Makes popcorn.

There is no American IKEA, NOVO or LMVH. It's not like we are poor over here, exactly.

The thing about the article that surprises me is that Americans are more productive. Everyone I know who has worked both places would attest to the opposite, and for work I have compared the productivity of companies producing the same product in the two regions directly, where the EU company was way more productive, like a factor 10 more productive. This was 20 years ago, so things can have changed.

Monday I was talking with some EU investment people about the current positive US growth situation, which seems good to me, and they were extremely skeptical. And they weren't even taking Trump into account (I asked directly). I think EU investors prefer more stable situations, less inequality and definitely more rule of law. These guys are not remotely liberal. Obviously the Ukraine war also influences their thinking.
posted by mumimor at 1:21 AM on May 8 [15 favorites]

Having lived in both places, Europe > the US, on most objective measures (healthcare, transit, etc) . American society is not only unsustainable, in many ways it's so dysfunctional it barely qualifies as a society.
posted by Pseudonymous Cognomen at 2:07 AM on May 8 [32 favorites]

I have a general rule that says if a news article can explain something simply, it’s wrong. Or if not wrong, missing out something really important. I think what this Financial Times article is missing out is “neoliberal economics and the policies of the Reagan/Thatcher years”.

Looking at writing and biographies from the 60s and 70s, we can see that English language nations had a lot of free time and surplus wealth. But looking at the same countries now we see that they have a general lack of surplus wealth, and that which is still around is concentrated in older generations. The link between them is American right wing political economic philosophy, which allowed some people to get very very rich. Europeans had their own philosophy, and were generally involved in a rebuilding process during the late 80s to mid 2000s, and therefore didn’t adopt so many stupid economic ideas.
posted by The River Ivel at 2:20 AM on May 8 [19 favorites]

Earning more is, in part, an American choice that is not shared by other nations.

Everything's free in America, for a small fee in America.
posted by flabdablet at 2:28 AM on May 8 [18 favorites]

There is a rightwing belief that the European good life of short hours and long pensions is unsustainable. European states will go bust, the argument goes, and then Europeans will have to work like Americans. The facts suggest otherwise.

To be fair, this is a general property of rightwing beliefs.
posted by flabdablet at 2:32 AM on May 8 [44 favorites]

Arguably, the world would be better off without any of the three companies mentioned in the article's title. I have recently been reading Borgmann's "Technology and the Character of Contemporary Life", and even though it is from the 80s, his analysis seems even more applicable today: Somewhere on the road (specifically, with the rise of industrialism and technology), we have bought into the idea that there is a split into "work" and "life", where the former is about making money (rather than engaging with the world in a way that involves our entire being) and the latter about spending that money (rather than engaging with the things that actually matter to us). Even in Europe, that paradigm still reigns -- so shorter working hours can only be the first step in assessing our relationship with technology (as the driver of that split) altogether. Which doesn't mean it's not important! Here in Germany, we have had some great new engagement with that question, both philosophically and as something unions are finanlly pushing for again.

(Apologies to anyone who has studied Borgmann more closely if I mischaracterize his ideas -- I am still very much in the process of studying them)
posted by Eclectic_Emu at 2:45 AM on May 8 [19 favorites]

Another thing I asked those investor guys mentioned above: can we invest in sustainable businesses in the US?
Answer: the US is not sustainable. I don't know if there was a language issue here, but it was harsh.
posted by mumimor at 2:56 AM on May 8 [7 favorites]

Poor Americans have neither time nor money, nor access to the basic necessities for a healthy, dignified life. To hell with Facebook and Tesla.
posted by The Manwich Horror at 3:02 AM on May 8 [22 favorites]

The thing about the article that surprises me is that Americans are more productive.

I was also surprised, as the last research on the issue in my field (SW development) concluded that US and European developers had about the same output, but US developers put in significantly more hours per week. Can't seem to find the source again, though.
posted by Harald74 at 3:07 AM on May 8 [6 favorites]

One thing I really dislike about economic statistics is that it's all aggregated and not available at the quintile level or better.

Nearly half of Americans have $500 or less in their savings accounts

If we're so wealthy, where's the money??

The FT opinion piece itself is kinda superficial garbage about Norway, Ireland, Luxembourg, Switzerland somehow 'working harder' (more productive) than other Europeans when clearly financialization effects are at play here.

Wealth, technically, should accrete, we should be finding ourselves wealthier over time as our surplus should exceed what we consume.

The core problem though is The [Economic] Rents are Too Damn High in so many critical areas of the economy where providers enjoy pricing power over consumers.

