility.
- Eumenes 3y ago
  I like my high wage. I would get paid half of what I got paid today if I lived in one of those places, if not less. Why would I want that? I have everything I want here and more. I already pay high taxes too. > Global Social Mobility Index Look at the attributes that make up the index, they aren't objective like you're making them out to be. Also, its from the WEF, an organization that has a contentious reputation.
  - Paul-Craft 3y ago
    Have you consider perhaps that you aren't the center of the universe, and that there are millions of other people who are worse off than you? That if those people were better off, even at your personal expense, then that would be a better society to live in? Your comments are all "me me me," and I don't see any reason why "we we we" should assign any weight to them.
    - Eumenes 3y ago
      Your zeal for this is unhinged. I don't owe anything to others. Giving more money to the government isn't going to "better society". Here is a link if you are feeling so charitable: https://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/public/gifts-to-government.html https://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/public/gifts-to-government.h... I'm already taxed nearly 45% of my income, pay insane property taxes on my home and car. Not to mention the goods I buy. How about the failing US government redirect its insane budget to improving things that matter, and not far away wars, foreign aid and ever-growing bureaucracy. Focus on domestic issues. Not global profiteering. People in the US, not just citizens but illegal immigrants as well, still have it pretty good compared to most places (free healthcare, EBT, housing vouchers). Thats why millions are trying to get here every year.
sudosysgen 3y ago
Most countries are "homogenous" nations with populations of below 10 million and low wages, so you're not actually saying much.
- Eumenes 3y ago
  Comparing a country of 335 million to countries the size of some of the USA's smallest states is a bad way to look at data.
  - sudosysgen 3y ago
    Perhaps, but the data doesn't show that there's a bias towards or against, and if anything it could be easier for there to be upwards mobility in a larger country.
  - Paul-Craft 3y ago
    Provide a good way, then. I'm open to it.

Paul-Craft 3y ago

How are low wages a problem? Affordability is the problem, and in at least the top 20, it seems the affordability situation regarding housing, healthcare, and the other basics of life (see, e.g. the bottom levels of Maslow's heirarchy) are all accessible to everyone. You do also realize that you're saying the US somehow affords more opportunity than the 26 other countries that rank above it on the Global Social Mobility Index? I don't think you've fully understood the concept here.

floor2 3y ago
Limiting opportunity is directly causal to a higher social mobility index though. Preventing people from earning high wages or accumulating wealth will directly increase that metric. A country where everyone is in extreme poverty could have the top score for social mobility.
Eumenes 3y ago
I like my high wage. I would get paid half of what I got paid today if I lived in one of those places, if not less. Why would I want that? I have everything I want here and more. I already pay high taxes too. > Global Social Mobility Index Look at the attributes that make up the index, they aren't objective like you're making them out to be. Also, its from the WEF, an organization that has a contentious reputation.
- Paul-Craft 3y ago
  Have you consider perhaps that you aren't the center of the universe, and that there are millions of other people who are worse off than you? That if those people were better off, even at your personal expense, then that would be a better society to live in? Your comments are all "me me me," and I don't see any reason why "we we we" should assign any weight to them.
  - Eumenes 3y ago
    Your zeal for this is unhinged. I don't owe anything to others. Giving more money to the government isn't going to "better society". Here is a link if you are feeling so charitable: https://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/public/gifts-to-government.html https://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/public/gifts-to-government.h... I'm already taxed nearly 45% of my income, pay insane property taxes on my home and car. Not to mention the goods I buy. How about the failing US government redirect its insane budget to improving things that matter, and not far away wars, foreign aid and ever-growing bureaucracy. Focus on domestic issues. Not global profiteering. People in the US, not just citizens but illegal immigrants as well, still have it pretty good compared to most places (free healthcare, EBT, housing vouchers). Thats why millions are trying to get here every year.

sudosysgen 3y ago

Most countries are "homogenous" nations with populations of below 10 million and low wages, so you're not actually saying much.

Eumenes 3y ago
Comparing a country of 335 million to countries the size of some of the USA's smallest states is a bad way to look at data.
- sudosysgen 3y ago
  Perhaps, but the data doesn't show that there's a bias towards or against, and if anything it could be easier for there to be upwards mobility in a larger country.
- Paul-Craft 3y ago
  Provide a good way, then. I'm open to it.