5 ms·

It’s not really about the numbers. My pile of money at retirement would definitely be larger if I moved across the pond. But here my children walk themselves to

by lrem 2y ago

It’s not really about the numbers. My pile of money at retirement would definitely be larger if I moved across the pond. But here my children walk themselves to school from the age of six. I don’t worry about them getting killed by a madman. And even the homeless get healthcare, including functional mental health support. Things no employer can offer in the US.

ptero 2y ago
This a very reasonable viewpoint. As a different personal opinion, I am glad that I live on my side of the pond. I am in my early 50s, and having worked in tech for the last 24 (with sane hours and never at the FAANG salaries) I own my condo in a nice town, my kids college is paid for and my personal accounts are well into 7-digits. This is not all roses: schools in the US stink (I have grown up on the other side of the pond and was lucky to get a great science education in school so I can see the difference), politics are polarized, supermarket produce is mediocre, etc. The biggest issue for me though is that I suspect that the societies on both sides of the pond are going to go through major changes in the next 10-15 years and many social programs will become unaffordable. I see governments of every first world country making crazy financial and societal choices so rather than depending on government to keep me alive and well I much prefer US salaries allowing me to have money in my own hands. I can put some of that into gold or Bitcoin, or buy an inexpensive apartment in a quiet country with decent finances and reasonable healthcare. Not being totally beholden to the government is what helps me sleep well at night. My 2c.
- immibis 2y ago
  Don't forget that your stock market retirement account is also a government welfare program.
  - ptero 2y ago
    I didn't understand this point, can you elaborate?
finikytou 2y ago
Im in western europe and I would never let my children walk themselves to school at 6. europe is far from being a safe place minus some eastern europe.
- trashtester 2y ago
  That depends on location within Western Europe. Where I live (also W. Europe), it's common for kids to walk to school from the age of 6, or soon after if the kids are not yet mature enough. In similar places in the US it may not even be the risk of criminals that is the largest threat. It may simply be that the road network is built for cars only, with few safe ways to cross roads without a vehicle. By comparison, where I live, parents are expected to act as a kind of traffic police a couple of mornings every year. That means that every place where the kids have to cross the road will have an adult blocking all cars from passing even if a kid is merely getting close (even if the speed limit is only 30km/h or 20mph) In other words, pedestrians get the highest priority while motorists are treated as second class. Nation wide, about 50-60% of the kids will walk or ride a bike to school in my country (and those who don't tend to either live far from the school or in a higher crime area). Compared to ~10% in the US. Also, while in the US kids of low income households are more likely to (have to) walk to school. In my country, it's possible that the relationship is, if anything, inversed. Having the kids walk to school is seen by many resourceful families as healthy, both from the physical activity in a screen-rich world and to teach them to be independent and confident. That means that in neighborhoods with a large percentage of such parents the parents are likely to ensure that the route to school is safe and walkable for kids.

by lrem 2y ago

ptero 2y ago

This a very reasonable viewpoint. As a different personal opinion, I am glad that I live on my side of the pond. I am in my early 50s, and having worked in tech for the last 24 (with sane hours and never at the FAANG salaries) I own my condo in a nice town, my kids college is paid for and my personal accounts are well into 7-digits. This is not all roses: schools in the US stink (I have grown up on the other side of the pond and was lucky to get a great science education in school so I can see the difference), politics are polarized, supermarket produce is mediocre, etc. The biggest issue for me though is that I suspect that the societies on both sides of the pond are going to go through major changes in the next 10-15 years and many social programs will become unaffordable. I see governments of every first world country making crazy financial and societal choices so rather than depending on government to keep me alive and well I much prefer US salaries allowing me to have money in my own hands. I can put some of that into gold or Bitcoin, or buy an inexpensive apartment in a quiet country with decent finances and reasonable healthcare. Not being totally beholden to the government is what helps me sleep well at night. My 2c.

immibis 2y ago
Don't forget that your stock market retirement account is also a government welfare program.
- ptero 2y ago
  I didn't understand this point, can you elaborate?

finikytou 2y ago

Im in western europe and I would never let my children walk themselves to school at 6. europe is far from being a safe place minus some eastern europe.

trashtester 2y ago
That depends on location within Western Europe. Where I live (also W. Europe), it's common for kids to walk to school from the age of 6, or soon after if the kids are not yet mature enough. In similar places in the US it may not even be the risk of criminals that is the largest threat. It may simply be that the road network is built for cars only, with few safe ways to cross roads without a vehicle. By comparison, where I live, parents are expected to act as a kind of traffic police a couple of mornings every year. That means that every place where the kids have to cross the road will have an adult blocking all cars from passing even if a kid is merely getting close (even if the speed limit is only 30km/h or 20mph) In other words, pedestrians get the highest priority while motorists are treated as second class. Nation wide, about 50-60% of the kids will walk or ride a bike to school in my country (and those who don't tend to either live far from the school or in a higher crime area). Compared to ~10% in the US. Also, while in the US kids of low income households are more likely to (have to) walk to school. In my country, it's possible that the relationship is, if anything, inversed. Having the kids walk to school is seen by many resourceful families as healthy, both from the physical activity in a screen-rich world and to teach them to be independent and confident. That means that in neighborhoods with a large percentage of such parents the parents are likely to ensure that the route to school is safe and walkable for kids.