Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Easy to tell 90% of the posters on this thread have never lived in Europe and get their entire perspective of life in Europe from a tik tok clip showing progressive liberal people in hip neighborhoods in Paris or Berlin.

As someone who's actually lived in Europe long enough and still spends plenty of time in Europe in various countries, it's indisputable that incomes are higher - substantially higher - in the United States. Average income in the entire UK is lower than the average income in Mississippi, the poorest state in the US. At the same time cost of living in the popular key European cities where the better jobs are isn't necessarily low either. Anyone looked at the cost of housing in London (or most of Britain in general?). Or Paris? Very expensive. Pretty much only rich people and poor people in subsidized housing live in most central European capital cities. Middle class and everyday people live in suburbs and outer neighborhoods, with long commutes on public transportation. Many Europeans somehow end up coming to the US for work and completely fall in love with the ease of suburban American life. And there's no shortage of poor neighborhoods in Europe too, the banlieues of Paris, the housing estates of Britain, the crowded tenements of migrants living off generous doles that is causing enormous cultural strife across Europe. And there's small dying towns and villages (speaking to the person complaining about small town America).

Europe does have a large enough affluent upper middle class but most Europeans are not in this category. And there's widespread fears across Western Europe over economic insecurity and decline in standards of living and mass migration. Few people are taking things for granted or thinking the future is rosy.

+100000

It’s like the women on Reddit who praise European parental leaves but don’t understand it’s $250-300 a week, the woman likely had finances independent of her partner/husband (meaning she’d have $0 of support) and there is the expectation the woman spends significant time away from work to watch a young child and also expected to return.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sigh. Repeating for the people who think they are discovering something novel. The US is a terrible place to be poor but ok if you are rich (though that is getting to be debatable). Europe is a good place to be if you are middle income or poor. The rich try to shelter.

Europe still sucks to be poor, it’s just that more people are poor so you don’t feel as bad because everyone else is in the same boat. And it’s harder to become not poor. Reduced class mobility, more entrenched aristocratic wealth over there. They tax labor like crazy but barely touch capital generated income.

Wrong. You can get sick and not become homeless or die. You can retire! Your kids can go to university and not have to put 50% of their paycheck into repaying their debt. You can still have days off. Their lower class lifestyle is a middle class lifestyle here without the constant undercurrent of terror that medical debt will take you down or your kids will get shot at school.

Wild you think everyone in the US is just one medical crisis away from homelessness and doesn’t take vacation. This mantra is often repeated and people like you believe it. It’s funny when my European friends find out how much vacation I get and my friends too (somewhere between 4-6 weeks) because it really disappoints them.

How would our country be so powerful and wealthy if no one ever took vacation and getting sick meant you became homeless? That doesn’t make any sense.

Everyone? No. But the USA is the only country in the world where medical bankruptsy exists. So clearly not that rare.

63% of Americans don't even have $500 to pay an emergency expense.

Actually, 99% of Americans don't have $2 to buy a candy bar (we can all make up stats).

Google is your friend if you weren't so lazy.

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/08/31/63percent-of-workers-are-unable-to-pay-a-500-emergency-expense-survey.html

Actually was hoping some absurd link would be found that just goes beyond what any normal intuition would provide. Here would be a different one that at least passes the smell test:

https://www.bankrate.com/banking/savings/emergency-savings-report/#no-emergency-savings

Technically, you could arrive at your "63%" number if the majority of workers earned less than $200/month, but, again, intuition suggests that is not reasonable.

Your crap intuition isn't actually a substitute for actual surveys by reputable sources. It's safe to say that anyone earning $200/month would be homeless with absolutely zero savings.

Your link doesn't paint a rosy picture for the average american either, so not sure at all what point you think you are making.

That is a fair point, I am not trying to paint a rosy picture of those living paycheck to paycheck in America. But usually we can make this point without statistics that don't align with reality.

For instance, here is a federal reserve survey (which I would say is more reliable than a "SecureSave" survey from 2023) showing the number is 37% for $400.

https://www.investopedia.com/are-you-financially-ready-a-third-of-americans-cant-handle-usd400-emergencies-11787407

I will admit there is a possibility that 26% of individuals have $401-499 in savings, meaning the two stats are not mutually exclusive. But 1/3 having <500 sounds much more likely than 2/3.

Surveys may vary...but the below was just pulled from this link you posted.

