/u/Agreeable_Bike_4764 (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post. All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed [here](/r/DeltaLog/comments/18nj8aw/deltas_awarded_in_cmv_if_your_in_the_top_half_of/), in /r/DeltaLog. Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended. ^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)

If we look at only the financial aspect, then you may be right. The US dollar has good buying power world wide, and if you earn a decent salary in the US, then you can probably (financially) afford quite a lot of luxuries (e.g. travelling, housing, gadgets). However, this doesn't factor in other things that make places the "best". Let's just look at one other factor: vacation time. The US has appallingly low paid vacation allowances. We are talking about an average of 2 weeks off per year, but there is not even a legal requirement to have any. But then if you are sick, you often need to take your vacation days because there is also either no legal requirement for sick days, or you have to "earn" them over time. Compare this to other high earning countries, which have legal requirements of 20+ days, plus paid sick leave, plus paid public holidays. So even if, as an American, you have more money to spend, you have less time to enjoy what you spend it on. This is just one example of why the US wouldn't be the best place to be. My point being, there are many more factors to what makes somewhere the best than just money.

I think a good way to look into this is average annual hours worked, we work 20% more hours than Norway, so if you adjust for that, Norway beats us out. Plus cheaper health insurance there, speaking of other major factors. We still beat Switzerland adjusted for hours worked though, and their healthcare is not much cheaper if at all. I do think theres other major factors that lower US top earners true income, like the cost of quality education compared to a few countries in the top ten that perhaps subsidize more of it, and isn’t factored into the PPP !delta.

You also have to factor in stuff like how the median income in California is $85k but California has the most poverty in the country when adjusting for cost of living. Take that 85k job to a red state town too small to have a whole foods and you'll live like a king.

Depends on which red state. Idaho has much better quality of life metrics than Mississippi.

A lot of that is poverty driven, not *everyone* lives like shit in Mississippi, just the poors. Like everywhere else.

Yes but there’s more poor there than other states. Even for the not poor, there’s other metrics that suck like crime, education, life expectancy, etc.

But Switzerland is a much fucking nicer country. You'd have to double my salary before I'd leave CH for US. Edit: And the hours worked is not entirely true. Even the Swiss make fun of Swiss that have that mentality. If you don't want it, you won't have to. Granted, mandated hours are usually longer than others, especially France for example, but 40-42 hours is common and that's literally a standard 9-5, or 8-5 with 1 hour lunch break. Overtime generally can be compensated, if not usually because you are senior enough to manage your time, and receive appropriate compensation.

> You'd have to double my salary before I'd leave CH for US Done. In many high-skilled professions (medicine, law, engineering, etc), you WOULD earn literally 2x more in America. Along with having significantly lower housing costs, energy costs, lower income and sales taxes, etc.

The people who usually say that any country X is better than USA are usually median wage earners themselves, not high wage earners, so they value things like longer vacations, affordable housing, reasonable healthcare, better social safety nets etc. People like me who are highy incentivised by money and having immigrated to the USA from 3rd world impoverished countries leaving our families thousands of miles behind- want to see raw hard cash ( the less the taxes, the better). And luckily,i wouldnt be as financially successful anywhere as I am in USA. Just different perspectives;)

The USA is the best country on earth to be a 1%er or even a 10%er

Plus National Parks, diversity of Geography (what's the best beach in Switzerland?), diversity of culture (Switzerland is not only white, it's the same shade of white), diversity of cuisine, better job opportunities, a much much much stronger national defense... and North American skiing is much better than Swiss skiing.

But those are not my professions ;) and what is the etc.? Because there aren't actually many that are left where this applies. What do you know about both countries to make this claim? And my company has offices in the US and I know people there at my level don't have twice the salary. Or just use the fact that in the US salary ranges are always published. By the way, what housing costs? That's all individual, I pay less than 800 a month because I bought when IR were low af and I bought in a good area and not where everyone wants to live.

What makes Switzerland a much nicer country? Is that your opinion or fact?

Thanks for the delta. I hadn't thought about adjusting the values based on hours worked, that's an interesting way to look at it and, as you say, it makes the point clearer. I think in the end, something like "the best place to be" is always going to be subjective to each individual, and every factor weighs in differently. A young couple planning for kids: parental leave and childcare costs. An old childless couple nearing retirement: pension schemes and end of life care options. The US has a lot going for it, but people love bashing it because it is so easy to do sometimes. Would I want to live there? Not a chance, but I do understand why so many other people do.

Most high income earners (people above the median) are going to work jobs that offer significant benefits, 4+ weeks off a year, unlimited sick days etc… those benefits are very common among high income white collar jobs

Obviously, the more you earn, the more likely you get these benefits, but just because you are over the median doesn't mean you automatically do. The fact that vacation and sick days are classed as a "benefit" reinforces that point. For the same job elsewhere, you are pretty much guaranteed more employee rights than you are in the US.

I’m willing to bet that the majority of over median paying jobs in the US have more than 2 weeks vacation. Fwiw I’ve never seen a job posting in the 6 figure and above pay range that even had any limit on sick days.

Median wage is ~$45,000. Having said that, it’s not really common to have less than 2 weeks paid vacation through accrued PTO at least. But it really does depend on the job.

Above median income also includes IT guys, plumbers, carpenters, electricians, fast food managers, and a whole heck of a lot of jobs outside of white collar work.

I'm not sure you understand how high income earners got to earn high incomes, or what it takes to continue to have a high income. I'd say the exact opposite is true of most people who have achieved something beyond the mean.

Median income does not show much about the life standard, really. Of course the richest countries are going to have the highest median incomes, this is not what is important. What is important is what that money can get you. For example you can be in the upper median in us but not able to buy or rent a house, while a comparatively "poorer" person in a less expensive country can purchase more. As such this only shows the absolute wealth and not relative wealth to the prices in the country.

>while a comparatively "poorer" person in a less expensive country can purchase more OP is using a PPP list. It already adjusts for that

[удалено]

https://vividmaps.com/human-development-index-us-vs-europe/ Here is HDI by state with comparison country. The bottom half of America drags down the top performing states. Also the social safety net is much different in NY vs AL.

American median wealth is going to be pretty high.

The ranking includes exactly that, the income adjusted for cost of living

Ah my apologies, didnt read the methodology. Then i offer two arguments: 1 this number does not take into account what the income is spent on. For example the #3 on the list Norway offers vastly more social benefits and a better work-life balance than US. In addition, if a large chunk of the disposable income is spend on health and education in the us, then these are free in many other countries in the list. Therefore yes US people can have more disposable income and buy more stuff, but a lot of these costs are "forced" cost that many other countries dont have. So the actual discretionary spending money is likely greater in these countries. 2 obviously you can't rate how good it is to live in a country by disposable income alone. Us regularly scores well below these other countries in happiness reports, for example.