This is even more evident in truly f---ed up economies of Canada and Australia currently, with the media running sob stories of people just trying to get by now being priced out of entire metro areas now.

Rents have reached a record high, with the median weekly rent in Australia now at $627

Housing is everyone's dominant expense, and yet it should be everyone's lowest since in most places it's a very durable good.

Youtube has been feeding me tornado videos for some reason now, and the science of tornadogenesis looks a lot to me as how housing works, a money vortex that just sucks all the wealth out of a community, distributing upwards to god knows where.

Hours of median wage to buy median house in the USA

This measure jumped 25% in the late 70s. They put Volcker in to try to stop it but when he bailed, it jumped another 20% in the 80s and it rose another 16% since 2000 after much tribulation as housing shenanigans precipitated the 2007-2011 GFC and then COVID-era systemic ZIRP boosted real home prices another 15%.

And is, in fact, America on the collective level, all that wealthy?

US Net Investment Position

if we're so wealthy, why are we $20T in the hole? Why will our Social Security payouts be cut 20% in 2035 and we're not doing anything about it now??

Why is there a $2T Federal deficit?

Corporate profits are up 50% since 2020 so clearly somebody is making money in this economy.
posted by torokunai at 3:39 AM on May 8 [30 favorites]

The FT opinion piece itself is kinda superficial garbage about Norway, Ireland, Luxembourg, Switzerland somehow 'working harder' (more productive) than other Europeans

Yes, Norway's extreme wealth is clearly built on nothing but the sweat and hard work of its very productive citizens and residents.

Just like Qatar and Saudi.
posted by Dysk at 3:48 AM on May 8 [22 favorites]

There is no American IKEA, NOVO or LMVH

And if you're talking tech companies, there is no American ASML. There is no American NXP.
posted by DreamerFi at 4:25 AM on May 8 [5 favorites]

I feel a little stupid every time I consider leaving the US, like all the reading I do seems like it'll be pretty much impossible for me when people start leaving in waves depending on this election outcome. Is Europe available or will I pretty much get turned down everywhere? I've got a work-from-home job that I could do in a different time zone, so I wouldn't really be giving Europe any reason to accept me except that I'd have money to spend.
posted by donuy at 4:37 AM on May 8 [2 favorites]

Here's the EU guide on getting a work visa to an EU country. It's on a country by country basis, but once you've got settled status (5 years), you have access to the full Schengen area.
posted by ambrosen at 4:41 AM on May 8 [6 favorites]

If we're so wealthy, where's the money??

The use of averages is statistical malpractice but right behind it is the way most of these stats define income as total pay minus taxes, but not considering other mandatory expenses. Wikipedia has a nice chart of median income by country which is adjusted by purchasing parity but doesn’t include the difference in healthcare expenditure which every country on that list other than the United States provides at much lower total cost and pays for out of taxes rather than out of pocket. That shows up a lot in tax debates, too, where it’s super easy to find lists of total tax rates by country but far rarer for someone to make that list combined with private health insurance premiums or retirement savings costs.

We also have other hidden costs like that: for example, dismantling our transit network to avoid sharing it with brown people means that Americans generally have to pay for one car per adult whereas even in countries like Germany that’s much lower, representing both a significant savings of many thousands of dollars per year and lower risk of one of the most common reasons people need healthcare or have their ability to work impacted.
posted by adamsc at 4:57 AM on May 8 [21 favorites]

And education! As a single parent of two, it has been a great relief that education up to and including doctorates is free here. I mean, none of them have pursued doctorates, but I never had to give it any thought, and today both are doing well.
posted by mumimor at 5:17 AM on May 8 [14 favorites]

Are societies with birthrates below replacement sustainable?
posted by Nancy Lebovitz at 5:23 AM on May 8 [2 favorites]

> Nearly half of Americans have $500 or less in their savings accounts.

Stats like this blow my mind because I guess it means that compared to nearly half of Americans I’m fucking rich, which I most definitely am not.
posted by The Card Cheat at 5:30 AM on May 8 [14 favorites]

I just want to know why we're pretending this is a real question. If I have more money but don't have healthcare, I don't actually have more money.
posted by vim876 at 5:35 AM on May 8 [37 favorites]

Recently, someone asked me what my "dream job" was and I was amazed by what a fucking american question that was.

Like, what's your dream colonoscopy?

I don't wanna fucking work. I wanna drink wine, read books, and sit around with my spouse and dog.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 5:35 AM on May 8 [78 favorites]

Are societies with birthrates below replacement sustainable?

Depends on immigration policy.