The 30% without three months of emergency savings is slightly lower than the 42% of Americans who said they didn't have any emergency savings in a U.S. News & World Report survey of about 1,200 people from earlier this year.

It's weird to say that 30% without 3 months of emergency savings is "slightly" lower than 42% who said they have $0 in the US News survey. That seems like a significant difference.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sigh. Repeating for the people who think they are discovering something novel. The US is a terrible place to be poor but ok if you are rich (though that is getting to be debatable). Europe is a good place to be if you are middle income or poor. The rich try to shelter.

Europe still sucks to be poor, it’s just that more people are poor so you don’t feel as bad because everyone else is in the same boat. And it’s harder to become not poor. Reduced class mobility, more entrenched aristocratic wealth over there. They tax labor like crazy but barely touch capital generated income.

Wrong. You can get sick and not become homeless or die. You can retire! Your kids can go to university and not have to put 50% of their paycheck into repaying their debt. You can still have days off. Their lower class lifestyle is a middle class lifestyle here without the constant undercurrent of terror that medical debt will take you down or your kids will get shot at school.

Wild you think everyone in the US is just one medical crisis away from homelessness and doesn’t take vacation. This mantra is often repeated and people like you believe it. It’s funny when my European friends find out how much vacation I get and my friends too (somewhere between 4-6 weeks) because it really disappoints them.

How would our country be so powerful and wealthy if no one ever took vacation and getting sick meant you became homeless? That doesn’t make any sense.

Everyone? No. But the USA is the only country in the world where medical bankruptsy exists. So clearly not that rare.

63% of Americans don't even have $500 to pay an emergency expense.

Actually, 99% of Americans don't have $2 to buy a candy bar (we can all make up stats).

Google is your friend if you weren't so lazy.

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/08/31/63percent-of-workers-are-unable-to-pay-a-500-emergency-expense-survey.html

Actually was hoping some absurd link would be found that just goes beyond what any normal intuition would provide. Here would be a different one that at least passes the smell test:

https://www.bankrate.com/banking/savings/emergency-savings-report/#no-emergency-savings

Technically, you could arrive at your "63%" number if the majority of workers earned less than $200/month, but, again, intuition suggests that is not reasonable.

Your crap intuition isn't actually a substitute for actual surveys by reputable sources. It's safe to say that anyone earning $200/month would be homeless with absolutely zero savings.

Your link doesn't paint a rosy picture for the average american either, so not sure at all what point you think you are making.

That is a fair point, I am not trying to paint a rosy picture of those living paycheck to paycheck in America. But usually we can make this point without statistics that don't align with reality.

For instance, here is a federal reserve survey (which I would say is more reliable than a "SecureSave" survey from 2023) showing the number is 37% for $400.

https://www.investopedia.com/are-you-financially-ready-a-third-of-americans-cant-handle-usd400-emergencies-11787407

I will admit there is a possibility that 26% of individuals have $401-499 in savings, meaning the two stats are not mutually exclusive. But 1/3 having <500 sounds much more likely than 2/3.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sigh. Repeating for the people who think they are discovering something novel. The US is a terrible place to be poor but ok if you are rich (though that is getting to be debatable). Europe is a good place to be if you are middle income or poor. The rich try to shelter.

Europe still sucks to be poor, it’s just that more people are poor so you don’t feel as bad because everyone else is in the same boat. And it’s harder to become not poor. Reduced class mobility, more entrenched aristocratic wealth over there. They tax labor like crazy but barely touch capital generated income.

Wrong. You can get sick and not become homeless or die. You can retire! Your kids can go to university and not have to put 50% of their paycheck into repaying their debt. You can still have days off. Their lower class lifestyle is a middle class lifestyle here without the constant undercurrent of terror that medical debt will take you down or your kids will get shot at school.

Wild you think everyone in the US is just one medical crisis away from homelessness and doesn’t take vacation. This mantra is often repeated and people like you believe it. It’s funny when my European friends find out how much vacation I get and my friends too (somewhere between 4-6 weeks) because it really disappoints them.

How would our country be so powerful and wealthy if no one ever took vacation and getting sick meant you became homeless? That doesn’t make any sense.

Everyone? No. But the USA is the only country in the world where medical bankruptsy exists. So clearly not that rare.

63% of Americans don't even have $500 to pay an emergency expense.

Actually, 99% of Americans don't have $2 to buy a candy bar (we can all make up stats).