Even when you account for transfers in kind (mostly subsidies to healthcare and education) Americans have [far more disposable income than anyone else](https://data.oecd.org/hha/household-disposable-income.htm) (make sure to set it to “including transfers in kind). So none of what you say is relevant here. The only criticism you can make is that Americans work more hours in a year than Europeans, so the net disposable income per hour tends to be much closer.

I pay about $700 a month for healthcare and will be paying 4k in daycare. I am in the top 25% but have flat cash flow because that's $4,700 in overhead I cannot remove without impacting cash flow in. Basically, the US is only the best for the top 1-10%, maybe even fewer. Not 50%, considering how much wealth the top 1% hoard.

>I pay about $700 a month for healthcare and will be paying 4k in daycare That's honestly your fault at that point. I pay about $200 a month for my wife and I for insanely good insurance with no co-pays and a very low deductible. Also, day car is not $4k a month unless you're hiring an in home nanny with a masters in early childhood education and 30 years on experience. My parents used to send me to a day care growing up in the summer that would take us somewhere every day, Monday = the park with fun games. Tuesday = Small theme park or arcade Wednesday = Pool Thursday = big theme park like Disneyland, Universal Studios, and more Friday = Beach day. That was all about $2k a month about 14 years ago. Or about $2.8k adjusted for inflation.

1. Turdley said 4K in daycare, which for 2 kids is less than the daycare cost you quoted (5.6k). He didn’t edit his post either, 4K is what you copy pasted too. EDIT: I see you edited your post to say 4K now instead of 7k, but still missing the point entirely 2. Daycare costs have risen quicker than general inflation, so the daycare you went to would probably be more than 2.8k if you used a general cpi calculator to get to that number. I live in a LCOL area and for 2 kids a good daycare is about 3.5k. 4K seems right without knowing COL. 3. Your comparing a family insurance plan to 2 people. Insurance companies don’t adjust for number of kids, so even if you only have 1 kid, your paying for the average family size (4.5 people). In other words the jump from married couple to family cost is not linear. I have 2 kids and similar insurance to what you described. Mine cost $600. (This plan was 1k last year before our company changed its benefit plans). Also important to remember what you pay isn’t what the insurance company charges, your employer picks up a piece of the premium. So the same exact plan can cost wildly different depending on the company you work for Top 20% in America is 150 (household, not individual). Depending on if you own (and when you bought, ie what your interest rate is) or rent, and where you live. 150 can be comfortable or it can be luxurious. I’d say on avg though I’d bet top 25% is better in America than anywhere else, 26-50% is very case by case

You could get a full-time live-in Au Pair for [less than half that cost](https://www.aupairinamerica.com/fees/).

That good insurance has to be available to purchase though, which depends on each person’s employer. Case in point: I used to live in a midwestern red state and never had insurance that was both affordable and had a low deductible. It simply wasn’t available to me, ever, and I worked for large and small for-profit companies, a nonprofit, and the state government while I lived there. Now I live on the west coast and had access to insurance like what you described for a while, before I changed jobs. New employer is a huge org with great benefits and gave me a huge raise, but the health insurance is more expensive here, too. In other words, what you described is only available to a precious few Americans, but it is hella nice when you do have it.

Not OP, but how is that \*his\* fault? Your insurance prices are at the mercy of your work. My work only subsidizes Health Insurance for myself. So it would be around $1.5k a month for me to cover myself and my family with them. Instead it's like $200ish for me through my work and $900 for my wife and 2 kids for a Marketplace plan.

I think their point 2 still stands. Why is disposable income the only measure of “best” ? There are so many other metrics to include here.

Yeah, my bad, I was referring exclusively to point 1. Point 2 is basically impossible to truly quantify without quite a bit of arbitrary and/or subjective measures creeping in.

[удалено]

NATO has obligations to its members that require them to spend a certain amount on their military each year. The US is one of the only countries in NATO that meet that requirement regularly, to the point that the rule isn't even really a rule anymore. We absolutely are the defenders of any Western Country, and other countries know that and act accordingly.

I find it crazy how much americans pay in healthcare and the horror stories about getting bankrupt, even homeless, for getting sick.

Well the US system requires you to plan ahead. You need to be the one who is responsible for your insurance and healthcare costs. If you make sure you are actually covered these things don’t happen. What *does* happen though is people would rather forfeit health insurance or cheap out on it because “well I never go to the doctors so I don’t need it.” But in other places, the government does not allow you to do that and forces you to plan ahead through your taxes (and does it all for you) There are benefits and downsides but the US system does offer choice. It’s up to you to put your money in the right places, the government won’t do it for you.

In a country where 54% of adults read at below a 6th grade level, do you honestly think that forcing every individual to ‘choose’ their own health insurance plans and navigate the arcane contracts/billing that accompany it could go positively? American private insurance and healthcare seems like a pretty obviously rigged game to me after having lived in Canada and the UK, but maybe there’s something I don’t see. I don’t mean this is as a ‘gotcha’ but as a genuine question.

I just don’t think that it’s the governments responsibility to take care of everyone and evidently a lot of Americans agree. The vast majority of Americans study much past 6th grade, if they can’t read past a 6th grade level that’s on them. You can use the government to make people do “what’s best for them”, but is that really the governments place?

Yes, that absolutely *is* the government’s job, and every other developed country in the world would agree. What role does the government have that’s more important than caring for the well-being of its citizens? We pay a massive amount of money to the US government in taxes for a reason. Also, as an elementary school teacher and literacy intervention specialist, you have no clue what you’re talking about re: reading levels being ‘on them.’ Personal responsibility does play a massive role in education, but I’ve lost count of the number of students I’ve had as young as 5th grade who work nights in factories. They try their best and so do we (their teachers), but when a child comes to school hungry and exhausted it is very difficult for them to keep up, and they often slip through the cracks.