Getting the global birthrate below replacement is something we'll absolutely need to do for at least a few centuries in order to get even close to sustainability. The only ethical way to achieve that is by making sustainability and ecological restoration something that people value more than we value our own personal reproduction, which is a big ask.

I do, hands down, no question, and even so, getting the snip was a wrenching decision I grieved hard over.
posted by flabdablet at 5:51 AM on May 8 [8 favorites]

I feel a little stupid every time I consider leaving the US, like all the reading I do seems like it'll be pretty much impossible for me when people start leaving in waves depending on this election outcome. Is Europe available or will I pretty much get turned down everywhere? I've got a work-from-home job that I could do in a different time zone, so I wouldn't really be giving Europe any reason to accept me except that I'd have money to spend.

Very broadly speaking, are you under 45-ish, skilled/educated, and you and your partner/children do not have any expensive health conditions? If so, you have a good chance at immigration (the real kind with work permission, not the extended stay tourist version) in a lot of places. Alternatively, do you have quite a bit of money? Lots of countries are ending their formal "golden visa" programs, where you invest some hundreds of thousands of dollars and get a visa for it, but overall pathways are pretty open if you can show those kinds of resources (i.e., can prove you will not be a drain on public services).

So in other words, even if Trump wins there won't be huge waves of people leaving the US, because there isn't any highly developed country that is welcoming in that way. Some people certainly will, but it won't be a flood, at least going to rich countries.
posted by Dip Flash at 6:04 AM on May 8 [7 favorites]

Recently, someone asked me what my "dream job" was and I was amazed by what a fucking american question that was.

At 47, I think I have stopped feeling like a super loser in that I have never had a career only jobs. I have felt horrible thinking I have done nothing of great import like have a career. The career is such a loaded word in NA (North America). Like, my best friend has a career. My husband has a career. It's hard to not feel like a failure sometimes when the current culture emphasizes careers AND hustling to make extra bucks.
posted by Kitteh at 6:09 AM on May 8 [6 favorites]

We're going to be moving to Europe in about five to eight years. Romania first, then eventually southern Italy is the plan. We are not old, we are not rich, and and we do not have high demand jobs that can get us visas.

Our facilitating factors are that my wife is a dual citizen (Romania) and I can get a spouse passport, she owns a studio apartment in Cluj, and the modest savings we have are effectively multiplied by moving somewhere that €1000-1200 a month supports a middle class living. We figure we can semi-retire (probably still do some consulting).

I spend approximately 30% of every day thinking about this.

Romania and Southern Italy are not the gay space communist meccas of our dreams, but I relish the idea of cheap health care, greatly diminished financial stress, and lovely old city centers to walk around in that won't require us to have cars.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 6:13 AM on May 8 [13 favorites]

We met with our financial advisor yesterday and one of the questions we asked is if it would be more financially advantageous for me to renounce my US citizenship so I can finally open a TFSA (Tax Free Savings Account). The upshot was that given I have more working years ahead of me to really add to an account than the cost of a one-time renounciation fee, it is very much worth considering.
posted by Kitteh at 6:21 AM on May 8 [3 favorites]

The underlying difference is a matter of definition.

- “Productivity” is how much stuff gets made in an economy
- “Productivity” is how much of that stuff can be siphoned away

I’m sure you can think of people who primarily ascribe to one definition or the other.
posted by notoriety public at 6:22 AM on May 8 [3 favorites]

I have a general rule that says if a news article can explain something simply, it’s wrong

The article isn't really that simple.

I have no doubt that the US is more productive overall. What happens with that productivity gain is a very good question and well worth evaluating.

Depends on immigration policy

Always an easy problem to solve!
posted by 2N2222 at 6:27 AM on May 8 [1 favorite]

Housing is everyone's dominant expense...

I live in the US. The employer that supports my household has started noting on our W2 forms how much our healthcare plan costs the employer. For 2023, it was equal to about 43% of the "wages" figures on the same W2. That's more than 5x as much as the payment we make on our mortgage, still more than 3x as much as we pay every year if I include the property taxes.

That money never flowed through our hands, so in a household-accounting sense, it's not an expense we're paying directly. It's still money spent on our behalf, money that might be available for other things (like paying us) if the health insurance weren't so ridiculously expensive.

Everyone knows American healthcare is too expensive. Somehow it's still not getting the attention it deserves.
posted by Western Infidels at 6:39 AM on May 8 [20 favorites]

True, the US produces more innovation, some of it beneficial. There is no European Google, Tesla or Facebook. Perhaps the global economy needs the US, or at least a few inventive bits of it — as long as you don’t have to live there.