Google is your friend if you weren't so lazy.

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/08/31/63percent-of-workers-are-unable-to-pay-a-500-emergency-expense-survey.html

Actually was hoping some absurd link would be found that just goes beyond what any normal intuition would provide. Here would be a different one that at least passes the smell test:

https://www.bankrate.com/banking/savings/emergency-savings-report/#no-emergency-savings

Technically, you could arrive at your "63%" number if the majority of workers earned less than $200/month, but, again, intuition suggests that is not reasonable.

Your crap intuition isn't actually a substitute for actual surveys by reputable sources. It's safe to say that anyone earning $200/month would be homeless with absolutely zero savings.

Your link doesn't paint a rosy picture for the average american either, so not sure at all what point you think you are making.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You obviously feel strongly about what you wrote. Your comment is practically hysterical. Despite your claims, American women are having more babies than Europeans. It’s not a tiny wealthy minority.

My guess is you live in a blue urban liberal bubble and don’t get out there often. Your beliefs are shaped by wealthy liberals and the poor minorities living around you.

I'm not PP, but are you disputing that the U.S. has the highest infant mortality rate in the developed world?

I think if you remove one minority group with terrible health, high obesity rates, low education and high out of wedlock births then the situation in America looks very different.
It’s tragic but simply doesn’t apply to your average white woman who graduated college and got married before having kids.

What you fail to understand is that Europe also has poor immigrants. Chile has poor people. There are minority groups in Europe with terrible health and low education and out of wedlock births — as you so delicately put it.

And yet, the United States is the only developed country with a maternal and infant mortality rate that Latvia would be ashamed of.

There is no denying that the United States has horrible outcomes for women and babies. But sure keep putting your head in the sand.

The CIA estimates the US' infant mortality rate at a 5.1 per 1000 vs Latvia's 4.7. Meanwhile Afghanistan is a 101.3. You're stretching.

Stop and think about what you’re saying:

You’re celebrating because the US has better health outcomes than Afghanistan! And you’re accepting that the United States is worse than Latvia. But maybe if we work hard we can finally meet Latvia’s numbers.

THAT is winning?

I'm suggesting that you're pretending the US is so awful when it's very slightly worse than major European countries, which largely have socialized medicine. The US doesn't have horrible outcomes, it has slightly worse outcomes, largely due to a single population group that has an outsized impact on the numbers.

Hold up. The US is not slightly worse than major European countries. The US is slightly worse than one of the poorest countries in the Europe — Latvia.

The US has completely fallen behind major European countries like the UK, Germany and France. And all of those countries have poor African migrants, war refugees and asylum seekers included in their data.

The poorest country in Europe is Moldova, not Latvia. (taking Ukraine out for obvious reasons)

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/poorest-countries-in-europe#title

You are correct! The United States has better health outcomes that the poorest country in Europe.

USA! USA! USA! USA!

Doesn’t it make you proud? Better than Moldova and Afghanistan! Worse than Latvia, Estonia, Ireland, Portugal, Spain, France, (the list is too long to type out but you get the idea.)

Mind sharing your source for overall healthcare ranking by country?

https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/fund-reports/2024/sep/mirror-mirror-2024?utm_adgroup=&device=c&creative=&matchtype=&placement=&adposition=&network=x&utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=&utm_term=&hsa_acc=1924159231&hsa_cam=22354259180&hsa_grp=&hsa_ad=&hsa_src=x&hsa_tgt=&hsa_kw=&hsa_mt=&hsa_net=adwords&hsa_ver=3&gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=22357980901&gbraid=0AAAAAD-XyuPyQbAhci3RaOQs1fNeGXT75&gclid=CjwKCAjw7_DEBhAeEiwAWKiCC0xlXyk7Ugp6OYGxLjE99ofkBwNAfgytUXLpJn9iUWMVcXmGpuQy8xoCRpkQAvD_BwE


https://www.internationalinsurance.com/health/systems/?srsltid=AfmBOorNfDcnIcFyW2Ybwyt34QVRBJIgahXlPON_yLVX5uFumEvxvdbY

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sigh. Repeating for the people who think they are discovering something novel. The US is a terrible place to be poor but ok if you are rich (though that is getting to be debatable). Europe is a good place to be if you are middle income or poor. The rich try to shelter.

