Two Sarahs: new motherhood in Sweden vs Seattle

[Anonymous]

The Swedes are paying for their healthcare, maternity leave, etc. They just pay it through their taxes.
Sweden top bracket 56.60% vs US top bracket 37%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:P.s. I think it’s easier to plan and hire someone for 15 months than for 4 weeks.

This. Our maternity sub for HR was there year long. She was not treated as a sub and she was a FT employee from her perspective

So does Sweden have a ton of people running around on one year contracts? I’m not saying it’s not better, I’m just saying it leaves a lot of open questions. A year is a long time for someone to be on a team.

Yes! This is built into their labor market.

Someone who works for 15 months is taking over the full responsibilities for the job not just doing the bare minimum for a month while someone is out. The timing also means professional workers can fully take on a project instead of letting work pile up.This setup is so commonplace that larger companies often use the same “temps” over and over so there’s no institutional knowledge lost. It’s a great system and works well.

It’s actually kind of funny how afraid Americans are of parental leave. It’s like they need to convince themselves it would never work to justify the stress of going back to work with newborn.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Swedes are paying for their healthcare, maternity leave, etc. They just pay it through their taxes.
Sweden top bracket 56.60% vs US top bracket 37%.

Boo how. So the income over 1 million/year is taxed slightly higher? And for that everyone gets Heath are and paid parental leave?

Yes, that sounds absolutely horrible!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Swedes are paying for their healthcare, maternity leave, etc. They just pay it through their taxes.
Sweden top bracket 56.60% vs US top bracket 37%.

Boo how. So the income over 1 million/year is taxed slightly higher? And for that everyone gets Heath are and paid parental leave?

Yes, that sounds absolutely horrible!

One, I have to assume you don't speak to people like that where you work? Two, you are making assumptions about my intent. Three, the point is to have a constructive dialog, not bash people with sarcasm because somehow this makes you feel empowered?? And, four, if you're going to use sarcasm, at least spell it correctly.

Whatever the case, I was only stating facts. If the US wants to up its taxes then more can be done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:P.s. I think it’s easier to plan and hire someone for 15 months than for 4 weeks.

This. Our maternity sub for HR was there year long. She was not treated as a sub and she was a FT employee from her perspective

So does Sweden have a ton of people running around on one year contracts? I’m not saying it’s not better, I’m just saying it leaves a lot of open questions. A year is a long time for someone to be on a team.

Yes! This is built into their labor market.

Someone who works for 15 months is taking over the full responsibilities for the job not just doing the bare minimum for a month while someone is out. The timing also means professional workers can fully take on a project instead of letting work pile up.This setup is so commonplace that larger companies often use the same “temps” over and over so there’s no institutional knowledge lost. It’s a great system and works well.

It’s actually kind of funny how afraid Americans are of parental leave. It’s like they need to convince themselves it would never work to justify the stress of going back to work with newborn.

The people who take these temp jobs are in a career slump.
Sometimes the parent comes back from leave only to be pregnant again
I know of one person who was not told her position was to fill in for a person on maternity leave.
Also, you can call in sick if your child has a fever
The best weeks for summer vacation are reserved for parents of small children

As you can see, there is some resentment

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Paid maternity leave went up from 12 weeks to 26 weeks fairly recently in India. Canada has a generous maternity/paternity leave policy. US is very backward.

Well, we are broke for various reasons. Now isnt the time for more "free" stuff. Pay down the debt and we will start talking.

"Free" stuff = public schools, roads, bridges, libraries, parks, vaccines, etc. You know, things that taxes pay for that benefit society, and that make our society cohesive and functional. Maternity and paternity leave would also be very beneficial to our society, but our government just hasn't prioritized this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Paid maternity leave went up from 12 weeks to 26 weeks fairly recently in India. Canada has a generous maternity/paternity leave policy. US is very backward.