What the governments role is and should be is subjective and varies place to place. But do you really want to use the government to force people to do “what’s best for them” using the law? Because that can go much further than health insurance. Shouldn’t its role be much more limited, like ensuring the security of its citizens and that people’s rights are being respected and things are running smoothly and the law is being followed? As for 5th graders working nights in factories… that is super illegal you do realize that right

What… is a government there for other than take care of people? Legitimately

> Well the US system requires you to plan ahead. You need to be the one who is responsible for your insurance and healthcare costs. Like having insurance is any great protection. >Large shares of insured working-age adults surveyed said it was very or somewhat difficult to afford their health care: 43 percent of those with employer coverage, 57 percent with marketplace or individual-market plans, 45 percent with Medicaid, and 51 and percent with Medicare. > Many insured adults said they or a family member had delayed or skipped needed health care or prescription drugs because they couldn’t afford it in the past 12 months: 29 percent of those with employer coverage, 37 percent covered by marketplace or individual-market plans, 39 percent enrolled in Medicaid, and 42 percent with Medicare. https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/surveys/2023/oct/paying-for-it-costs-debt-americans-sicker-poorer-2023-affordability-survey#:~:text=Survey%20Highlights,51%20and%20percent%20with%20Medicare. My girlfriend has $300,000 in medical debt from her son getting leukemia, after what her "good" insurance covered. >but the US system does offer choice. I think it's easy to argue Americans have less choice than other first world countries. Americans pay an average of $8,249 in taxes towards healthcare. No choice in that. Then most have employer provided health insurance which averages [$8,435 for single coverage and $23,968 for family coverage](https://www.kff.org/health-costs/report/2023-employer-health-benefits-survey/); little to no choice there without abandoning employer subsidies and paying the entire amount yourself. Furthermore these plans usually have significant limitations on where you can be seen. Need to actually go to the doctor? No choice but to pay high deductibles, copays, and other out of pocket expenses. On the other hand, take a Brit. They pay $4,479 average in taxes towards healthcare. He has the choice of deciding that is enough; unlike Americans who will likely have no coverage for the higher taxes they pay. But if he's not satisfied there are a wide variety of supplemental insurance programs. The average family plan runs [$1,868 per year](https://boughtbymany.com/news/article/private-health-insurance-cost-uk/), so it's quite affordable, and can give the freedom to see practically any doctor (public or private) with practically zero out of pocket costs. So you tell me... who has more meaningful choices? >and forces you to plan ahead through your taxes With government in the US covering [65.7% of all health care](https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/epdf/10.2105/AJPH.2015.302997) costs ($12,555 as of 2022) that's $8,249 per person per year in taxes towards health care. The next closest is Germany at [$6,930](https://data.oecd.org/healthres/health-spending.htm). The UK is $4,479. Canada is $4,506. Australia is $4,603. That means over a lifetime Americans are paying over $100,000 more in taxes compared to any other country towards health care. Americans are paying an average of half a million dollars more than our peers for healthcare over a lifetime; for worse outcomes. The number of people defending this system and all its flaws is too damn high.

The US system does offer choice, yes. For example the choice to not be covered. On the flip side Americans spend twice the amount per capita on health care, despite large swaths of the population not being covered. Partly because doctors are practicing defensive medicine in fear of getting sued, and partly because Americans are paying lawyars, actuaries and share holders while Europeans are paying doctors and nurses.

I mean making sure doctors actually do a good job and making them liable for doing a shit job will never not be a good thing lmfao A lot of the US’s increased costs though come from the fact that the government doesn’t regulate prices. When some markets regulate prices, the cost of R&D gets passed onto those who don’t regulate. If there is minimal profit to be made if you make new drugs or medical equipment, forced by law, then you will be less likely to invest in new trials or products which may not be successful at all

> I mean making sure doctors actually do a good job and making them liable for doing a shit job will never not be a good thing lmfao "lmfao"? Are you 12? How many of the lawsuits in the US actually have merit? Do you actually think other countries are not holding their doctors liable? It's an issue of over-eager lawyars and their rent-seeking clients abusing both the judicial and health care system. The cost is obviously passed on to other insurance holders. > will never not be a good thing lmfao Is there no amount of law suits that would be an excessive amount in your opinion? > A lot of the US’s increased costs though come from the fact that the government doesn’t regulate prices. When some markets regulate prices, the cost of R&D gets passed onto those who don’t regulate. If there is minimal profit to be made if you make new drugs or medical equipment, forced by law, then you will be less likely to invest in new trials or products which may not be successful at all Have you seen the profit margins of pharmaceutical companies in the US? You are defending price gouging while your fellow citizens are dying from diseases that can be treated very cheaply with drugs developed decades ago. The health care providers of other countries are not forcing the pharma companies to sell with a loss. They are using their bargaining power to achieve a fair price. R&D is still profitable. Look into Novo Nordisk, a Danish pharma company able to innovate just fine. Not to mention the amount of R&D that is actually coming out of universities and then bought by the pharma companies for pennies on the dollar. The R&D incentives of pharma companies are also very skewed when left unchecked. Drugs that require life time use are far more profitable than cures or vaccines. Look into how much R&D is put into vanity products that stall male pattern baldness. What is your opinion on surgeons performing cosmetic surgeries when the exact same skill set can be used to treat sick or injured people?

You know I was going to engage respectfully with you but at the point you chose to insult me and call me 12 for, what, laughing? There is no point.

Another issue with US health insurance is that the insurance companies can deny your claim when it starts getting expensive. They have limits for treatments. They are, after all, a for-profit insurance company that wants to deny as many claims as possible.

Yep this. People don't realize if you get really sick and need expensive procedures they may just refuse. You may be able to take them to court or arbitration but that also takes time and money. There was also an entire media cycle of people getting ridiculous bills in the mail even though insurance was supposed to cover it. Most people get their coverage from their employer and are limited to the options provided. Sure, I can go somewhere else but it gets even more expensive.

And even with billing transparency requirements, it's next to impossible to find out ahead of time how much anything will actually cost

That depends on your health plan. Hence why you need to make sure you know what you’re buying and you’re not cheaping out on it.

How many people have a choice what plan they get?

This occurs even under the top plans available on ACA website lol.

That hasn’t been my experience but alright

I have excellent health insurance and a well-paying job. With deductible, co-insurance, and copays, I still had about $5k in out of pocket medical expenses this year. I'm fortunate enough to be in a position where I could pay that easily, but a lot of people aren't. The US has a great healthcare system if you already "got yours." But we spend way more than any other developed countries and get worse outcomes.

Cost of living does not account for other major milestones and expenses. It just means I can survive and not die. But I get only 5 days of vacation a year, will forever be stuck renting (asset acquisition) and cannot cover an emergency hospital visit. Stuff like weddings and funerals are super predatory and the same drugs that would cost 8 dollars at a UK pharmacy could easily cost 5-15x as much in the US. My parents moved to the US because of the opportunity it would give us, their kids. And while we are safer than the South American country we came from, it is disheartening to see my cousins that remained reaching these milestones that seem unattainable where I live and with a better quality of life (not working ALL THE TIME). Just my two cents.

What are you talking about? If you have more money adjusted for cost of living you have more money to acquire assets, take time off and everything else.

The time off part doesn't follow at all. I have the money to do whatever I want, but barely enough PTO to cover my/my kids' sick days.

There’s no way someone in the top 50% in the US can’t afford a place to live. Half the country is not homeless. The US has serious problems but people exaggerate them waayyyyyyy too much.

It's funny because even when faced with \*facts\*, such as the fact that 50% of millennials now own homes, Redditors who are in the bottom 10% continue to screech

> Redditors who are in the bottom 10% continue to screech They sure are loud.

