Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If you were so ambitious, you would become self-employed or an entrepreneur. In that case you could work 24/7 if you wanted. So, I don't get your logic there...
Well, here we have another difference between Europe and the US.
Starting your own firm is much easier in the US. For instance, in Europe you'd need to save much more money to boot, as the state requires you to pay for pension system and health care system right from the start. Not to mention all that red tape. This is one of the reasons why nothing similar to Silicon Valley has ever emerged in Europe, despite high government incentives and subsidies. In fact, European Union and European countries spend a lot of their budgets to support innovation and they still lag behind American start-ups that get no support from the government.
Well, here we have another difference between Europe and the US.
Starting your own firm is much easier in the US. For instance, in Europe you'd need to save much more money to boot, as the state requires you to pay for pension system and health care system right from the start. Not to mention all that red tape. This is one of the reasons why nothing similar to Silicon Valley has ever emerged in Europe, despite high government incentives and subsidies. In fact, European Union and European countries spend a lot of their budgets to support innovation and they still lag behind American start-ups that get no support from the government.
Depends where in Europe. My OH started his own company last year, just filled out a few forms and got a loan and it was started, not much red tape or saving money required at all.
Depends where in Europe. My OH started his own company last year, just filled out a few forms and got a loan and it was started, not much red tape or saving money required at all.
So she/he possessed a house or something to support the loan. But someone like me (my whole wealth is a car because everything else I possess is legally my parents' or rented) would have it much more difficult to start a new business. For starters, providing I were about to hire someone, I would need much more money in Europe than in the US because of social taxes (obligatory pension fund, health care etc.).
In order to start a business you need a good idea, a business plan and some money, no matter where you do it.
The red tape depends a lot on the industry. Some require a lot more preparations than others.
I guess it is easier to get funding in the US because investors are greedier and thus more willing to risk something.
So she/he possessed a house or something to support the loan. But someone like me (my whole wealth is a car because everything else I possess is legally my parents' or rented) would have it much more difficult to start a new business. For starters, providing I were about to hire someone, I would need much more money in Europe than in the US because of social taxes (obligatory pension fund, health care etc.).
Yeah hiring someone is expensive though here at least there's a way to hire someone but they still work for themselves so they have to pay their own taxes.
Starting your own firm is much easier in the US. For instance, in Europe you'd need to save much more money to boot, as the state requires you to pay for pension system and health care system right from the start.
NO, you DON'T. It depends where in Europe. In Holland you can start a company at a cost of pretty much zero. Just register, pay some bucks, and voila, you own a company. It doesn't do anything yet, but hey, buying stuff costs money in the US as well.
US middle class : big houses, big SUVs, big fridges , big cooking ranges, a lot of personal room for the individual.
European middle class : smaller houses, smaller cars , fridges, house appliances, etc, more crowded space for each
I'm not comparing health , welfare systems, or the general organization of society here ( banking system, working conditions,environmental policies, public investment or the lack thereof, etc). The differences here are maybe in favor of Europe, it's another debate but there is one point in which the proponents of the grass is greener (in Europe) persuasion are wrong : the quality of life of the middle class is obviously higher in the USA and Canada, and it's crucial, because as everybody knows, the middle class is the backbone of developed societies..(some will answer that because of the crisis, the middle class is dwindling in America : rest assured it's the same in Europe , in spite of the so called "welfare state"!
Well, do bigger houses, big cars and bigger fridges translate into high quality of life? I always wonder about that question.
Is your life materially happier due to owning a big suburban house and a big SUV instead of a moderate sized apartment and passenger car? I am familiar with north american lifestyle as I live here. Everyone wants a big house. A family of 4 want a 2000-3000sf house with 4 bedroom and a bunch of rooms unused for 300 days of the year. Does the extra space provide better life?
And let's don't forget, all big house dwellers live in the suburbs and most have to commute to the city center to work. People in Manhattan or downtown Chicago/San Fran don't live in big houses. Here in Toronto, most 1 bedroom apartments are 500-700sf, and 2 bedrooms are 700-900sf, probably in line with Europe. Many don't drive cars, let alone SUVs. they don't have giant space for their unused junk but gain a much convenient lifestyle - short commute, less stress with traffic. I live in a 650sf condo and have a 10 minutes commute everyday, by foot. I have access to almost everything I need from food to entertainment to doctors within 20 minutes of walking. I prefer this life, than a 4 bedroom house in the middle of nowhere.