Europe still sucks to be poor, it’s just that more people are poor so you don’t feel as bad because everyone else is in the same boat. And it’s harder to become not poor. Reduced class mobility, more entrenched aristocratic wealth over there. They tax labor like crazy but barely touch capital generated income.

Wrong. You can get sick and not become homeless or die. You can retire! Your kids can go to university and not have to put 50% of their paycheck into repaying their debt. You can still have days off. Their lower class lifestyle is a middle class lifestyle here without the constant undercurrent of terror that medical debt will take you down or your kids will get shot at school.

Wild you think everyone in the US is just one medical crisis away from homelessness and doesn’t take vacation. This mantra is often repeated and people like you believe it. It’s funny when my European friends find out how much vacation I get and my friends too (somewhere between 4-6 weeks) because it really disappoints them.

How would our country be so powerful and wealthy if no one ever took vacation and getting sick meant you became homeless? That doesn’t make any sense.

Everyone? No. But the USA is the only country in the world where medical bankruptsy exists. So clearly not that rare.

63% of Americans don't even have $500 to pay an emergency expense.

Actually, 99% of Americans don't have $2 to buy a candy bar (we can all make up stats).

Google is your friend if you weren't so lazy.

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/08/31/63percent-of-workers-are-unable-to-pay-a-500-emergency-expense-survey.html

Actually was hoping some absurd link would be found that just goes beyond what any normal intuition would provide. Here would be a different one that at least passes the smell test:

https://www.bankrate.com/banking/savings/emergency-savings-report/#no-emergency-savings

Technically, you could arrive at your "63%" number if the majority of workers earned less than $200/month, but, again, intuition suggests that is not reasonable.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sigh. Repeating for the people who think they are discovering something novel. The US is a terrible place to be poor but ok if you are rich (though that is getting to be debatable). Europe is a good place to be if you are middle income or poor. The rich try to shelter.

Europe still sucks to be poor, it’s just that more people are poor so you don’t feel as bad because everyone else is in the same boat. And it’s harder to become not poor. Reduced class mobility, more entrenched aristocratic wealth over there. They tax labor like crazy but barely touch capital generated income.

Wrong. You can get sick and not become homeless or die. You can retire! Your kids can go to university and not have to put 50% of their paycheck into repaying their debt. You can still have days off. Their lower class lifestyle is a middle class lifestyle here without the constant undercurrent of terror that medical debt will take you down or your kids will get shot at school.

Wild you think everyone in the US is just one medical crisis away from homelessness and doesn’t take vacation. This mantra is often repeated and people like you believe it. It’s funny when my European friends find out how much vacation I get and my friends too (somewhere between 4-6 weeks) because it really disappoints them.

How would our country be so powerful and wealthy if no one ever took vacation and getting sick meant you became homeless? That doesn’t make any sense.

Everyone? No. But the USA is the only country in the world where medical bankruptsy exists. So clearly not that rare.

63% of Americans don't even have $500 to pay an emergency expense.

Actually, 99% of Americans don't have $2 to buy a candy bar (we can all make up stats).

Google is your friend if you weren't so lazy.

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/08/31/63percent-of-workers-are-unable-to-pay-a-500-emergency-expense-survey.html

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You obviously feel strongly about what you wrote. Your comment is practically hysterical. Despite your claims, American women are having more babies than Europeans. It’s not a tiny wealthy minority.

My guess is you live in a blue urban liberal bubble and don’t get out there often. Your beliefs are shaped by wealthy liberals and the poor minorities living around you.

I'm not PP, but are you disputing that the U.S. has the highest infant mortality rate in the developed world?

I think if you remove one minority group with terrible health, high obesity rates, low education and high out of wedlock births then the situation in America looks very different.
It’s tragic but simply doesn’t apply to your average white woman who graduated college and got married before having kids.

What you fail to understand is that Europe also has poor immigrants. Chile has poor people. There are minority groups in Europe with terrible health and low education and out of wedlock births — as you so delicately put it.

And yet, the United States is the only developed country with a maternal and infant mortality rate that Latvia would be ashamed of.

There is no denying that the United States has horrible outcomes for women and babies. But sure keep putting your head in the sand.

The CIA estimates the US' infant mortality rate at a 5.1 per 1000 vs Latvia's 4.7. Meanwhile Afghanistan is a 101.3. You're stretching.

