Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

US takes 'richest nation on earth' crown from Switzerland

thelocal.ch

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 248 posts

Re: US takes 'richest nation on earth' crown from Switzerland

#71

Post by brownbat »

> But debts in the Alpine country are far higher than in the US...

Debts make this comparison difficult to make meaningful.

A few cases:

- Minimum wage earner barely scrapes by but does not seek any credit.

- Someone in a high cost of living area takes out a mortgage.

- A young neurosurgeon with fresh educational debt takes on a very high paying job.

- A billionaire borrows to finance a major real estate project

The net worth of these cases goes from highest to lowest. The "means" run in the opposite direction.

Sometimes indebtedness is poverty. Sometimes it's consumption smoothing. Sometimes it's a reasonable investment in a home or earning potential. Sometimes it's a dangerous source of leverage on a foolish bet.

I don't know how we disentangle all those when trying to measure or compare human welfare.

> the strength of the US dollar [also contributed]

If high Swiss property values and a strong US dollar conspire to to flip the #1 and #2 countries on this specific metric, I'm worried we're drifting into Spaceballs territory. What's all this mean? Possibly... absolutely nothing.

Re: US takes 'richest nation on earth' crown from Switzerland

#72

Post by illuminati1911 »

anigbrowl wrote: post #45
hartator wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually the 20% poorest in the US has it better than the average EU middle class. Ref: https://www.google.com/amp/s/fee.org/articles/the-poorest-20...

[flagged]

Do you have an argument against the information and details provided by the article or nothing but bitterness as it seem.

Re: US takes 'richest nation on earth' crown from Switzerland

#73

Post by rndgermandude »

why_only_15 wrote: post #27
CobrastanJorji wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is consumption defined as spending, though? If an apple costs $1 in the US but 25 cents in Europe, and a poor person in each place is provided a free apple by the government, did the poor person in the US have 4 times the consumption?

The way you adjust for the first effect is to adjust by Purchasing Power Parity, which they did.

Well, you try to adjust by Purchasing Power Parity. That works well for things where you can directly compare, like the price of an apple. However, it doesn't work so well for other goods and services, e.g. single payer health care vs health care costs in the US, because at best you're comparing apples to oranges.

On top of that, it does not account for things you may need in one nation but not in another. E.g. cars spring to mind. In the US you need a car in most places even the bigger cities, to get to work for example. In a lot of places in the EU you don't.

Re: US takes 'richest nation on earth' crown from Switzerland

#75

Post by Reason077 »

rayiner wrote: post #48
Reason077 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure it's an entirely fair way to define poverty. In many parts of Europe you can have a relatively high standard of living without consuming (or even owning) all that much. For example, you can have a high standard of living without owning a car (and all the 'consumption' that goes along with that), in cities that have good public transport, and a good infrastructure/environment for walking and cycling. In m…

But if consumption capacity was equal in Europe, that consumption would shift to something else, such as food and entertainment. People in New York City don’t consume less because they don’t own a car—they spend more money eating out, etc. And Europeans are hardly ascetics. It’s fair to assume that in both places, if people had more means to consume they would.

> "But if consumption capacity was equal in Europe, that consumption would shift to something else, such as food and entertainment."

Yes. But my point is that not all consumption can be considered equal in terms of the wellbeing and quality of life that it provides.

For example, if I was spending $5000 per year on car payments and fuel for my commute to work, that's a lot of 'consumption'. But it isn't something that makes me happy or feel fulfilled.

On the other hand, suppose I live in a city where I can walk, cycle, or ride a tram to work. My quality of life might be equal or better - yet I'm consuming $5000 less.

Re: US takes 'richest nation on earth' crown from Switzerland

#76

Post by tdhoot »

Cyph0n wrote: post #64
rayiner wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

France has much slower internet on average than the US: https://www.akamai.com/de/de/multimedia/documents/state-of-t... It’s almost as if it’s part of a pattern, where the top 75% in the US do better than France, while the stronger French safety net is better for the bottom 25%.

How did you get from "slower internet" to "there is a pattern"? If you scroll two comments up, you'll see the most crucial difference: free healthcare. Healthcare-related expenses can bankrupt an entire family in the US, even with great health insurance... Then there is free education, but let's leave that aside for now.

The lowest income people in the US also qualify for free healthcare through Medicaid. It covers ~20% of the US population (that number also includes those with disabilities).

Re: US takes 'richest nation on earth' crown from Switzerland

#77

Post by ineedasername »

brownbat wrote: post #71

> But debts in the Alpine country are far higher than in the US... Debts make this comparison difficult to make meaningful. A few cases: - Minimum wage earner barely scrapes by but does not seek any credit. - Someone in a high cost of living area takes out a mortgage. - A young neurosurgeon with fresh educational debt takes on a very high paying job. - A billionaire borrows to finance a major real estate project The…

> I don't know how we disentangle all those when trying to measure or compare human welfare.

I think they just aren't very good metrics for measuring or comparing human welfare. There might not be any single or small groups of metrics that do any better either. It's a nebulous and complex thing that doesn't have easy answers. Of course in the hierarchy of human needs basic financial security to secure food, shelter, etc is pretty important and a precursor for positive welfare, but not really a sufficient condition.

Re: US takes 'richest nation on earth' crown from Switzerland

#78

Post by negrit »

tdhoot wrote: post #76
Cyph0n wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How did you get from "slower internet" to "there is a pattern"? If you scroll two comments up, you'll see the most crucial difference: free healthcare. Healthcare-related expenses can bankrupt an entire family in the US, even with great health insurance... Then there is free education, but let's leave that aside for now.

The lowest income people in the US also qualify for free healthcare through Medicaid. It covers ~20% of the US population (that number also includes those with disabilities).

Everyone qualify for healthcare in France, you don't have to take part of a pissing contest about who is the poorest...

Re: US takes 'richest nation on earth' crown from Switzerland

#80

Post by rndgermandude »

hartator wrote: post #8
anxrn wrote: post #2

I suspect using the median net assets instead of the average would lead to vastly different results.

Actually the 20% poorest in the US has it better than the average EU middle class. Ref: https://www.google.com/amp/s/fee.org/articles/the-poorest-20...

That uses consumption data for 2010, coinciding with the year the EU financial crisis really hit and dominated the news, while the financial crisis in the US was already in downswing.
Post reply on HN