We simply can't compare lifestyle in Houston or Atlanta with London and Vienna. The former is cheap and large because these cities offer much much less in terms of urban amenities. You need to compare with New York, Boston, San Francisco, Toronto, Vancouver, Montreal etc, and with the exception of Montreal, none of these cities are cheap.
A middle class family can't afford living anywhere close to the city center of NYC, Boston, SF, Toronto and Vancouver, let me assure you. A townhouse in Manhattan, or Beacon Hill, or the Annex can easily exceed $1 million, and nobody making $50-100k can afford it. They may choose to have a 2000sf house with a backyard to boast, what they don't mention is the miserable 1.5 hours one way each day in commuting, the fact that there is literally nothing interesting to see or do within walking distance, or even 20 minutes driving distance. If they need to buy a pack of cookies, they need to drive. Need a haircut, drive 15 minutes. Watch a movie, drive to a plaza. Their kids are stuck to their large houses with no association with the outside world with very limited chances to interact with another human being other than a few neighbors.
Is the quality of life "obviously" higher in North America? I am not so sure. They may get bigger spaces and big cars, but unless these predominantly determine quality of life, which I highly doubt, they lose a lot of things urban dwellers enjoy. Imagine a family watches an opera/match on a Sat night. A suburban family needs to probably drive 40 minutes to downtown, spend $20 on parking, and another 40 minutes driving back. When everyone is bed, it is probably past midnight. It becomes such a stress that they simply avoid it instead stick with their suburbs buying things from the strip malls to stuff their empty house as the main means of entertainment.
Yes, apartments are of similar size in most of Europe, the more urban and interesting the environment, the smaller the apartment, simply because of the higher price per square meter, foot or whatever.
Big homes don't really make sense. They require more resources to build, heat, clean, maintain, etc. And when children grow up having their own rooms from an early age on, that doesn't exactly promote their social skills, like sharing, compromising, adapting...
A lot of delusionists here.
Take my case : I live in France and earn yearly 36000 € (about 40 000 $) - before taxes-that would make me a blue- collar worker in the US, here I'm middle class (maybe lower middle class, still, it's middle class, blue collar workers generally earn less). I own a one bedroom, 700 sqft apartment with a tiny garden . Now imagine what lower middle class Americans would say if they had to live in such conditions! it's true there are some perks here, like long , loooong vacations (6 weeks : you read well, 6 goddamn weeks!)it's a kind of trade-off : we pay you less, but you have more vacations. Fine. Personally, I don't complain, because it's my own culture, I've been so to say nurtured since cradle with this way of life, so I try to do the most of it. But I believe someone who doesnt lack ambition like me (and millions like me) would be happy to be at least given the choice-as I guess Americans would like to be given the choice too to have longer vacations and earn less- : you work more and earn more or you forge ahead with your measle pay and your 6 weeks vacations.. It's what former French President wanted to do. He failed in front of the rebellion of the French unions and the French Left now in power.
Whatever : do you still honestly believe in this "the grass is greener " thing? it ain't greener, on neither side of the Pond.
Actually, 36000 euros is more around of 49k US Dollars.
Also, you have to adjust to the hours paid vs vacation time, since the COST to the employer is higher.
Example:
People in Portugal usually keep comparing minimum wage of Portugal to other countries, and they use numbers that are not adjusted. (A minimum wage worker in Portugal earns 485 euros and this is the number they hear).
Yet, they only work 11 months, and receive 14 months of wages (the so called holiday subsidy and Christmas subsidy). Therefore, someone earning a minimum wage, in truth is earning 485 * 14 months / 11 months = 617 euros per month.
This is important since hoidays differ among countries.
Then we can find out, that to EMPLOY someone for minimum wage the employee needs to create much higher value in production.
Taxes is something people don't take into account!
Social Security in Portugal = 11% from the employee and 24% from the employer.
Meaning, unless a worker makes a production higher than 617 euros * 1.24 = 765 euros then it's not worth to employ.
The same goes for France.
If you earn 36000 euros GROSS, it's around 49k US Dollars.
If I remember correctly the employer has to pay 50-60% of the wage to Social Secuirty or something which I find just utterly ridiculous.
So, someone making 36000 euros in reality, because of taxes, is making 56000 euros or 75000 dollars.
Adjusting for the holiday period of (6 weeks in France?) we get a total ADJUSTED cost of 85000 dollars per year.
Now compare that, to the employer and employee social security contribution of 6% each.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