Sanitary systems have more hygiene, open sewers have more spontaneity

By I.P. Freely
For Open Sewers Digest

Comparing sewage systems is dangerous terrain, but last week gutter oil salesman Rich Oder went there. He told Open Sewers Digest there was a difference between treated and untreated effluent. “Municipalities that treat their wastewater are populated by cowards and fools; societies with open sewers are simply more productive.”

This has often been said before. Mallarmé wrote an entire novel about gutter oil. In it, the main character develops an antipathy for the condiment, and the open sewers that produce it, and expresses this to the man sitting next to him on the train. “But where,” asks his interlocutor, “do you go to the bathroom?”

“Yes, going to the bathroom,” said the main character, before launching into an exegesis whose thesis is unfortunately unprintable, but which may readily be guessed at.

Wastewater treatment plants and open sewers do things differently.

Treated wastewater is more hygienic, and open sewers offer greater spontaneity. Taste alone is a poor indicator of which is to be preferred. There are objective measures of proper sewage management: does it flow, is it easy to use, and what is its capacity. Sewage management must also be sustainable, which is a lazy and vacuous way of saying that it ought not to cause catastrophic outcomes. So which form of sewage infrastructure does it better?

Open sewers cause illness, which isn’t so great. In response, historical development patterns led some societies to prefer sanitary systems for sewage treatment.

This displeases gutter oil enthusiasts like myself, and it’s no accident that, possessed of such a tendency, my opinions are to be found in the august pages of this very publication.

I’ve got a few column inches to fill here so permit me to bloviate upon the specious equivocation I’m attempting.

Some people don’t like the smell of sewage. Others say it just looks bad. On the other hand, some people say open sewers are more exciting and spontaneous.

But open sewers spread disease. And gutter oil isn’t healthy. However, these things encourage adaptability and resilience in the organisms that live in sewage, and those attributes are not to be lightly dismissed. Allow me to dispraise open sewers, however, in a closing rhetorical flourish meant to accomplish precisely the reverse.

True, open sewers produce more sponaneity, some of it beneficial. There is no sanitary cholera, typhus, or dysentery, after all. Perhaps the world really does need more gutter oil, or at least these three especially revolting components of it. Then again, open sewers are problematic in practice, like the organisms they breed, as is readily apparent to everyone but me, a revolting talking swine who writes for Open Sewers Digest.
posted by cthlsgnd at 6:42 AM on May 8 [27 favorites]

Everyone knows American healthcare is too expensive. Somehow it's still not getting the attention it deserves.

I mean, we know why. Healthcare is something Americans are conditioned to pay for, not receive as a right, and the prevailing American ethos is "Did you work hard enough to receive the things you need/want? GOOD JOB. You did not? You're a parasite and you deserve the bad things that are going to happen to you."
posted by DirtyOldTown at 6:42 AM on May 8 [18 favorites]

"America's not a country. It's just a business. Now fucking pay me."

America is first world decadence for corporations and rich people with a built-in exploitable population. This is a prerequisite for companies like Google or Uber to exist in the first place. Google needs a lack of regulation so they can digitally strip mine everyone's privacy. Uber needs people they can pay as little as possible.

They couldn't happen in the EU because the EU would regulate them out of existence for being Google or Uber. Meanwhile, the US will happily provide tax incentives and that exploitable population they need.

And the lottery ticket is always perceived to be there. If you find the right major, or the right STEM skills or luck into the right job/career you can pay a pittance in taxes and make what's pennies to our plutocrats but a gobsmackingly extravagant living to the average person. In 2019 the top 20% had a household income of over $100,000/yr. That's more than 60 million people.

They're coming for you too, of course. In the mean time they'll continue to dangle that carrot and people will keep playing the game. Because they have to. But 1 in 5 people get pretty lucky. So it persists.
posted by howbigisthistextfield at 6:45 AM on May 8 [10 favorites]

The jaw-dropping stupidity of an America obsessed with worker shortage BUT ALSO unwanted influx of immigrants seeking work never gets less depressing.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 6:46 AM on May 8 [18 favorites]

Everything's free in America, for a small fee in America.

This lyric may to need to evolve to reflect the new business model of selling our personal information/privacy cheap.

Reddit’s first earnings reveals they make $3 per user
posted by fairmettle at 6:56 AM on May 8 [1 favorite]

This is just the FT doing the same thing they always do -- trying to convince the UK that they should be more like americans (docile, ignorant, and desperately racist) because americans are easier to exploit, and more unlike those shifty foreigners across the channel.
posted by aramaic at 7:12 AM on May 8 [11 favorites]

I'm not going to make sweeping generalizations about Canadians or Europeans (something that is usually not reciprocated) but I have two amusing anecdotes working with companies from both places. And I want to note the outright jubilation at taking advantage of the situation that was present in both cases.