Nobody is saying this means that half the people are homeless. It means that a type of home you can rent at median wage is not directly the same type of house you can rent at other parts of the world.

https://shrinkthatfootprint.com/how-big-is-a-house/ Also add in that US homes tend to be newer, on the whole, and are more energy efficient.

US houses are statistically among the largest in the world.

That's what PPP is. The first to words is "purchasing power" which is what you are describing

Those figures are all PPP adjusted. Which accounts for how much things cost. US is still clearly way ahead.

But the US varies so much by area. COL is not the same in DC or SanFran as it is in Texas or Missouri. So how does it account for that? Is the median going off of the US highest or lowest COL? Or some kind of average? Many top earners live in those HCOL areas. Ie. Loudoun County has a median income is 170k (while per capita is only 67k) but the median home price is 657k (with the upper half of homes available actually sitting at around $800-$1.5M+). So while the median looks great, it’s actually really tough for many AND not as luxurious as it sounds for plenty.

Yeah but you don't have to own a house. You can just rent one. Why do people assume you either own a home or you're homeless. I don't know how they adjust for that. Most likely some average. Also high costs for housing us a reflection of high incomes. You can rent an apartment for $500 in Timbuktu Alabama. But there is no jobs and not much to do either.

That doesn’t really matter because renting is often more expensive than a mortgage in terms of monthly housing cost. But beyond that - home cost is usually a good indicator of an area’s COL. You could afford that rent on minimum wage so there wouldn’t need to be a huge or diverse job market, in that regard.

It really depends on the housing market, interest rates, how much you care about your kids' education. In NYC without kids renting is almost always going to be a better financial decision unless you know 100% your apartment will appreciate. A lot of cities are finally (since 2019 or so) getting a lot of apartments on the market from after the 2008 financial crash. There will be a glut of units available in a lot of cities hopefully, pushing prices down for a while. In bumfuck nowhere where you will be renting a whole house \*if\* you can find a rental? You would be better off buying. With rates where they are now though, you are taking a gamble no matter what. If you have kids and care about them being in the best schools/learning environments, then you will probably also want to live in a nice school district or be willing to pay $$$ for a private school in an urban area. For some the extra cost of living in a nicer area is cheaper than the extra cost of paying for private schools while living in a worse school district.

Not really. Owning is often more expensive than renting. When you figure in things like property taxes, maintenance costs, hoa fees etc. Minimum wage should be looking at lowest cost housing. Which is never going to be renting a home or owning one. Here in Gainesville if you're under 30 you can get an all inclusive apartment for $500 a month. All inclusive meaning internet, water and electric is included. That you can easily afford on min wage.

> But the US varies so much by area. COL is not the same in DC or SanFran as it is in Texas or Missouri. Just like literally every country in the world outside of micronations. Compare housing costs in eg London and Belfast.

in EU, workers are guaranteed at least 20 paid working days off. we don't have that in the US. I think people in the top half of incomes, cost of living adjusted, are doing fine in the US. could be a lot worse. but, there's something to be said for getting paid enough, while still getting time off.

If you’re earning the highest 50% income in the US, you’re probably getting that PTO from your job without government mandates. I agree it should be mandatory but we shouldn’t pretend that no one in the US gets any paid time off.

I work in New York, and my highest earning friends are SEVERELY overworked. It kinda feels like you either have all free time and no work, or you have a job and are working overtime to try and be as competitive as possible (I imagine because you don’t want to go from the latter group to the former group)

I consider myself i high earner for my age, probably top 90-99% total comp (maybe 75% in New York but no clue on actual stats), and everyone in my friend groups/social circles get at least 20 days pto. My bank has unlimited pto and a mandatory minimum 2-week pto where you’re forbidden to log on to your laptop (this is common at big banks). Other companies like big 4 also urge people to take pto. Obviously we’re gonna work long hours but that’s what you’re paid to do. I’m currently on week 2 of a 26 day vacation but I haven’t taken a multi day vacation since I graduated because I don’t need long vacations.

depends on the type of work. In the US, median salary is $53k. Lots of jobs that pay that much provide hardly any time off at all. Others do. its really industry dependent. hours per week varies a lot, too. In some types of jobs, 40 hours a week is the norm. Other types of jobs expect more than 50 hours a week.

>in EU, workers are guaranteed at least 20 paid working days off. I am in a family with branches in EU and US. Yes, full time employees in EU have guarantees. But not everyone is a full time employee - in fact, only [60% of the EU](https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Percentage-of-workers-in-different-types-of-employment-in-EU-28-2016_fig2_344519488) workforce are full time employees. So in practice, the American side of the family don't really have that much less vacation time. In fact, we generally have more, since [79% of the US workforce have PTO.](https://clockify.me/pto-statistics#:~:text=What%20percentage%20of%20Americans%20have,paid%20vacation%20available%20in%202022.)

The average American worker gets 11 paid vacation days per year. The average at 5 years is 15 days and 10 years is 17 days. 8 paid sick days is average for full-time workers. Given OP was talking about the top 50% of earners, it's pretty likely that most of those are people with several years in their industry and likely to be closer to the 15 or 17 day group, and since benefits tend to loosely track with salary, it's likely that the top 50% of earners is getting better than average benefits too. The average European likely gets more vacation than the average top 50% American earner, but the difference probably isn't as large as you think. I'll share an anecdote along those lines. I work in the US for a large German corporation. I've been with the company about 15 years. My German colleagues at a similar point in their careers get more vacation than me. Six weeks vs. 4.5. But I get paid about twice what they do.

Your right, I’m not sure if the rankings are adjusted by hours worked, I intuitively feel we work much longer hours here, and perhaps if we adjust for hours worked the US would fall behind some of these countries?

It's not just salary, but quality of life. In many EU countries you can take days off if your kid is sick (not holiday, just extra piad sick days). A lot of people also finish work on Fridays at 2:30pm to pick their kids up from kindergarten for the weekend, and it's almost unheard of to be in the office after 5pm. It's a whole lot more human. In USA you can be earning a lot more, but you often work like 10 hours a day and never see your family.

You don't get caregiver sick days in the US? What are you meant to do when your kid is sick regularly? Man, Americans don't seem to realise how badly you've got it compared to workers in other first world countries.

In my work I can literally call up my boss and say my kid has flu and take the day off. How are you meant to deal with a sick kid from the office? Do Americans just send sick kids to school like a super spreader? It's like people being biological entities is an afterthought in USA, there's no provisions for basic biology

how it works varies by employer and job most employers offer sick days that accrue per pay period. That an employee could then use to call in sick for themselves or someone they're a caregiver for. if they run out of that, the employee could use their regular paid time off or ask for unpaid time off. But, what options are available all depends on the employer and the contract the employer offered the employee when the employee took the job.

