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

Do not compare EU salaries with the US

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 109 posts

Re: Do not compare EU salaries with the US

#81

Post by pidg »

raverbashing wrote: post #47
rayiner wrote: post #32

Whatever your politics, we should endeavor to stop giving oxygen to rhetoric that misstates easily verifiable facts: > I don't wanna make 250k while most people work three jobs About 5% of people work more than one job in the US: https://www.qualityinfo.org/-/it-takes-two-or-more-oregon-s-... In Germany, where the author is based, that figure is 3.5 million of a labor force of 45 million--over 7% https://www.dw.com/e…

You're technically correct, but are picking at straws Lies, damn lies and statistics. Even from your link: > Nearly 3 million people worked a "minijob" — meaning they earned €450 ($499) or less per month — on the side of a full-time job. So they have a "main job". How many of those in the US would just be unaccounted for? How big is the size of "under the table" jobs in the US? How easy is to qualify for Medicaid or…

Not to mention that Portugal has a nationalised healthcare system. I think I'd rather have 430 Eur + nationalised healthcare than $1260 and have to pay out of pocket (or deal with years of paperwork and insurance claims)

Re: Do not compare EU salaries with the US

#82

Post by 908B64B197 »

raverbashing wrote: post #49
digianarchist wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disagree on the cost of living point. London and Dublin are comparable to a lot of major US cities yet wages are much lower than these cities. Even Canada pays better than a lot of European cities when you factor in COL between say Toronto and London.

> Even Canada pays better than a lot of European cities when you factor in COL between say Toronto and London Doubt. The sinking CAD is an issue and COL (except for rents) is usually lower in Europe

I don't get why they don't simply use the US dollar at this point.

Re: Do not compare EU salaries with the US

#83

Post by 908B64B197 »

mkl95 wrote: post #39

A few things about the EU's (especially southern / eastern EU) job market: - There is a job shortage at the moment. This is not as acute in tech but the situation in tech is not good either. - Startups are chronically poor. There is little investment in startups and it's hard to secure it. If you are involved with a small startup it's likely it has existed for 5+ years and it has never had a round of more than €100k.…

> Startups are chronically poor. There is little investment in startups and it's hard to secure it. If you are involved with a small startup it's likely it has existed for 5+ years and it has never had a round of more than €100k.

Why not re-incorporate in SV?

Sounds like the VC ecosystem is simply broken. Where are Europeans investing then?

Re: Do not compare EU salaries with the US

#84

Post by scotty79 »

rayiner wrote: post #60
marcinzm wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US is really bad for the lower middle class in terms of social support. The poor can get passable benefits if they know how to apply but the middle class doesn't get that. As a note, there's other social issues with being poor in the US so I wouldn't recommend that either.

That's why we spent a bunch of money creating the ACA. If I was a single person here in Maryland making $24,000 per year, I could get a low-deductible health plan for $115/month (and a high-deductible one for a fraction of that). That's 5.75% of gross income, which is lower than the health-insurance tax a lower middle class person would pay in most European countries.

It's 1.25% in Poland. Technically 9% but you can deduct 7.75 of those 9 diectly out of the tax you owe.

It doesn't depend on income and gives you access to whatever hospitals can provide for everybody. My SO had six brain surgeries, two radiation treatments (one with cyber-knife) and Temodar chemo twice, and months of rehabilitation and hospital stay for that. She still died in the end but she got few years of healthy life more (and a year of some life) for the 1.25% of patchy mostly freelancing income. All she had to spend on top of that was maybe 100$ on minor medicaments.

Re: Do not compare EU salaries with the US

#85

Post by scrose »

kevindong wrote: post #58
scrose wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That seems pretty good to be honest. I’ve seen affordable housing listings in NYC for families of 1-2 with income limits topping out at 160K.

For example, this lottery [0] from early 2020 permits individuals with an income of $168,130 to qualify for the affordable unit. Affordable housing units developed during some of the late 2000s to early 2010s had very, very high income limits. Those housing programs have mostly been sunset at this point but units built under those programs retain the income bracket levels then in effect. http://web.archive.org/web/20…

Interesting, thanks for the history! I personally qualified for/lived in an affordable housing unit for a few years right after college. The income limit for a single person was 95k at the time

What I find interesting about many of these units is how the net effective rent is still typically 40x annual income for people in that bracket. If I hadn’t switched jobs and gotten some significant raises in the process, much of my salary would have still been going to housing in an ‘affordable’ unit.

Re: Do not compare EU salaries with the US

#86

Post by leereeves »

handelaar wrote: post #41
rayiner wrote: post #32

Whatever your politics, we should endeavor to stop giving oxygen to rhetoric that misstates easily verifiable facts: > I don't wanna make 250k while most people work three jobs About 5% of people work more than one job in the US: https://www.qualityinfo.org/-/it-takes-two-or-more-oregon-s-... In Germany, where the author is based, that figure is 3.5 million of a labor force of 45 million--over 7% https://www.dw.com/e…

Whatever your politics, we should endeavor to stop giving oxygen to rhetoric that misstates easily verifiable facts * Your comparison between Portugal's social security system and the US's includes only one source of support, but several are available. (Cost of housing is one.) Neglecting this easily-verifiable fact has the same misinformational outcome as lying. * "Medicaid has extremely low out-of-pocket costs" is…

> Your comparison between Portugal's social security system and the US's includes only one source of support, but several are available.