In one case I was working for a company that was acquired by another company out of Mississauga. The first thing they did was to terminate the company-funded HSA (Health Savings Account for those that don't speak 'Murican Health Care Fuckery). An act that I routinely joke about as "Canadians stole my health care!"

In another case the UK branch of the company was notorious for filing P0 Jira tickets at the drop of a hat. (For those that don't speak Tech Industry Fuckery that's a fire-alarm level that in our case created an automated phone call. In this case at 2:00 AM local time. All because they wanted someone to read an error message to them.)

In both cases I was struck by the absolutely stunning lack of decorum or even basic decency. So for people complaining about those damn racist hateful 'Muricans you should probably take a note that you're living in a glass house and a significant portion of the electorate in both places is proactively trying to dismantle the much better social environment you inherited.

Which is another way to say, maybe be less shitty when generalizing. Because I hope they don't succeed and I hope your benefits don't become a casualty in the culture war. But if you want to talk about hateful, racist assholes you should probably be a little more courteous because it isn't all that uncommon that the call is coming from inside the house
posted by howbigisthistextfield at 7:22 AM on May 8 [6 favorites]

> a significant portion of the electorate in both places is proactively trying to dismantle the much better social environment you inherited.

Oh, absolutely (in Canada, anyway). Millions of my fellow citizens are frothing mad about immigration, voting to nuke public healthcare and other social programs they benefit from, suuuuuper racist, etc., etc., etc.. It just takes time to change attitudes across large population groups, and that process is already well under way.
posted by The Card Cheat at 7:30 AM on May 8 [5 favorites]

In both cases I was struck by the absolutely stunning lack of decorum or even basic decency. So for people complaining about those damn racist hateful 'Muricans you should probably take a note that you're living in a glass house and a significant portion of the electorate in both places is proactively trying to dismantle the much better social environment you inherited.

Yup, Doug Ford is actively trying to starve our public healthcare system for private options, making what was pretty decent healthcare for all into absolute shittiness. 2.3 million Ontarians do not have a family doctor, thus going to ER and Urgent Care for maladies one's family doctor should be able to take care of. At this point, you've got Ontarians nearly accepting the possibility of private healthcare because they see the current system as broken, not something that could be fixed. And I believe it can be fixed.
posted by Kitteh at 7:31 AM on May 8 [5 favorites]

Jinx, TCC!!
posted by Kitteh at 7:31 AM on May 8 [3 favorites]

One thing I really dislike about economic statistics is that it's all aggregated and not available at the quintile level or better.

Nearly half of Americans have $500 or less in their savings accounts

That stat is actually false. The median US household has a net worth of over $120k and a liquid net worth of $8,000, according to the US Census and Federal Government Statistics. Of course, that $8k is rolling and may include some bills not yet paid, but most Americans don't have $8k worth of bills every month. So if half have $8k, income quadrants don't fall off that quickly, where you can use the value 'nearly half'.

Best as anyone can tell, 15% of US households don't have $500, and would have to borrow $500 from their parents or friends while being over 21 years of age (under 21 yo it's not odd to borrow money from parents), or have to use a lender of last resort (a payday lender).

The problem with the US is not that 'everyone is poor', it's that the US has extreme income inequality. At the other end, 15% (20% if you include home value) of US households have investible assets over $1m. You can see the inequality in that- if median net worth is $100k, so 35% have between $100k-$1m.

Also most Americans like their medical care just fine, can easily pay for it, and that's why changing it has been so hard. If people didn't like their medical care or most couldn't afford it, it would be easy to change it.

But I actually agree that if we changed our transit (the median household yearly car expenditure dwarfs the median yearly out of pocket medical expenditure - it's not even close) and were able to change to a cheaper healthcare option, it would dramatically increase the median household's free cash flow.
posted by The_Vegetables at 7:34 AM on May 8 [7 favorites]

the median household yearly car expenditure dwarfs the median yearly out of pocket medical expenditure - it's not even close

But this is also hard to change because people also like their car, and thus don't really mind paying the outrageous expenditures for it. We are actually kind of lucky car manufacturers have been as benevolent as they have been. I actually see this changing in the near future.
posted by The_Vegetables at 7:41 AM on May 8 [2 favorites]

Hours of median wage to buy median house in the USA
That is actually hours of non-supervisory average wage. And nobody buys houses with cash, instead they mortgage them. Most of the effect comes from 30-Year Fixed Rate Mortgage Rate changes; how much does it cost *per month* to buy a house *over 30 years*.