Well, we are broke for various reasons. Now isnt the time for more "free" stuff. Pay down the debt and we will start talking.

"Free" stuff = public schools, roads, bridges, libraries, parks, vaccines, etc. You know, things that taxes pay for that benefit society, and that make our society cohesive and functional. Maternity and paternity leave would also be very beneficial to our society, but our government just hasn't prioritized this.

Military budget
White House lobbyists
Corruption

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: While the policies in Sweden sound awesome and amazing, let's remember that Sweden also has very high taxes and a tightly closed border and strictly enforced immigration policies.

We have a whole different set of issues to deal with here in the U.S. I'm not saying we are dealing well with them...just saying that you can't compare apples to oranges. We have a lot of room for improvement on this issue, but it's not like Sweden's way is a magic potion.

Any solution for the US would need to be tailored to our particular set of challenges we have-which are different than Sweden's.

Obviously, but that doesn't mean we can't admire their maternity leave policies!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Swedes are paying for their healthcare, maternity leave, etc. They just pay it through their taxes.
Sweden top bracket 56.60% vs US top bracket 37%.

So what? If I can have a great lifestyle on a lower net income, I'm TOTALLY fine with that. Part of the problem in the US is that people are obsessed with wealth, and sometimes you just don't need that much wealth to be happy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Swedes are paying for their healthcare, maternity leave, etc. They just pay it through their taxes.
Sweden top bracket 56.60% vs US top bracket 37%.

Boo how. So the income over 1 million/year is taxed slightly higher? And for that everyone gets Heath are and paid parental leave?

Yes, that sounds absolutely horrible!

One, I have to assume you don't speak to people like that where you work? Two, you are making assumptions about my intent. Three, the point is to have a constructive dialog, not bash people with sarcasm because somehow this makes you feel empowered?? And, four, if you're going to use sarcasm, at least spell it correctly.

Whatever the case, I was only stating facts. If the US wants to up its taxes then more can be done.

I mean either you're paying for healthcare/childcare out of pocket, or you are paying for in taxes. You're STILL PAYING FOR IT.

[Anonymous]

This may have already been mentioned ...there's an extremely interesting documentary called "Sweden-Lessons for America". I highly recommend it - it's about an hour long. It shows how they did it and how they had to make serious adjustments along the way to smooth it out.

[Anonymous]

The documentary is on Amazon Prime.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Swedes are paying for their healthcare, maternity leave, etc. They just pay it through their taxes.
Sweden top bracket 56.60% vs US top bracket 37%.

Boo how. So the income over 1 million/year is taxed slightly higher? And for that everyone gets Heath are and paid parental leave?

Yes, that sounds absolutely horrible!

Let me guess, you’re not the one being taxed higher. It’s always easier to spend other people’s money.

By the way, the top bracket here starts at like 400k or something.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Swedes are paying for their healthcare, maternity leave, etc. They just pay it through their taxes.
Sweden top bracket 56.60% vs US top bracket 37%.

Boo how. So the income over 1 million/year is taxed slightly higher? And for that everyone gets Heath are and paid parental leave?

Yes, that sounds absolutely horrible!

One, I have to assume you don't speak to people like that where you work? Two, you are making assumptions about my intent. Three, the point is to have a constructive dialog, not bash people with sarcasm because somehow this makes you feel empowered?? And, four, if you're going to use sarcasm, at least spell it correctly.

Whatever the case, I was only stating facts. If the US wants to up its taxes then more can be done.

I mean either you're paying for healthcare/childcare out of pocket, or you are paying for in taxes. You're STILL PAYING FOR IT.

+1

Speaking as an upper income family, I’d rather pay for my own things (maternity leave, health insurance, private school) and let other people do the same.

Guarantee, if we moved to Sweden, our lifestyle would be less because of taxes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's very hard to get hired as a woman in Sweden for this reason.

Exactly. Taxpayers don’t want to pay for that. People should pay for their own lifestyle choices.