That's the result of having a country with a smaller population. This gives citizens more even access to quality education and more even access to all kinds of opportunities.
Two New Moms Return to Work – One in Seattle, One in Stockholm
41–50 of 73 posts
Re: Two New Moms Return to Work – One in Seattle, One in Stockholm
#42Earlier quoted context omitted.
Americans sometimes joke that we live in a third world country. Many people here are dissatisfied with our family and healthcare policies, but no one seems to know how to actually fix it. Obamacare wasn't really a good solution. It was just the most politically viable. So you need more than a good plan for what works better. You also need to somehow get it accepted politically and that ends up being a sticking point.
How to fix it? Get involved with your local DSA chapter. Work on putting socialists on your local ballot and getting initiatives passed locally. Educate your friends and neighbors that 'socialist' policies are much broader than what has been demonized in the US since the red scare. Edit: Also, consider unionizing and bargaining for parental leave, healthcare, living wages, employee board representation, etc.
Except that isn't what we are talking about.
Re: Two New Moms Return to Work – One in Seattle, One in Stockholm
#43Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's why they are poor.
And yet consistently polled as being far happier. Turns out, when you have your basic needs cared for, can afford a house, to travel, the latest gadget ... well, the rest is just pretty pointless and doesn't buy you any additional happiness.
I agree but that's not what we were comparing here.
Re: Two New Moms Return to Work – One in Seattle, One in Stockholm
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm happy to accept your hypothesis that US citizens will come out on top for lifetime net income, but this article was about the human costs, like having children or not. What cost is forgoing having a family? Is that even calculated? My hypothesis is that it's not and all those people that simply weren't able to have a child because of work and healthcare costs are simply, and conveniently, ignored. It's ok though,…
The example was about the human costs sure, but very much closely tied to things related to income (job security, costs of child care, etc.). But let’s keep it to the family. Say between the age of 25 and 35 an American will be able to take home an extra 10k per year compared to a Swede. 100k an extra savings goes a long way to being able to take care of a new child or start a family. Not saying my hypothetical is ac…
Yes, let’s sacrifice the best child bearing years of our lives so that we can outcompete someone else who didn’t sacrifice the best child bearing years of their lives, and then increase the probability of spending a good portion of those savings on fertility treatments.
There can exist a balance between investing in one’s future versus enjoying the present. Nature doesn’t make each day equivalent to the next, and it’s crazy to see so many in the rat race in 20s and 30s so that they can “relax” in their 50s and 60s, because they’re competing against others willing to sacrifice their 20s and 30s.
Re: Two New Moms Return to Work – One in Seattle, One in Stockholm
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
If healthcare is any indicator I wouldn't be so sure. The US is consistently ranked at the bottom of most-efficient healthcare systems. You guys pay so much more per capita then any other nation on the planet [1]. So your taxes might be lower, but you still need to spend the money via other channels. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_hea...
Sure. How this manifests on an individual level though can be vastly different. Many employers offer highly subsidized health care as part of compensation. So that + higher salaries my guess is American’s still come out ahead.
If coming out ahead means having to put a 3 month old in daycare. And worrying about losing your job as you would also lose access to healthcare for the 3 month old.
And coming out ahead means pumping breastmilk, when it’s vastly inferior for the mother and much likelier to cause her to lose her milk supply.
Edit: the top 10% do very well in the US. The next 10% are hoping to become part of the top 10%. The bottom 80% don’t have a better option.
Re: Two New Moms Return to Work – One in Seattle, One in Stockholm
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
If it’s the same then...it’s the same. One is not better than the other. What country in Europe are you coming from and what makes you afraid of getting sick in the US?
The problem in USA is spiky unexpected cost of health care. Even with good insurance you never know when a random huge bill might come. Best avoid doctors unless you’re literally dying
I agree that paying for all health care with insurance leads to quite a bit of surprise billing and opaque pricing.
That being said, I’m not sure how often the average person deals with a bill that they are on the hook for beyond their deductible.
I’m still not sure what average medical costs per person over a lifetime are in the US compared to a Swedish person’s costs if you’re counting the proportion of their taxes that go to paying for national healthcare.
Edit: fixed a typo.