As interest rates go down, the value of the home you can buy for a given monthly amount goes up. And in the current climate, the plot of land most houses are on is the majority of the cost of the "house", and are valuable in competition with each other.

It isn't impossible to get the median house price down while increasing buying power, but that involves making other stuff to spend money on more attractive relative to living in a "better" location.

The USA is a very unequal society. They have a median wealth of 107k and a mean wealth of 551k, 5x higher. This is a sign that a huge amount of their "mean" wealth is concentrated in very few hands.

By median wealth, USA is 15th place globaly, behind every "well off" industrialized nation, and just ahead of Spain, Japan, Singapore, Ireland and South Korea. It is middle of the pack for industrialized winners of WW2/Cold War countries, honestly.

But by "mean wealth", the USA is only exceeded by banking ministates (Switzerland and Luxembourg). The only country in the top 20 Mean wealth countires with a higher Gini wealth (not income) index is Sweden, and that is because Gini doesn't account for non-owned entitlements (like state pensions).

> Getting the global birthrate below replacement is something we'll absolutely need to do for at least a few centuries in order to get even close to sustainability.

Or a revolution in reducing human impact on the environment; food production and resource extraction and energy.

To win the climate change crisis we have to get CO2 emissions to zero. When CO2 emissions are zero, there is no longer a CO2 price on power generation. And unbounded power generation permits stuff like extremely compact food production.

Imagine valuing environmental damage while also dropping the price of electricity 10 to 100 fold. Building a hydroponic vertical farm becomes both economical and doesn't require huge amounts of land dedicated to growing crops.
posted by NotAYakk at 8:00 AM on May 8 [3 favorites]

Nearly half of Americans have $500 or less in their savings accounts

That stat is actually false. The median US household has a net worth of over $120k and a liquid net worth of $8,000, according to the US Census and Federal Government Statistics

I'm no expert on the statistics so I'll defer to anyone more informed than me, but "half have less than $500" is definitely how it is getting reported. Example article. It looks like this is based on a survey of ~1000 people, so it's not surprising they might have come up with quite different statistics.
posted by Dip Flash at 8:08 AM on May 8 [1 favorite]

This is just the FT doing the same thing they always do -- trying to convince the UK that they should be more like americans (docile, ignorant, and desperately racist)

I'm not sure whether it's you that thinks americans are “docile, ignorant, and desperately racist” or that you're saying that's what the FT thinks, but I don't think that is the FT's agenda*, and if you're saying that's what the UK thinks, I mean, there's no shortage of evidence that a whole lot of the UK electorate are blinkered xenophobes, but it'd be nice if you weren't putting words into people's mouths.

I mean, this is a pretty shallow piece, but Stephen Bush and Jennifer Williams are amongst the best and most direct national newspaper commenters and journalists in the UK today. So no, the FT absolutely does have things to say.

*if nothing else, the FT's audience is about ⅓ UK, ⅓ US and the rest is split between Asia-Pacific and EMEA.
posted by ambrosen at 8:16 AM on May 8 [3 favorites]

a different take: 🇪🇺 European Accelerationism - eu/acc
posted by chavenet at 8:18 AM on May 8

Dear Mr Freely,

I write in response to your recent piece in Open Sewers Digest in which you claim, without a scintilla of evidence, that treated wastewater is more hygienic.

This is simply not acceptable. Treating wastewater, as the enclosed meta-analysis by Rogan et al argues loudly and forcefully, poses an existential threat to the right to free excretion upon which this nation's greatest businesses have made their pile. Such a proposal being floated under your byline is a softening of your journal's otherwise firm consistency that I trust we shall not see repeated.

Yours etc

N. L. Seepage
Media Liaison Orifice
National Fecal Association
posted by flabdablet at 8:25 AM on May 8 [6 favorites]

To me this all about watching what people do, not what they say.

There are far more Europeans working high-level jobs in the U.S., than Americans working high-level jobs in Europe, which implies that salary trumps free time.

But conflating this is: Europeans can always go home for cheaper healthcare or education, and very few Americans speak enough French, German or Italian to get high-level jobs in the major European business cities.
posted by MattD at 8:31 AM on May 8 [2 favorites]

>Nearly half of Americans have $500 or less in their savings accounts

That stat is actually false. The median US household has a net worth of over $120k

There are now two links in this thread which describe the source of that statistic, so if you're going to say it's false, you have to provide some reason to doubt it, preferably including another link with details if we want them.