Stop and think about what you’re saying:

You’re celebrating because the US has better health outcomes than Afghanistan! And you’re accepting that the United States is worse than Latvia. But maybe if we work hard we can finally meet Latvia’s numbers.

THAT is winning?

I'm suggesting that you're pretending the US is so awful when it's very slightly worse than major European countries, which largely have socialized medicine. The US doesn't have horrible outcomes, it has slightly worse outcomes, largely due to a single population group that has an outsized impact on the numbers.

Hold up. The US is not slightly worse than major European countries. The US is slightly worse than one of the poorest countries in the Europe — Latvia.

The US has completely fallen behind major European countries like the UK, Germany and France. And all of those countries have poor African migrants, war refugees and asylum seekers included in their data.

The poorest country in Europe is Moldova, not Latvia. (taking Ukraine out for obvious reasons)

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/poorest-countries-in-europe#title

You are correct! The United States has better health outcomes that the poorest country in Europe.

USA! USA! USA! USA!

Doesn’t it make you proud? Better than Moldova and Afghanistan! Worse than Latvia, Estonia, Ireland, Portugal, Spain, France, (the list is too long to type out but you get the idea.)

Mind sharing your source for overall healthcare ranking by country?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sigh. Repeating for the people who think they are discovering something novel. The US is a terrible place to be poor but ok if you are rich (though that is getting to be debatable). Europe is a good place to be if you are middle income or poor. The rich try to shelter.

Europe still sucks to be poor, it’s just that more people are poor so you don’t feel as bad because everyone else is in the same boat. And it’s harder to become not poor. Reduced class mobility, more entrenched aristocratic wealth over there. They tax labor like crazy but barely touch capital generated income.

Wrong. You can get sick and not become homeless or die. You can retire! Your kids can go to university and not have to put 50% of their paycheck into repaying their debt. You can still have days off. Their lower class lifestyle is a middle class lifestyle here without the constant undercurrent of terror that medical debt will take you down or your kids will get shot at school.

Wild you think everyone in the US is just one medical crisis away from homelessness and doesn’t take vacation. This mantra is often repeated and people like you believe it. It’s funny when my European friends find out how much vacation I get and my friends too (somewhere between 4-6 weeks) because it really disappoints them.

How would our country be so powerful and wealthy if no one ever took vacation and getting sick meant you became homeless? That doesn’t make any sense.

Everyone? No. But the USA is the only country in the world where medical bankruptsy exists. So clearly not that rare.

63% of Americans don't even have $500 to pay an emergency expense.

Actually, 99% of Americans don't have $2 to buy a candy bar (we can all make up stats).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nobody is forced into mediocre existence. People just don't care about material things like they do here.They don't produce as much waste a much as Americans. Perhaps this is your measure of good life. Add $10k of crap Americans buy a year, and health, property taxes, education to that $50k.
It never crossed my mind in EU that I will be homeless or can't afford to go to the doctors. If this were in the back of my mind all the time, sure I want to become well off. This is not a worry in EU.
The ones who have the drive, do get rich. Look at the unicorns per capita for Estonia. The education level for the poor is so much better than in US (see Pisa 2022). If any, the poor are forced and stay in poverty in US because of their education level.
Don't confuse not wanting to be uber rich with being held back. Europeans can invest in the markets/real estate just like anyone else. It's just not as important as it is here.
It actually seems more important to Eastern Europeans as we remember not being able to do so. But our kids are getting 'soft' as the need for extra things or money is not there. Experiences yes, but not things. They definitely travel more than people in US.
I'm from EE, but living here. I talk about money and the need to get rich more than my friends back at home. They need me to shut up and just enjoy the party.
They have access to American stock market and their own markets. They have the 20 euros a day to throw into it to retire early. They'd rather enjoy it, because they already live as if they are semi-retired.