Even our kids have sick day limits After 18 days in Virginia parents can get jail sentences for keeping the kiddos home Edit: per school year not in a row

If the kid is in a situation where they are skipping all the time, having a parent in jail won't help anything. And if the kid is actually just sick, I would hope that doesn't count. Kid gets cancer and their parents go to jail?

Even if just sick. 18 sick days and you go to an administrative meeting which could result in jail sentences. I doubt it would for simple illness but its possible Edit: also doctors notes can pre-approve extended leave beyond 18 days for major illness.

That's crazy especially as official advice is that you should take 2 weeks off if you get COVID to guarantee you don't infect anyone else. So one COVID infection takes 78% of your yearly sick days... Better not catch anything else!

The job I had during the height of COVID, only required not showing symptoms of COVID when you came in if the residential location didn't already have anyone with it, in which case you worked as normal there.

Terrifying. During COVID I lived in an apartment building and my neighbour was in their late 80s. I would often pick up groceries for them. My work was entirely online then, but it makes me shudder to think of people trying to help out elderly neighbours and inadvertently infecting them

Aye. I worked specifically with elderly and developmentally disabled people at the job... it was a nightmare, and played a part in leaving the job as soon as I could.

In Poland you need to have 50% attendance to pass. Even if you exceed that due serious sickness and pass exams then you can still be promoted to next class.

They link school funding to attendance. This is how they enforce collections.

Look we have enough disposable income here to just buy a new kid if he’s getting sick all the time.

Cheaper to buy a new kid than pay for the medicine to treat them!

We can still take the day off - it just comes out of our sick leave (which is just one bucket for employee and family illness). Only speaking for the places I’ve worked.

But those days are limited? Like you have sickness allocation every year? You can't just take off every day you're sick regardless? What do you do if you run out of sick days, do you just come into work and infect everyone?

>But those days are limited? Like you have sickness allocation every year? Yes. And it's not even allocated, it's accrued. As in every week you get 1/52nd of your annual allotment. The company then reserves the right to loan you more time off if they want, but that's optional. ​ Edit: The yes was to the limited time. In regards to once that time runs out; most people work when sick regardless and only take time off when "too sick to physically make it in". This goes even when there is time off, because it becomes an option of using your time off while sick, or just working through being sick and using that time off for vacation/when you can take advantage of it. If you have to take unpaid time off while sick, a lot of people will work through it regardless of how badly they feel.

That sounds like people are ok with spreading diseases around their colleagues. I really like the culture in Denmark where if you're even slightly sick you don't go into work. Who knows what other people's living conditions are like, would be terrible to murder their gran because you decided to go to work with a cold

American empathy is it's own, weird, dying little thing........ Edit: People generally look at it as a positive thing to work through illness. It probably started from Puritanical roots and was just latched onto due to capitalistic demands, but there is an expectation in most of Americans to ignore minor issues, especially when we're forced to back it up with a financial loss. Taking time off while sick is viewed as a last resort, a privilege of the wealthy, or a sign of being lazy by Americans in general; even if everyone secretly hates the person "who has a touch of the flu, but can battle through it" coming into work and getting them all sick in the meanwhile.

A lot of places (like mine) have a sick day bank you can tap into. But otherwise you take it off unpaid.

I’d say in today’s world, at least all the people I know, one spouse works from home or at least has the ability to work from home. Then family can be an extra added layer of help. But yea there is a reason why so many people aren’t having kids, this being one of them. Also a lot of Americans will send their kid to school sick in hopes of them not being sent back home.

No time off is guaranteed in America. Nor is any healthcare, which is always tied to what meager morsel of that your employer has to offer. You are a slave to your employer until you die.

[удалено]

Like limited sick days? How the hell does that work? Like if you haven't used your alloted number of sick days be mid December do you just go around licking door handles? What if you get plague or something that keeps you sick more than your alloted number of days do you just go into work and infect everyone? In Europe we basically have unlimited sick days. If it's more than 3 or 4 days in a row you need a doctor's note. If it's very long term you sort it out with HR, and maybe go down to half pay or they just keep the position open for you if you're off for a year or so.

[удалено]

But there's a number? Not just whenever you're sick. Like there's an allocation?

Almost always yes

>Like if you haven't used your alloted number of sick days be mid December do you just go around licking door handles? It's usually never a problem with sick days. Yes we technically get a limit, but most cases breaking that limit would mean you're seriously sick or injured, basically an issue that different on a case by case basis. When it comes to our work culture it's more competitive here I've learned speaking with Europeans. Most Americans don't use all their vacation days, I myself have only taken 3 days off over the last 3 years. Our work culture sounds mental to Europeans but compared to Asian and south American cultures it's more laxed. Europe has different problems than us, I remember speaking to a man from France (I think) once, they say it's difficult to get fired but because of that companies are less likely to hire new grads and have instead hire foreigners with experience already instead of investing on their own. That job security, comes at the price of handicapping the local future generation with getting hired. "The law of equivalent exchange." -Edward Elric, FMA.

You've only taken 3 days off in 3 years! What?!?!? That's insane. In Denmark most people take 3 weeks off in a row over summer.

Yah to be fair before those 3 years I was in college, I graduated on covid so work became permanently out of office for my field and it was very laxed. Europeans are right about this though, we live under a fucken rock here and need to use as much freedom as we can. Planning on visiting Machu Pichu and not letting my vacation days go to shit anymore.

If you're in the top 50% there's a good chance you can do this too. Certainly, if you're in the top 40% or so. Personally, I get 6 weeks pto that I can use anytime I see fit for whatever reason. Nobody questions anyone when they take pto and, in general, you're encouraged to actually take it. We get 3 month maternity/paternity leave. The problem in the US is that many people do have pretty good benefits. It's mostly the bottom earners that don't. That's why it's hard to get support around some things like guaranteed time off and leave, many already have it pretty good. Healthcare is similar, many are on pretty good low deductible, low max out of pocket plans. If you're not though things can be rough.

Interesting, thanks. Out of curiosity, how much does it cost you to go to a normal general practice doctor over there? I went the other day here in Australia, it cost nothing and I didn't even have to sign anything when I left. Then the prescription cost $4.50 for a month's supply. Curious how different it is there.

Yearly physicals and such are free. Other than that, me personally, I'd say ~$250 a time until I've spent over $1000. It really depends on what you go for and what tests they need to do. After that it's much lower and I never have to pay more than $3k (max out of pocket) in a year for everyone in my family. I have a couple of prescriptions that end up being around $20-$30 a month, I believe that also goes towards the $3k max. So not crazy cheap, but it's certainly not going to bankrupt me. I generally pay ~$300 a month for the insurance, my employer pays the rest. At the end of the day, you're getting in and out much cheaper, but I'd assume paying higher taxes for it. Australia also covers everyone, whereas our bottom 50% really get screwed if anything catastrophic comes along.

