4 ms·

The lower classes' standard of living is all that matters. If you're rich, you can live especially well even in 3rd world countries (where servants are cheap a

by Mikeb85 11y ago

The lower classes' standard of living is all that matters. If you're rich, you can live especially well even in 3rd world countries (where servants are cheap and anything can be paid for).

WalterSear 11y ago
The world is not a dichotomy. There's a whole load of people between rich and poor who's standard of living can be poor, despite their relative wealth.
- Mikeb85 11y ago
  My point is that to measure a single country's progress, you need to measure the quality of life for the working class, minorities, retirees, etc... That's why things like health care, transport infrastructure, PPP, median and average salaries, etc... are all factored in to quality of life rankings. And why the US isn't the best country to live in. Obviously there's many people between homeless and billionaires, but I was responding to a post that claimed the US' quality of life was better because of the potential to live well.
rhino369 11y ago
By lower class I don't mean everyone not rich. I mean everyone not middle class or better. Median household income PPP adjusted in America is 30-40% better than France and Germany.
- Mikeb85 11y ago
  But household income adjusted to PPP isn't the only quality of life indicator. For the 'median' family in the US, they can expect to pay far more for health care and transportation. US PPP income is highly skewed because the US dollar is very strong, and a basket of consumer goods in the US is very cheap. Healthcare and education on the other hand are astronomical, and certain items seen elsewhere as 'luxuries' can be required in many parts of the US (one or two cars, for instance). Anyhow, most quality of life surveys put the US at around 10th, which I think is pretty appropriate based on what I've seen (both statistically and anecdotally).
  - rhino369 11y ago
    Income PPP adjusted also doesn't factor in taxes. Things like free tuition are paid for by much higher rates. Healthcare is usually part of compensation packages in America. I'm not sure if that gets included in gross income. My main problem with quality of life indexes is they tend to overvalue income equality. It's true that income inequality is generally associated with poor countries but the USA is clearly an outlier. Favoring equality is a normative judgement.
    - Mikeb85 11y ago
      > Healthcare is usually part of compensation packages in America. For certain jobs. Many don't provide healthcare. > Things like free tuition are paid for by much higher rates. Higher rates in higher income brackets. Not across the board.
      - brewdad 11y ago
        Are tax rates really that much higher though? In my state, middle class pays 25% Federal income tax plus 9% state income tax plus 6.2% SSI tax plus 2.9% Medicare tax plus 0.5% transit tax. That's 43.6%.
        abalashov 11y ago
        It's notoriously difficult to calculate effective taxation in the US since it is fragmented across so many jurisdictions (goes hand in hand with the US's incessant attachment to federalism), and because many of the taxes in this cascade can be partly or wholly deducted from superior taxes (e.g. state taxes deducted from federal taxable income). Nevertheless, you are correct that the aggregate effect is that we pay roughly the same cumulative tax as the average Western European citizen. A little less, to be sure, but we get vanishingly little for it in social benefits, particularly in the catastrophe that is health care. The result is that we have to pay both sides: pay the government, then pay (gargantuan sums!) out of our own pockets for things like tuition and health care.

by Mikeb85 11y ago

The lower classes' standard of living is all that matters. If you're rich, you can live especially well even in 3rd world countries (where servants are cheap and anything can be paid for).

WalterSear 11y ago

The world is not a dichotomy. There's a whole load of people between rich and poor who's standard of living can be poor, despite their relative wealth.

Mikeb85 11y ago
My point is that to measure a single country's progress, you need to measure the quality of life for the working class, minorities, retirees, etc... That's why things like health care, transport infrastructure, PPP, median and average salaries, etc... are all factored in to quality of life rankings. And why the US isn't the best country to live in. Obviously there's many people between homeless and billionaires, but I was responding to a post that claimed the US' quality of life was better because of the potential to live well.

rhino369 11y ago

By lower class I don't mean everyone not rich. I mean everyone not middle class or better. Median household income PPP adjusted in America is 30-40% better than France and Germany.

Mikeb85 11y ago
But household income adjusted to PPP isn't the only quality of life indicator. For the 'median' family in the US, they can expect to pay far more for health care and transportation. US PPP income is highly skewed because the US dollar is very strong, and a basket of consumer goods in the US is very cheap. Healthcare and education on the other hand are astronomical, and certain items seen elsewhere as 'luxuries' can be required in many parts of the US (one or two cars, for instance). Anyhow, most quality of life surveys put the US at around 10th, which I think is pretty appropriate based on what I've seen (both statistically and anecdotally).
- rhino369 11y ago
  Income PPP adjusted also doesn't factor in taxes. Things like free tuition are paid for by much higher rates. Healthcare is usually part of compensation packages in America. I'm not sure if that gets included in gross income. My main problem with quality of life indexes is they tend to overvalue income equality. It's true that income inequality is generally associated with poor countries but the USA is clearly an outlier. Favoring equality is a normative judgement.
  - Mikeb85 11y ago
    > Healthcare is usually part of compensation packages in America. For certain jobs. Many don't provide healthcare. > Things like free tuition are paid for by much higher rates. Higher rates in higher income brackets. Not across the board.
    - brewdad 11y ago
      Are tax rates really that much higher though? In my state, middle class pays 25% Federal income tax plus 9% state income tax plus 6.2% SSI tax plus 2.9% Medicare tax plus 0.5% transit tax. That's 43.6%.
      - abalashov 11y ago
        It's notoriously difficult to calculate effective taxation in the US since it is fragmented across so many jurisdictions (goes hand in hand with the US's incessant attachment to federalism), and because many of the taxes in this cascade can be partly or wholly deducted from superior taxes (e.g. state taxes deducted from federal taxable income). Nevertheless, you are correct that the aggregate effect is that we pay roughly the same cumulative tax as the average Western European citizen. A little less, to be sure, but we get vanishingly little for it in social benefits, particularly in the catastrophe that is health care. The result is that we have to pay both sides: pay the government, then pay (gargantuan sums!) out of our own pockets for things like tuition and health care.