How do American and Western European living standards compare?
The difference I see between Americans and Western Europeans in their living standards is their style of life. For instance, an American starts life out trying to get an education beyond what is available at high school (which is often not that great). This is a huge cost. For instance, it can cost you a million dollars to go to a good medical school to become a medical doctor in the USA. In Western Europe, either the fees are much lower or there are no fees at all.The next thing you want to do once you get out of college is to get a house or a property of some kind. In parts of urban Western Europe, there is a tradition of renting that is almost like ownership (you cannot be kicked out except for extreme renovation requirement for the building, non payment of rent, certain criminal activities or the owner needs to move back in). Families live in such rental properties for generations. That means no worrying about having to sell a property when you want to move on. No worry about changing interest rates or property prices or negative equity.That said, many people in Western Europe do buy their own properties. But they are doing so without be saddled with their college/education debt.Another feature is that Americans are always fearful about health insurance and therefore their job. Getting fired is a big deal for some bread-winners. In Western Europe, it can be a month or two without work and little risk as the health care is provided by the state.Americans also get very little vacation time. It is not unusual to get just 5 working days off for your first year in a job. This is terrible. People need to spend time with their families and to recharge their batteries. Add this to the fear that some Americans have of losing their job and therefore their family’s health insurance and you have a cycle of fear and worry.Yes, Europeans do pay more taxes and most of the time the corporations pay much more taxes than in the USA (yes corporate tax on profits in the USA is higher at 35% but no medium to large sized company pays that because of the many loop-holes created by lobbyists.)What this means is that Americans often drive bigger cars on cheaper petrol/gas and live in bigger houses (all on credit!) than Western Europeans but are biting their nails with worry all the while.
Why do people think that libertarian socialism is an oxymoron when they haven't even read about it?
While studying alternative economic systems under the College of Liberal Arts, in the department of Anthropology, I heard the term "Socialist Libertarian". It was defined as a person whose philosophy approved of more personal liberty than we currently have in the US, and less corporate or business liberty than we currently have in the US. Since all of the students taking that class were Americans, we could all identify with the restrictions on liberty that come from government, like marijuana. One of my professors once said that if everyone in the US owned at least some stock in every public corporation, and that private corporations were small with only a few owners, that would come closest to the real practice of socialism. His belief was that Corporatism, like we have in the US now, was the result of businesses having way too much control over markets, over their employees, and over their customers. I agree with him. (And with you.)
Why is the wealth gap a good thing?
If everyone had the same wealth, who would buy expensive things? The economy would collapse so the only things produced are those things that the average person can afford.You might think this is fine, that luxury benefits only the few, that we’d be better off for it. But consider the adoption cycle for technologyHere is Humphrey Bogart in the 1954 film Sabrina, where he plays an industrial magnate with a limousine with a radio phone and stock ticker. It illustrated his immense wealth, as well as how he was never away from work. This was probably the first time the average American realized that anything like this was even possible.Then consider the iconic Motorola DynaTAC as used in Wall Street (1987) by Gorden Gekko on the beach. This phone was available to the public. But adjusting for inflation cost the equivalent of $9000 today, So it was a luxury good, an icon that epitomized the filthy rich.And then, more recently, is an agent from bank in Cape Town's Khayelitsha township showing a customer how to use the mobile banking features of his phone.This is how technology diffuses through society. This is how we advance. The rich and their fancy gadgets subsidize the R&D of new technology. Those with extraordinary resources can afford to pay extraordinary amounts for having cutting edge technology. Their taste for expensive toys are what keeps the technologists in business and allow them to tinker with new designs and new approach, looking for something that will have mainstream appeal. Eventually, the successful ones hit upon methods of scaling up production, in way that leads to dramatically lower costs, where everyone benefits, even the global middle class.Without a wealth gap, none of this happens.See: If Steve Jobs really cared about humanity, people, and changing the world, why did he sell products at 80% profits? Sure, he brought a revolution, but how has the common man (the global middle class), who can't afford his products, benefited from it?
If the U.S. is richer than Saudi Arabia, how come Saudis live more lavishly than Americans?
This is my take on this, I will try to make it short, Saudi Arabia is ran by a family, by no means all the gulf states are like no else in the world, they are kingdoms, emirates, ran and governated by a single family, very very large family with loats of members.People care little who rules them as long as they live good lives, saudi arabia bolsters the local economy by elminating costs of living and basicly reducing them to 0, the oil is basicly free, health insurance, etc etc. Don’t get me wrong, everyone gets paid, but goverment finances all those things, why is the question.They are buying the support from the population, when now deceased Saudi king was in USA over health treatment few years ago, when he came back, he gifted citizens estimated 35 billion $ in all sort of stuff, some spent in new houses, cars, some used it to get rid of debts, etc.They hold a tight grip over the population and they are paying that, a lot.People are not only possible enemy of the king/heir, there are other family members who wish to control the number one oil producer state in enire world, just think of all the schemes behind going on even as I write this down.For instance, Qatar never had a peacefull power transfer, every ruler couped his own ruler, family schemes are very often in gulf states, having people support you helps alot.About wage gaps, it is same in every gulf country, Qatar is the only state in the world where domestic population is only 30% of the total pop.Every saudi sunni has a good life, the immigrants from Syria, India, Pakistan and African states have it bad, The Shia minority in eastern province also have it tough.Saudi arabia is also center of muslim religious tourism.But this year, budget defficit is aprox 30%, that is huge, every relevant economic institute in the world suggest saudi arabia will bankrupt in 6 years if oil prices remain at this low point, if they do not change things that is.I’m sure there are some grammar erros in here, once again english is not my mother language but I’m sure you can understeand what I wanted to say. Hope it helps.
Why Would Someone Buy A Real Rolex?
...it works at a deeper depth and rugged - keeps good time, and a ready made heirloom...