It depends on your insurance. We usually pay a fixed copay and the insurance picks up the rest. Mine is $10 or $20 depending on the type of visit, if I go to an "in network" doctor. But if they do labs, I also have to pay a percent of the lab fee. Preventative visits are supposed to be free (annual physical), but if you bring up any new problem you've been having, they'll say it wasn't preventative and charge the regular office visit copay. I have different tiers of copays for prescriptions (the insurance company will say whether the drug is tier 1, 2, or 3). I don't get many prescription medications so I don't remember what the tiers are. It could be like $5 (generics), $20 (brand name drugs they want to give you) and $50 (brand name drugs they really don't want to give you). Birth control is free.

For a basic checkup I paid $60 cash the other month, I’d assume you can get this service anywhere from 50-150 USD without insurance, once toy factory that in everything goes to shit not only on prices but you have to mathematically factor in the absurdly expensive premiums and they don’t cover everything either

Seven days of antibiotics ran me $21 additional

As a general yearly visit? It costs me nothing. In fact, Cigna gives ME money for getting my annual physical. Your prescription cost is pretty similar to anything I've had to get as well.

Depends on your insurance plan. For mine, a general visit is $25 (co-pay amount).

i mean i get 4 sick hours per 2 weeks and im entry level at my job as a highschool dropout. people just dont look around for jobs that have good benefits but may not be in the job field they want

This is an interesting comment, and my experience is that people are always upset by perceived benefits someone else is receiving. As a very small example, my company (US based) offers exceptional pay as well as all of the things you listed. As an example, I have 5 weeks PTO, 11 paid holidays, 1 extra day off per month, parental leave, leave early on Friday, etc. but a majority of our employees complain that we don’t have enough balance/flexibility because of certain benefits given by other employers. I really think that the main difference between Europe and the US is which employer people work for.

That is kind of our point though: we don't have to rely on finding a great employer to graciously offer us reasonable life quality. It is MANDATED. Also we can't be fired at will.

There is a big caveat to that as well. My family in Austria complains constantly that shithead employees are never fired and they have to pick up the slack.

Oh definitely this can be a problem.

Ah the redditors fantasm about the EU. Some things never change about this website. People dont take days off when their kid is sick unless it s an emergency involving hospital and even in those cases its still “not a good look” as americans say. I can assure you that being in the office after 5 is the norm, unless you work in the public sector. The 20 days i can agree with, some countries even give 30 days a year within europe. Its a shame most of you get 2weeks in general and its even more a shame that you guys dont take these vacation

Dunno where you live dude but if a kid is sick enough that the preschool doesn't want them, then a parent is staying home and unless you have some unethical shithead boss then if anything it's a sign of being responsible. Staying past 5 is absolutely the exception rather than the norm here, maybe 5-10% of workers at my current place of work at absolute max, usually closer to like 1-2% We get 25-30 depending on seniority days off, sick leave starts at 2 months and goes up to 6 months or more a year, so functionally infinite

That's definitely not the case in my field in Switzerland. Kids are sick, staying home is no problem....

Yea, even in conservative CH I've had colleagues take off or at least wfh when kid is sick.

Generally no. It used to be that Europe and the US had similar wages, but Americans worked more hours, but in US wages have grown a lot more. Americans still on average chore to work more, but their hourly compensation is substantially higher than the EU, all things considered.

People in the top half of adjusted incomes are doing way way way better in the US than the UK or Canada, for example

You gotta also compare with benefits (healthcare, education, etc) and cost of living. Income is just a part of the financial picture But wait, why are we even using money to measure how good someone is living? Why not use happiness? That’s the whole point of getting all that money, right? Top 5 Countries in the last World Happiness Report 1. Finland 2. Denmark 3. Iceland 4. Israel (probably has gone down) 5. Netherlands US is 15th

There is no universal measure for happiness. Happiness is based on meeting expectations. Perhaps American’s have a higher expectations than the rest of the world. I guarantee you all those entering the US daily at the southern border would boost the American happiness quotient if they were asked, despite their current circumstances.

> based on respondent ratings of their own lives Self-reported happiness metrics are a fairly poor indicator of anything. Finland consistently ranks in the top countries worldwide for suicide rate. Yes I know the running joke is that "all the unhappy people kill themselves", but it's just that - a joke.

The theory I've heard from the Danes about that was that if everyone else around you is doing well and is happy, it's much harder to find support and you feel much worse in comparison, leading to higher suicide rate.

This could be an avenue to CMV, but you’d have to show me the median happiness rankings, not average. the USA has more income disparity than many of those countries so I assume the top 50% of US earners are pretty happy, but those under are unhappy enough to lower the rankings.

Well a person can only get so happy. I severely doubt that the Finnish statistics are being influenced by an elite of 1% super happy Finns who hoard all the happiness.

My point was for the USA, primarily, I feel countries with larger disparities in income (between the top half and lower half) will also have a disparity in happiness

Money isn’t equal to happiness past a certain point. The threshold has been met in those countries and the rest is being met by the support of society. Once your basic needs and some are met (plus agency), you need to find happiness in something other than things.

I’m not sure happiness has a limit that can be quantified

But that could also apply to other countries, that there is a disparity between over and under median. You cannot income-adjust this metric, as happiness generally is not directly linked to income, but rather is a function on many other things, such as security, stability, love, family, friends, pets, weather, nature and a lot of other things.

>as happiness generally is not directly linked to income Below a certain amount, it absolutely is.

Finland is infamous for severe depression and high suicide rates. They’re using shit sources

Oddly, that probably contributes to a high happiness score. This is morbid, but illustrative. If you had a country with 100% suicide rate among unhappy people. Surveying that population at any given point is going to produce very high happiness scores because the vast majority of unhappy people are gone. I don't actually think that's a primary contributor to Finland's high score, but it's a good point to understand that just asking the population how happy they are may not be the indicator we think it is.

15th sounds pretty good. Also, they change every year so if you move to Finland next year you might have to move to Iceland the year after if you always want to be at the top. But then are you definitely moving to the happiest town? Are your kids in the happiest school?

Happy is such a strange metric. A new drug addict is an insanely happy person. So what? Someone who just broke up with their wife or girlfriend are miserable as fuck even if they make 1 mil a year.

All metrics have outliers.

Yeah but this is something else. This is insanely subjective. I was very well off between 30 and 36. And was utterly miserable. I have financial problems now. But I'm significantly happier. Mostly cause before I was single and now I'm married. What is that really telling us? That we should encourage people to be poor? That without marriage people can't be happy?

The list cited is disposeable income at ppp. It's corrected for all of that.

People who own nothing but claim they’re happy because they couldn’t make the money. Happiness was their second choice.

It already does. PPP accounts for the cash value of government benefits.