Several sources of support are available in the US as well, including food stamps, medicaid, and housing assistance.

Re: Do not compare EU salaries with the US

#87

Post by biggermike »

africanboy wrote: post #61
biggermike wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You still have to pay for it. You don't, actually. Medicaid is a de-facto single payer system (with the caveat that it's funded by both federal and state governments).

You can take for granted two things in life: - death - downvotes from Americans who do can't tolerate critics Medicaid is not "free" there are requirements, but assuming you qualify, there are hidden costs. Like for example. > The DRA created a five-year "look-back period." That means that any transfers without fair market value (gifts of any kind) made by the Medicaid applicant during the preceding five years are pe…

> Medicaid is not "free" there are requirements, but assuming you qualify, there are hidden costs. Like for example.

Totally different program (medicaid nursing home care) and not relevant because (1) it isn't medical care and (2) someone who has assets to draw down from is, by definition, not poor.

> If after 4 years they want to gift their children with a few thousand euros to pay, for example, for their marriage, they don't have to worry about it.

This isn't a realistic scenario (at least in theory). Medicaid nursing home eligibility is evaluated on a case by case basis and penalties are only incurred if the Medicaid applicant's intent is to defraud the government (i.e. you can't give away your money for the sole purpose of acquiring government benefits).

Re: Do not compare EU salaries with the US

#88

Post by leereeves »

pidg wrote: post #81
raverbashing wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're technically correct, but are picking at straws Lies, damn lies and statistics. Even from your link: > Nearly 3 million people worked a "minijob" — meaning they earned €450 ($499) or less per month — on the side of a full-time job. So they have a "main job". How many of those in the US would just be unaccounted for? How big is the size of "under the table" jobs in the US? How easy is to qualify for Medicaid or…

Not to mention that Portugal has a nationalised healthcare system. I think I'd rather have 430 Eur + nationalised healthcare than $1260 and have to pay out of pocket (or deal with years of paperwork and insurance claims)

Someone receiving $1260/month in disability income (and no other income) would also be eligible for the US's government healthcare system, Medicaid.

Re: Do not compare EU salaries with the US

#89

Post by africanboy »

biggermike wrote: post #87
africanboy wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can take for granted two things in life: - death - downvotes from Americans who do can't tolerate critics Medicaid is not "free" there are requirements, but assuming you qualify, there are hidden costs. Like for example. > The DRA created a five-year "look-back period." That means that any transfers without fair market value (gifts of any kind) made by the Medicaid applicant during the preceding five years are pe…

> Medicaid is not "free" there are requirements, but assuming you qualify, there are hidden costs. Like for example. Totally different program (medicaid nursing home care) and not relevant because (1) it isn't medical care and (2) someone who has assets to draw down from is, by definition, not poor. > If after 4 years they want to gift their children with a few thousand euros to pay, for example, for their marriage,…

> someone who has assets to draw down from is, by definition, not poor.

So it is a paid program

Payed by your poverty.

If you end up inheriting money from a distant uncle, you have to pay back.

> you can't give away your money for the sole purpose of acquiring government benefits

That's understandable.

And it's only necessary because the country with the highest spending per capita on healthcare cannot agree that the only reason why they don't create a free universal healthcare system is not because it is economically unfeasible (if it is for Italy, it is for USA, I usually argue that USA could do a much better job than us), but because they fear that without the incentive to become rich and distance yourself from State benefits, the system would collapse.

It's only a cultural problem: nobody wants to rely on the State providing base services because nobody wants to think of themselves as "being poor" because only poor people use public services.

When you come from countries where public figures, politicians, presidents, Queens and Kings and even the Pope go to public hospitals, you can't imagine why it should be a bad thing.

Re: Do not compare EU salaries with the US

#90

Post by rayiner »

scotty79 wrote: post #84
rayiner wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why we spent a bunch of money creating the ACA. If I was a single person here in Maryland making $24,000 per year, I could get a low-deductible health plan for $115/month (and a high-deductible one for a fraction of that). That's 5.75% of gross income, which is lower than the health-insurance tax a lower middle class person would pay in most European countries.

It's 1.25% in Poland. Technically 9% but you can deduct 7.75 of those 9 diectly out of the tax you owe. It doesn't depend on income and gives you access to whatever hospitals can provide for everybody. My SO had six brain surgeries, two radiation treatments (one with cyber-knife) and Temodar chemo twice, and months of rehabilitation and hospital stay for that. She still died in the end but she got few years of health…

> It's 1.25% in Poland. Technically 9% but you can deduct 7.75 of those 9 diectly out of the tax you owe.

It’s 9%. That’s the money that goes into the health insurance system. You can’t run a universal health insurance system with a 1.25% tax.

If you can take a deduction on your personal income tax for what you pay in health tax, then you have to compare those personal income tax rates as well. The proper way to do this is to look at the tax wedge: http://www.oecd.org/tax/tax-policy/taxing-wages-poland.pdf

http://www.oecd.org/tax/tax-policy/taxing-wages-united-state...

The tax wedge for an average single worker Poland is 36%, right at the OECD average. For the US it’s 29.8%. The Poland number includes health insurance, and the US number doesn’t. For workers who have to purchase an ACA plan, the effective tax rate probably works out to the same number.

But 70% of US workers get health insurance from their employer, which is a benefit on top of their income (so it’s not factored into the OECD tax wedge data).

Post reply on HN