I was shocked at the luxury stores in the Amsterdam airport. Europeans are clearly highly materialistic.. I’ve never seen Gucci, Louis Vuitton, Baccarat, and Hermes etc. stores in any American airports.

europeans tend to spend on quality products (if they can afford it), but quality over quantity. Same for clothing

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nobody is forced into mediocre existence. People just don't care about material things like they do here.They don't produce as much waste a much as Americans. Perhaps this is your measure of good life. Add $10k of crap Americans buy a year, and health, property taxes, education to that $50k.
It never crossed my mind in EU that I will be homeless or can't afford to go to the doctors. If this were in the back of my mind all the time, sure I want to become well off. This is not a worry in EU.
The ones who have the drive, do get rich. Look at the unicorns per capita for Estonia. The education level for the poor is so much better than in US (see Pisa 2022). If any, the poor are forced and stay in poverty in US because of their education level.
Don't confuse not wanting to be uber rich with being held back. Europeans can invest in the markets/real estate just like anyone else. It's just not as important as it is here.
It actually seems more important to Eastern Europeans as we remember not being able to do so. But our kids are getting 'soft' as the need for extra things or money is not there. Experiences yes, but not things. They definitely travel more than people in US.
I'm from EE, but living here. I talk about money and the need to get rich more than my friends back at home. They need me to shut up and just enjoy the party.
They have access to American stock market and their own markets. They have the 20 euros a day to throw into it to retire early. They'd rather enjoy it, because they already live as if they are semi-retired.

I was shocked at the luxury stores in the Amsterdam airport. Europeans are clearly highly materialistic.. I’ve never seen Gucci, Louis Vuitton, Baccarat, and Hermes etc. stores in any American airports.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nobody is forced into mediocre existence. People just don't care about material things like they do here.They don't produce as much waste a much as Americans. Perhaps this is your measure of good life. Add $10k of crap Americans buy a year, and health, property taxes, education to that $50k.
It never crossed my mind in EU that I will be homeless or can't afford to go to the doctors. If this were in the back of my mind all the time, sure I want to become well off. This is not a worry in EU.
The ones who have the drive, do get rich. Look at the unicorns per capita for Estonia. The education level for the poor is so much better than in US (see Pisa 2022). If any, the poor are forced and stay in poverty in US because of their education level.
Don't confuse not wanting to be uber rich with being held back. Europeans can invest in the markets/real estate just like anyone else. It's just not as important as it is here.
It actually seems more important to Eastern Europeans as we remember not being able to do so. But our kids are getting 'soft' as the need for extra things or money is not there. Experiences yes, but not things. They definitely travel more than people in US.
I'm from EE, but living here. I talk about money and the need to get rich more than my friends back at home. They need me to shut up and just enjoy the party.
They have access to American stock market and their own markets. They have the 20 euros a day to throw into it to retire early. They'd rather enjoy it, because they already live as if they are semi-retired.

Europeans don't consume "10k of crap a year" because they can't afford to. It's that simple, they're not more altruistic.

There's plenty of homeless people. Not sure why you're implying this. Most if not all are people with clear substance or mental problems. Which is also true for homeless people in the US too... look around DC, these aren't people temporarily down on their luck. We also have plenty of Section 8 subsidized housing. We can make this a battle of stats, but I find it weird people are trying to place Europeans on some kind of higher moral plane, which makes no sense to anyone who's actually lived in Europe and knows 1) they're just as materialistic, 2) they make less money, 3) they have plenty of issues of their own, 4) each country is different so what works in Austria doesn't mean it's the case in the UK (which has massive housing shortages and affordability issues, for example, far outstripping the US).

This really isn’t true. A good friend is a principal at a PE group in Germany that owns consumer products companies. He makes millions.

He commented to me that it’s very odd analyzing acquisitions in the US because the average person buys two or three of something when the average European will own only one no matter their income. His company specializes in high end consumer products, so it’s not looking at super mass market.

As an example, at one point they owned (maybe still do) one of the high end European stroller companies. The average European that can afford it, owns one of these (including himself…and absent having twins), while the average for an American was like 2.5. Again, they account for number of kids, twins etc…this is just Americans having a different consumer view on items.

This guys could afford to buy as much crap as he wants, but he says it’s a huge cultural difference in consumerism. He only owns one car even though he could own 10 if he wanted…but he lives in Frankfurt and has no need for more than one.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sigh. Repeating for the people who think they are discovering something novel. The US is a terrible place to be poor but ok if you are rich (though that is getting to be debatable). Europe is a good place to be if you are middle income or poor. The rich try to shelter.

Europe still sucks to be poor, it’s just that more people are poor so you don’t feel as bad because everyone else is in the same boat. And it’s harder to become not poor. Reduced class mobility, more entrenched aristocratic wealth over there. They tax labor like crazy but barely touch capital generated income.

Wrong. You can get sick and not become homeless or die. You can retire! Your kids can go to university and not have to put 50% of their paycheck into repaying their debt. You can still have days off. Their lower class lifestyle is a middle class lifestyle here without the constant undercurrent of terror that medical debt will take you down or your kids will get shot at school.