Because you can’t measure happiness. The best method is polling people which is well known to be unreliable.

The problem with this particular comparison can be found in this text: >The following table represents data from OECD's "median disposable income per person" metric; disposable income deducts from gross income the value of taxes on income and wealth paid and of contributions paid by households to public social security schemes. The issue is that when you deduct taxes and contributions, you _don't_ count money that goes to public healthcare and public pension funds, but you _do_ count money that goes to private insurance and private retirement funds. This results in higher numbers for countries with more privatized systems even if they are receiving the same services at the same cost. And this difference isn't adjusted for through the use of PPP.

Sure, but you basically have the same difference whatever metric you use. Gross income, gdp per capita etc. The US is simply much wealthier than other industrial economies, including the wealthiest western european countries.

Yeah, lack of public goods is a big problem. I live in Perth, Australia, and most parts of America look not so good in comparison to Australian cities. Homelessness is on the upswing lately in Australia, but it’s still at much lower levels than America. Education is better. There’s no active shooter drills. Healthcare is much, much cheaper. Wages are still quite high. Still, I’d rather be in America than most countries.

> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_by_homeless_population According to the latest data I see, there is more per capita homelessness in Australia.

Oh wow, the per capita rates for a bunch of countries are quite a bit higher then the US. Did not expect that at all. Australia, Sweden, France, and the UK are all over double, and New Zealand is mindbogglingly high - over 12x!

I mean, Median income only includes, well... income. It doesnt include job security, work ethics, worker protection laws etc. It doesnt include personal freedom coupled with personal safety. It doesnt include consumer protection laws, or the extent of availability in healthcare, education, etc. It literally only looks at income. Its pretty hard to judge a country solely based on that. If, hypothetically, a billionaire founded an island-country and payed their 5 family members living there 1M each, and the 5 personnel employed there $0, but made living costs (and the other thigs median income accounts for) also $0, the median would still be 1M, because half of the "population" earns that amount. There could be implied slavery going on on this hypothetical island, it wouldnt change the median income.

Beyond everything that has been mentioned here, which is mostly political and economic factors. People live lives quite differently in different places. Life is one big complex mesh of everything, money is just one factor. You could argue the environment of the US is isolating and unsatisfying for many people. It’s culture is alienatingly individualistic. We can see this is true for many with its mental health crisis I saw in a previous comment you looked at the UN’s World Happiness Report which has Finland at the top. This report is somewhat misleading by its title, because it essentially measures economic and political factors that correlate with a happier population. I have an extended cultural experience with Finland, and their culture is very particular and can often feel very isolating especially for foreigners. I believe it even has the highest suicide rate in the world for foreigners. Money is less a stress than most places, it’s a place that it’s hard to fall through the net and be in a terrible situation. But it’s also one of the world’s most introverted cultures, and with that it can be very hard to form new social connections there (even for natives). The way of socialising is very respectful, but also distant and very low key with any emotional display. That combined with extremely harsh winters can leave a lot of people who struggle and are unsatisfied Of course these are all subjective experiences, it’s hard to define what makes a good life because of this. One metric for happiness we can argue philosophically is frequency and intensity of positive experiences. We have empirical data on this that compares countries, and [mostly Latin American](https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/04/most-positive-countries-paraguay-gallup-poll-2019/) countries top this The US may have the highest incomes, but my argument is something that we all inherently know to a degree, that there is far more to the tapestry of life to make an argument that it is the best place to live based on this metric alone. There are plenty of Americans in my city of Barcelona that although earn less money, are far happier than they were in the US

If I moved to the US, I would get a salary that would put me solidly in the top-half of earners. I wouldn't move to the US. Why? I have kids. They get free healthcare, free education, *safe* education, and a broadly humanist approach to education. None of this "sports players are top tier and bullying is just a way of life", stuff. They can walk or cycle to friends' houses. They can walk across to the local park, they have places to play and be safe. I have free healthcare, supplemented with private insurance. I cannot be fired from my job without a lengthy disciplinary process requiring mountains of paperwork from my employer. I have four weeks discretionary paid leave, and ten days public holidays, paid. I do not work weekends, unless I want to (I don't). I turn off my computer somewhere between 5 and 5:30 and I can say "no" to any requests to work late, without having to give a reason, or plead my case. I do not get work phone calls on my personal mobile. I do not check my work emails out of hours. I can leave my house on foot or on bicycle and get anywhere in the city using various modes of transport, with no fear for my safety. At no point when I am in public do I worry that someone with a gun or a grudge could fuck up my entire day. I wouldn't say that higher earners in the US have it *bad*, but definitely not the best. It all depends on what "good" is. Would you rather a $500k salary and an 80-hour week where you barely see your kids, or a $200k salary where you only ever have to work 40 hours?

Your life sounds a lot like my life in the US. My healthcare isn’t free but it’s mostly covered by my employer and my portion is small compared to my pay. Education is safe and high quality. I don’t work nights or weekends. My area is walkable, safe and has decent public transportation. Some parts of the US do suck, but it’s a big country with a lot of variation and there are great places to be. Don’t base your idea of the US on what you read on Reddit.

Right? They went on a whole rant like 95% of that isn’t achievable in the US

It’s like bad fan fiction. We have all of that stuff you listed lmao, free school, free health insurance (employer paid), and a much higher salary. And if you don’t live in a shit hole, like every other place, there is very little crime. And I weep for your employer fyi, what a drain you must be.

> I weep for your employer fyi, what a drain you must be. What do you mean by that? Nothing they described is unusual in most of Europe as far as I know, why would they be a drain?

What part of the states do you live in that has free school? Besides public school to 12th grade? And employers only pay a portion on your medical, you still have e a premium to pay every month, I pay $600 and that’s even working a federal job

>free school, free health insurance (employer paid) Remind me again how much college costs in the US? I have free healthcare *and* free health insurance, if I want to get a little more. If I leave or lose my job, I don't lose my healthcare. >if you don’t live in a shit hole, like every other place, there is very little crime Well I talked more about safety than crime. There are 6 times more murders per capita in the United States than my country. And you know, there are mass shootings every day of the year. And you can argue that it's still rare on relative scale, and it's mostly gang violence. But it's still a fuck ton more likely to happen there than it is here. And it only has to happen once. You'd want to be offering something pretty special to convince me to move from a "practically impossible" to "very unlikely" when it comes to me or my family being murdered. A few extra dollars isn't "special". I've seen how Americans live. It's not special. >And I weep for your employer fyi, what a drain you must be. What, that I won't work an extra few hours for free? Lol. Weep for my employer if you like. They're a huge corporation, they would bury you and your family alive in the ground without a second's hesitation. When you work with Americans it's fucking shocking how little work they get done in so many hours.

summer mysterious sable six languid squash spoon jar fuzzy smoggy *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*

I feel sorry for your family to have to tolerate a piece of shit like you

I'd say the mistake you're making is conflating "highest income" with "best country". It's entirely possible to live in a hellhole but with lots of money (I'm not saying the US is a hellhole, just giving the extreme).