Re: Two New Moms Return to Work – One in Seattle, One in Stockholm
#47I'm a dad in Stockholm and currently in the first month of my parental leave which is expected to last at least more 6 months. My girlfriend just went back to work. Our daughter is 11 months old. I worked 75% from the time she was 6 months old until a month ago when I went for a 100% parental. My employer pays me a bonus on top of the state money as a perk. As far as I am concerned I can’t even imagine it being any o…
I'm Norwegian, and the Norwegian system is similar to the Swedish. I live in the UK, though, and so I've seen how expensive and inflexible UK policy, which is much closer to US is Vs. for my brother in Norway. I don't understand how people on more normal incomes do it in places like the UK and US.
Not sure it is so bad in the UK now that we have shared parental leave: I am a father of a recent newborn and I get to share 12 months off (well, 50 weeks since my wife must take at least the first 2 weeks after birth herself) with my wife for our newborn son.
We're getting approx £600 a month (so I guess 800-900USD depending on exchange rates today) of free money during the first year from the government (maternity allowance), before any payments from employers. Not amazing amounts of free money, but helps pay for some essentials and considering we are both earning fairly huge salaries I was surprised we were entitled to anything at all.
My employer is actually pretty generous and I as a partner I am getting several months off at full pay - most partners will get only 2 weeks off unless they make use of the shared parental leave, but the "major" employers all have similar generous parental leave perks from what I know.
Both my wife and I are legally gauranteed our jobs back when we return as far as I understand it, and from what I know we can request 80% time etc, or some other flexible arrangement and it must be considered fairly and allowed if feasible.
I have been really impressed with the NHS. Obviously everything ante-natal and post-partum was 100% free (including parenting classes in addition to the clinical stuff). What has really impressed me has been the free home visits by the midwives and nurses in the days and weeks after birth - an amazing service to just have midwives turn up 2 days afterwards and check that mother baby (and father!!!!!) are doing ok, then to continue getting home visits in the following weeks. Really impressed. We paid to get some extra private scans done earlier in the pregnancy for peace of mind etc, but otherwise the NHS has been excellent for this (and I don't usually sing it any praise for normal services)
As for childcare I don't know yet - from what I gather childcare is a cluster-fuck in the UK with oversubscription and fairly high costs (e.g. £100/day in London for 8am-8pm) outside of the public nurseries. There are some things available for this I think (childcare vouchers for 30hours a week of free childcare?) but I don't know anything about it.
So tl;Dr: 365 Vs 480 days off, 800USD+100% salary Vs 3700USD, potentially oversubscribed public or expensive private daycare Vs cheap public daycare.
Re: Two New Moms Return to Work – One in Seattle, One in Stockholm
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure. How this manifests on an individual level though can be vastly different. Many employers offer highly subsidized health care as part of compensation. So that + higher salaries my guess is American’s still come out ahead.
If coming out ahead means having to put a 3 month old in daycare. And worrying about losing your job as you would also lose access to healthcare for the 3 month old. And coming out ahead means pumping breastmilk, when it’s vastly inferior for the mother and much likelier to cause her to lose her milk supply. Edit: the top 10% do very well in the US. The next 10% are hoping to become part of the top 10%. The bottom 80…
Evidence please.
Re: Two New Moms Return to Work – One in Seattle, One in Stockholm
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
How to fix it? Get involved with your local DSA chapter. Work on putting socialists on your local ballot and getting initiatives passed locally. Educate your friends and neighbors that 'socialist' policies are much broader than what has been demonized in the US since the red scare. Edit: Also, consider unionizing and bargaining for parental leave, healthcare, living wages, employee board representation, etc.
Scandinavian countries are not socialist and using the word "socialist" (as Bernie does) to advocate for social-democratic policies is both inaccurate and unnecessarily polarizing.
Democratic socialists and social democrats agree on many policies, and both are largely absent from the political stage in the US.
Re: Two New Moms Return to Work – One in Seattle, One in Stockholm
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
If coming out ahead means having to put a 3 month old in daycare. And worrying about losing your job as you would also lose access to healthcare for the 3 month old. And coming out ahead means pumping breastmilk, when it’s vastly inferior for the mother and much likelier to cause her to lose her milk supply. Edit: the top 10% do very well in the US. The next 10% are hoping to become part of the top 10%. The bottom 80…
Evidence please.
Which claim? Federal law gives 3 months off from work (if employer has 50 or more employees). There’s like 8 states with 4.5 months off, and 6 weeks for dads. Also might be subject to minimum employer size.
And the vast, vast, majority of people don’t work for a high margin tech or finance company with generous leave benefits so I don’t see what the point is talking about them.
You’re either part of the group making passive income so you’re not worried about losing your income source, or you’re not.