But anyway it's very possible to have only $500 in your savings account while still having a net worth of over $120k, particularly if you own a house. Lots and lots of elderly people who have equity in their homes but tiny incomes meet both of these criteria.

Also, people's 401k accounts are part of their net worth, and their HSAs, and their cars. Maybe also their life insurance policies? And, you know, their checking accounts.

I feel like when we are calculating how much money people have in Europe, we should take into account the value of the goods and services provided by the state as well...
posted by OnceUponATime at 8:45 AM on May 8 [7 favorites]

There are far more Europeans working high-level jobs in the U.S., than Americans working high-level jobs in Europe, which implies that salary trumps free time.

There's also the factor of the asymmetric language barrier, depending on the European country in question. "Europe" also covers both developing and highly developed economies.
posted by Dysk at 9:09 AM on May 8 [3 favorites]

And the mirror of that "taking into account value of goods/services" bit is talking about income burdens the services not provided (pension/401K, healthcare, etc) by the state and how they should be lumped into American "tax" discussions.

Which, as someone sitting more or less on the 100K median income linked above, is a hair about 37% (401K, health insurance, local/county/state/federal taxes, SSI, medicare, medicaid). And I have no dependents, am in excellent health, and an affordable health insurance plan (~$140/month through work).

This is almost what I'd be paying in Spain (I think it's ~38-44% of the total when you do all the bracket math) but unlike Spaniards my healthcare is dependent on me not leaving this job. My pension is dependent on me making my own contributions religiously AND the stock market not getting obliterated before I retire in 30 odd years (or someone inventively looting the account). The train service isn't up to par, infrastructure is falling apart, the administrative state has been gutted, libraries and parks are underfunded (or being closed), schools are hilariously underfunded and also funded in exactly the wrong ways, but hey we bought a ton of PATRIOT Brand Kabul Orphanage Detectors from some guy who wants a mansion on the Potomac.

Oh also, our life expectancies are lower and may still be dropping (though maybe things leveled out).

And the food quality from even high tier grocery stores here is appalling in comparison to grabbing bread and cheese from a local Spar.
posted by Slackermagee at 9:17 AM on May 8 [8 favorites]

We are not going to win the climate change crises:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/may/08/world-scientists-climate-failure-survey-global-temperature
posted by WatTylerJr at 9:20 AM on May 8 [2 favorites]

There is one advantage of the "Europeans have more time, Americans have more money" thing and immigrants from the US have been taking advantage of this since time immemorial: for folks from many places, if they work in the US until they have what would count as a lot of money back home, then go home, they can retire earlier and with more.

The trick is, the kids you've raised in the US may not want to go back to Serbia or Bulgaria or what have you and if you ever want to see them or your grandkids again, leaving the US may not be practical.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 10:40 AM on May 8 [6 favorites]

> Which, as someone sitting more or less on the 100K median income linked above, is a hair about 37% (401K, health insurance, local/county/state/federal taxes, SSI, medicare, medicaid). And I have no dependents, am in excellent health, and an affordable health insurance plan (~$140/month through work).

100k is median net worth.

USA median income is 38k, but that includes kids and retirees etc; median salary is 40k (women) 52k (men).

At 100k income you are 2x median salary. And yes, that is around when (if all goes well) you match European service quality.

The US surplus (compared to the EU) flows into people much richer than those with middle class 100k salary.

...

I have no idea how to account for government services for net worth purposes. Or even income.

When the state spends 1 billion dollars on roadworks, does that count as income for the people who live near the roads? That 1 billion dollars in roadworks could be specially crafted to only help a small percent of the population, or a general public good.

The same could hold for health care. You could probably get cost values by age and use that as a proxy, that the state is providing you with an insurance plan with value X where X is the average cost of health care for someone your age? Or you could track actual expenditures - when you go to the ER and cost the government 1000$, that is 1000$ in "income"?

State pensions are also interesting. You aren't free to liquidate them, and the promise could be broken; but but we could value them equal to the value of a future annuity with that income stream.

I suspect doing that kind of work would get Sweden's 83% wealth GINI (!) down a bunch, as most of the people in Sweden with few assets also have a social safety net's worth of "assets" that aren't on their books.
posted by NotAYakk at 12:58 PM on May 8 [3 favorites]

Nicolai Tangen, head of Norway’s giant oil fund. Even he has taken enough leisure time to amass a collection of Nordic modernist art

Somehow I don't think it just takes time to assemble an art collection.
posted by doctornemo at 1:54 PM on May 8 [9 favorites]

There are far more Europeans working high-level jobs in the U.S., than Americans working high-level jobs in Europe, which implies that salary trumps free time.

