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.
I must say this is one of the dumbest posts I have read in a very long time.
No, wealth is not the best indicator for living standards. Supposedly according to your index you are three times better off in Italy than in Germany. Also I find it interesting how some countries vanished from the list. Qatar, Kuwait, UAE, Cyprus is included, but Portugal, Poland, and Greece isn't. In fact I can't even find Denmark. Still you ate this "study" raw.
Now let's be honest. You were actually looking for something better, such as incomes. But since incomes all show US to be in the top, then you couldn't use that. Hence, you noticed wealth. As it fitted your interest, it became the factor for living standards.
I think we rather should look at income.
This is average disposable income adjusted for costs
1 United States 42,050
2 Ireland 41,170
3 Luxembourg 37,997
4 Switzerland 35,471
5 Australia 34,952
6 United Kingdom 33,513
7 Canada 32,662
8 Norway 32,620
9 South Korea 31,051
10 Netherlands 29,269
11 Austria 29,008
12 Sweden 28,301
13 Denmark 27,974
14 Japan 27,763
15 France 27,452
16 Spain 26,856
17 Finland 25,747
18 Belgium 25,642
19 Israel 24,225
20 Germany 24,174
21 Italy 23,194
22 Greece 21,352
23 Portugal 17,170
24 Czech Republic 15,115
25 Slovakia 14,701
26 Poland 14,390
27 Estonia 13,737
28 Hungary 12,843
Not wanting to pay dues to an organization one does not belong to is freeloading? LMFAO
Freeloading is forcing non-members to pay dues to a union. It's actually not freeloading. It's theft.
P.S. Showing up to work and doing a job and getting paid for it is in no way freeloading. It's called work. Only a union moron would call a person wanting to work a freeloader.
My God, how many times do you have to be told that it's a fact that unions don't operate for free? A billion times!! If you don't want to belong to a unionized workplace and enjoy its services, then stay the hell out of it. Other people would like to join a unionized work force if they could find one. A person wanting to accept the advantages of a unionized workplace free of charge is without the slightest doubt a freeloader, whether you are able to accept it as true, or not. Since you have never been a union member before, I can better understand where your ignorance about unions come from now.
From 1865-1890 wages in manufacturing rose 50% and another 34% from 1891-1914.
This was when less than 3% of the workforce was unionized and they had no special legal status like they do now. There were no minimum wage laws or other workplace protections. And millions were leaving heavily unionized Europe for non-union United States. Child labor was disappearing and work hours decreased from about 70 week to a little over 40.
You'll also notice world migration patterns show people always move from heavily unionized areas to non-union areas. Only exception was a decade or two in Detroit. If unions did anything to help workers these patterns would be the exact opposite.
Most people like you deal with these facts by ignoring it.
All numbers adjusted for inflation and can be found in U.S. Census records.
And anyone says that we would be making less money if it weren't for unions has to brainwashed or ignorant because all of history shows they are wrong.
And I'm poorly informed? lols.
And who said I hate unions? Stop making stuff up about me. I don't hate unions, I think they are worthless and hurt everyone involved. Doesn't mean I hate them.
Just to what depths do you have to go to get your anti-union propaganda?
Disposable income adjusted only for cost isn't a good measure either. It assumes that your neccessary expenses are the same from country to country.
When you look at the disposable incomes of countries like Norway and Luxembourg, stuff like healthcare, tuition fees, and so on, are already covered, and the disposable income is what you got left. That kindof works if you are comparing Luxembourg to Norway, but not so much with the US, which is exceptional in leaving a lot of those things to come out of peoples disposable income.
In exchange the US gets slightly lower taxes, which boosts the disposable income.
Everyone in the US doesn't have to cover every social benefit out-of-pocked, but enough do.
You want to force people to pay dues that are not a member of the union because you believe stealing is okay.
I see nothing wrong with a labor union wanting to exert its right, if it has it, to collect money from all workers in a unionized work force. At least, I can well grasp the fact that labor unions don't operate for free. You also adamantly refuse to accept the fact that labor unions must represent ALL workers, whether they are union members, or not. So unlike you, I can easily understand why unions would want money from all workers. Once again, if you want to be so wrong as to regard that as nothing but thievery, just remember no one said you had to be required to work at such a place.
Last edited by StillwaterTownie; 06-20-2013 at 04:23 AM..
You may as well ask why the whole American political system is skewed to the right, relative to most other nations.
Well, wouldn't you hate to be told by the boss in a state that doesn't have RIght to Work that "if you let a union in here, then you'll give that union the right to take money out of all your paychecks. It won't matter if you want to become a union member, or not." That line has often worked well in states that don't have right to work.
Disposable income adjusted only for cost isn't a good measure either. It assumes that your neccessary expenses are the same from country to country.
When you look at the disposable incomes of countries like Norway and Luxembourg, stuff like healthcare, tuition fees, and so on, are already covered, and the disposable income is what you got left. That kindof works if you are comparing Luxembourg to Norway, but not so much with the US, which is exceptional in leaving a lot of those things to come out of peoples disposable income.
In exchange the US gets slightly lower taxes, which boosts the disposable income.
Everyone in the US doesn't have to cover every social benefit out-of-pocked, but enough do.
No it doesn't, that's the point of utilizing purchasing power parity. There is an inherit assumption that people consume the same items across countries, which they don't. PPP also, as you stated, doesn't calculate social services, but transfer payments are included in the calculation.
Unions at one time brought about the existence of the middle class. A person could work hard and be paid well. Now most unions consist of people being paid well who do not work hard. Some conservatives see unions as socialist entities. They are not for the most part...Conservatives and now liberals who are wealthy don't like unions - because in their minds their servants should work for little or nothing. A living wage is slowly becoming a thing of the past as unions fail and the elite demand cheap labor.
Now most unions consist of people being paid well who do not work hard.
I bet your UPS man would strongly object to that notion.
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.