Wild you think everyone in the US is just one medical crisis away from homelessness and doesn’t take vacation. This mantra is often repeated and people like you believe it. It’s funny when my European friends find out how much vacation I get and my friends too (somewhere between 4-6 weeks) because it really disappoints them.

How would our country be so powerful and wealthy if no one ever took vacation and getting sick meant you became homeless? That doesn’t make any sense.

Everyone? No. But the USA is the only country in the world where medical bankruptsy exists. So clearly not that rare.

63% of Americans don't even have $500 to pay an emergency expense.

Actually, 99% of Americans don't have $2 to buy a candy bar (we can all make up stats).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sigh. Repeating for the people who think they are discovering something novel. The US is a terrible place to be poor but ok if you are rich (though that is getting to be debatable). Europe is a good place to be if you are middle income or poor. The rich try to shelter.

Europe still sucks to be poor, it’s just that more people are poor so you don’t feel as bad because everyone else is in the same boat. And it’s harder to become not poor. Reduced class mobility, more entrenched aristocratic wealth over there. They tax labor like crazy but barely touch capital generated income.

Wrong. You can get sick and not become homeless or die. You can retire! Your kids can go to university and not have to put 50% of their paycheck into repaying their debt. You can still have days off. Their lower class lifestyle is a middle class lifestyle here without the constant undercurrent of terror that medical debt will take you down or your kids will get shot at school.

Wild you think everyone in the US is just one medical crisis away from homelessness and doesn’t take vacation. This mantra is often repeated and people like you believe it. It’s funny when my European friends find out how much vacation I get and my friends too (somewhere between 4-6 weeks) because it really disappoints them.

How would our country be so powerful and wealthy if no one ever took vacation and getting sick meant you became homeless? That doesn’t make any sense.

Everyone? No. But the USA is the only country in the world where medical bankruptsy exists. So clearly not that rare.

63% of Americans don't even have $500 to pay an emergency expense.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You obviously feel strongly about what you wrote. Your comment is practically hysterical. Despite your claims, American women are having more babies than Europeans. It’s not a tiny wealthy minority.

My guess is you live in a blue urban liberal bubble and don’t get out there often. Your beliefs are shaped by wealthy liberals and the poor minorities living around you.

I'm not PP, but are you disputing that the U.S. has the highest infant mortality rate in the developed world?

I think if you remove one minority group with terrible health, high obesity rates, low education and high out of wedlock births then the situation in America looks very different.
It’s tragic but simply doesn’t apply to your average white woman who graduated college and got married before having kids.

What you fail to understand is that Europe also has poor immigrants. Chile has poor people. There are minority groups in Europe with terrible health and low education and out of wedlock births — as you so delicately put it.

And yet, the United States is the only developed country with a maternal and infant mortality rate that Latvia would be ashamed of.

There is no denying that the United States has horrible outcomes for women and babies. But sure keep putting your head in the sand.

The CIA estimates the US' infant mortality rate at a 5.1 per 1000 vs Latvia's 4.7. Meanwhile Afghanistan is a 101.3. You're stretching.

Stop and think about what you’re saying:

You’re celebrating because the US has better health outcomes than Afghanistan! And you’re accepting that the United States is worse than Latvia. But maybe if we work hard we can finally meet Latvia’s numbers.

THAT is winning?

I'm suggesting that you're pretending the US is so awful when it's very slightly worse than major European countries, which largely have socialized medicine. The US doesn't have horrible outcomes, it has slightly worse outcomes, largely due to a single population group that has an outsized impact on the numbers.

Hold up. The US is not slightly worse than major European countries. The US is slightly worse than one of the poorest countries in the Europe — Latvia.

The US has completely fallen behind major European countries like the UK, Germany and France. And all of those countries have poor African migrants, war refugees and asylum seekers included in their data.

The poorest country in Europe is Moldova, not Latvia. (taking Ukraine out for obvious reasons)

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/poorest-countries-in-europe#title

You are correct! The United States has better health outcomes that the poorest country in Europe.

USA! USA! USA! USA!

Doesn’t it make you proud? Better than Moldova and Afghanistan! Worse than Latvia, Estonia, Ireland, Portugal, Spain, France, (the list is too long to type out but you get the idea.)