Apart from what Dysk said, you are selecting for a very specific group of people: those who value high-paying executive positions. It's not like people who choose to be teachers or nurses or community organizers are doing that because they failed at being rich.

But I think in the US, people in general are more focused on income, out of necessity. When you have to pay extortionate amounts for healthcare, education and old-age care, you need to think about your income.

It's one of the weird things I'm getting out of the Trump trial in Manhattan. They were paying Cohen double his outlay, to account for his taxes. Well that's the same he would have payed in taxes here. But then he also has to pay for health insurance and save up for his kids' education, which a person in the same tax bracket here wouldn't have to. So here, even a well-payed lawyer who does like his good life would not be as focused on income as the equivalent American.
posted by mumimor at 1:59 AM on May 9 [5 favorites]

There are far more Europeans working high-level jobs in the U.S., than Americans working high-level jobs in Europe, which implies that salary trumps free time.

Apart from what Dysk said, you are selecting for a very specific group of people: those who value high-paying executive positions. It's not like people who choose to be teachers or nurses or community organizers are doing that because they failed at being rich.

It's not just executives. A lot more people migrate from the EU to the US than in the other direction and it's been that way for a long time. Part of that is the fact that the US is much more open to immigration (even after the lingering restrictions from the Trump administration) than the EU is, but also that salaries are higher here leading to people at all levels of the social scale seeing potential economic opportunity, whether or not they plan to go back home after working here. Even accounting for healthcare costs, people can come out well ahead.
posted by Dip Flash at 6:59 AM on May 9

USA median income is 38k, but that includes kids and retirees etc; median salary is 40k (women) 52k (men).

At 100k income you are 2x median salary. And yes, that is around when (if all goes well) you match European service quality.

Not exactly. The median household income for adults under 65 who are cohabitating (though generally married) with children under 18 years old, is over $120k in most US metro areas, and above $200k in a few metro areas. It doesn't require them both to be working. And it is correct that it removes the elderly retirees, young workers, college students, divorcees, etc, but generally US income is far higher than the medians suggest. You can see this in action that NYC has a very low median income, lower than places like Omaha Nebraska, but that means NYC has more young people, immigrants, poor people, etc than Omaha does, so the median is shifted.

Or in a place like Southlake TX, which has a population of almost 40k with a median income of around $250k - they basically exclude singles, young people, poor people, etc with their housing policies.

However, I think the surmise is probably correct - if you are at or below the median income, the US is kind of a rough place and pretty expensive, but if you are above, then it's a pretty nice place to live, and probably lightly preferable to Europe.
posted by The_Vegetables at 7:30 AM on May 9

But conflating this is: Europeans can always go home for cheaper healthcare or education, and very few Americans speak enough French, German or Italian to get high-level jobs in the major European business cities.

Also conflating this is that a huge number of Americans have also never left America. There are less than half the number of passports as there are Americans (48%) and some Americans have more than one passport. Meanwhile more than two-thirds of Europeans have been to another country.
posted by srboisvert at 9:50 AM on May 9 [1 favorite]

Meanwhile more than two-thirds of Europeans have been to another country.

That's such a low number to me, given how close the borders are there. But it's kind of like how a surprising number of Americans never leave their home state. Lots of people just don't travel much, and if they do they don't go very far.
posted by Dip Flash at 10:26 AM on May 9 [1 favorite]

> if you are at or below the median income, the US is kind of a rough place and pretty expensive, but if you are above, then it's a pretty nice place to live

Gets into Rawls' Veil of Ignorance yes. Those who ended up on the happy side of the curve want to renegotiate the deal.
posted by torokunai at 11:04 AM on May 9

I own a pretty large suburban home in the American South, and that the monthly fee for my 91-year-old father to be in an assisted living facility (ALF) is over six times my mortgage payment. The two senior options in my area are 1) insanely expensive and 2) skilled nursing facilities with terrible conditions and lots of code violations. Lucky he has special insurance for this, but after 3 months we are still fighting the insurance company and I’ve laid out over $35,000 that I’ll never get back. So much for my son’s college fund!

I’m pretty far up the income brackets and I think America is bullshit. Also the majority of high-paying “career” jobs are totally isolated from any social purpose or value, and the companies offering the best salaries are actively destroying the world and profiting off the suffering of people in other countries. That bit is probably true everywhere though.
posted by caviar2d2 at 3:34 PM on May 9 [3 favorites]

DirtyOldTown, not for the 1st time, I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.
posted by theora55 at 4:19 PM on May 9 [1 favorite]

You are not currently logged in. Log in or create a new account to post comments.