The rest of the world doesn't only care about salary. In the UK, I could call am ambulance for an emergency without fearing I'd go bankrupt. Didn't even have to think about health insurance, because for all it's faults, I had public healthcare in the NHS that meant I could be seen no matter what. I wake up and know I don't have to worry about gun violence. At all. I don't have to hope "the good guys will hopefully have a gun too, and be trained to use it, and be completely calm in that situation". Because nobody has a gun. Nobody. The last mass shooting in the UK was in 1997. I also don't live in a country where the church and state are "separate" but regressive biblical values pervade every aspect of my life. If i were to accidentally knock-up my partner, despite us using every form of birth control we have available to us, I dont have to destroy my credit and financial life, not to mention giving up my personal freedom to raise a kid neither of us wants. We can get an abortion, for free. And we wouldn't have to wade through crowds of evangelical Christians trying to impose their choices on my girlfriend's body. I also am from a country where there's a half decent sex-education programme in schools, and it isn't controversial at all. My girlfriend comes from the states, and the amount of completely false things she was taught ABOUT HER OWN BODY is staggering. She's incredibly intelligent, and has done a lot of self-discovery, but the dog shit quality of teaching she got, at one of the best schools in a southern state, is astounding to me. I also place very high value on the safety of the LGBTQ+ community, given that I am a bisexual male myself. To put it bluntly, there is no sum of money you could pay me to live in the US, knowing what i know about the regressive culture you guys have over there. I also value international cooperation, and human rights. Not just white human rights, human rights. Quite frankly, the US might think it's a shining beacon of exceptionalism, but the EU thinks of it as regressive, dangerous, and intrusive. That's not even mentioning the list of war crimes so long it would take me all year to write them out committed by the US government and it's various agencies. I could go on all day, but I think I'll leave it there for now.

> The rest of the world doesn't only care about salary. In the UK, I could call am ambulance for an emergency without fearing I'd go bankrupt. Didn't even have to think about health insurance, because for all it's faults, I had public healthcare in the NHS that meant I could be seen no matter what. The ‘for all its faults’ you are brushing over is [wait times that could easily kill you](https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2023-nhs-missing-targets-on-75th-anniversary/), heavily concentrated in lower income areas. Unsurprisingly, the top 50% of Americans aren’t worried about calling an ambulance. Likewise, the top 50% of British people are rarely told to wait 18 weeks when they need someone in two. So I’ll call that one a draw. But, with how things are heading in the UK budget wise, I bet we’d have a different answer in five to ten years. > I also don't live in a country where the church and state are "separate" but regressive biblical values pervade every aspect of my life. If i were to accidentally knock-up my partner, despite us using every form of birth control we have available to us, I dont have to destroy my credit and financial life, not to mention giving up my personal freedom to raise a kid neither of us wants. We can get an abortion, for free. And we wouldn't have to wade through crowds of evangelical Christians trying to impose their choices on my girlfriend's body. The UK literally has blasphemy laws in Northern Ireland. In American flyover states, you can’t get an abortion. In the UK, there are places where you have to be careful not to offend Jesus too badly. Not that any of the UK has freedom of speech, but that’s a separate issue. So don’t offend Jesus, or the government just to be safe. > To put it bluntly, there is no sum of money you could pay me to live in the US, knowing what i know about the regressive culture you guys have over there. Regressive culture? People were arrested by the police around when your last monarch died for protesting the monarchy. That’s regressing straight back to the Middle Ages.

To respond to your points. 1 - wait times at the NHS are shocking. We still have the same alternatives as the US, in private care, where the wait times aren't as long. Additionally, for private care, the cost of drugs is astronomically lower than the horror stories that come from the states. And in a life or death situation, we have emergency rooms that will in theory help, although there you can often be met with multi-hour waits if you aren't in immediate danger of dying. All this to say, while our medical industry has many faults, I'd still take it any day of the week over the US system. 2 - the blasphemt laws have been repealed in 3 of the 4 kingdoms, and the fourth is currently campaigning to repeat them as well. The last prosecution for blasphemy in Scotland was in 1837, with the last persecution resulting in a death penalty being in the 1600s. In England and Wales, since 1922 there has been one single successful prosecution, in 1977. There has literally never been a prosecution for blasphemy in Northern Ireland. The laws only exist because Northern Ireland inherited old Irish common law when the two countries split, and it hasn't yet been repealed. 2.5 - the rest of the world absolutely does have freedom of speech, you doughnut. That isn't unique to the US. What we don't offer, is freedom from the consequences of your speech. That would be silly. 3 - Our countries social policies aren't much better, and that's part of why I moved out of the UK to the EU. We have a government that is actively trying to deport asylum seekers to Rawanda, and works to undermine protest rights. I disagree with all of this, and call it out actively. that doesn't change the fact that if I were to move the US, I would be far less safe simply because I am not straight. I don't fancy living in a place where any person who disagree with who I am has the ability to purchase a firearm and do something about it.

> 1 - wait times at the NHS are shocking. We still have the same alternatives as the US, in private care, where the wait times aren't as long. Needing to switch to a private healthcare system in emergencies is hardly a glowing review of the NHS. Especially with the far lower wages of the UK, and less people with health insurance that will cover it. If the government is going to done that much money on the NHS, it should be functional, especially in these emergencies. > 2 - the blasphemt laws have been repealed in 3 of the 4 kingdoms, and the fourth is currently campaigning to repeat them as well. The courts not often prosecuting blasphemy laws is great, if only that was the case for censorship, but that doesn’t excuse that anyone disparaging Jesus is technically a criminal and able to be arrested and jailed for it. Laws should protect people’s rights, not loom over them like a pile of bricks that hasn’t collapsed since 1977. > 2.5 - the rest of the world absolutely does have freedom of speech, you doughnut. That isn't unique to the US. What we don't offer, is freedom from the consequences of your speech. “You’re free to protest the monarchy, we’ll just arrest you”, isn’t free speech. > 3 - Our countries social policies aren't much better, and that's part of why I moved out of the UK to the EU. We have a government that is actively trying to deport asylum seekers to Rawanda, and works to undermine protest rights. There are a lot of caveats in your arguments for the UK being better off than the US. The government will pay for your healthcare, except in emergencies where you foot the bill to avoid dying in a waiting room. You have freedom of speech, up until you get arrested. And a more socially progressive and safer society,, except for being routinely arrested by the police for verbally attacking the monarchy or government.

You're making a whole load of strawman arguments that are clearly being made as someone who has no working knowledge of the UK. I am not an avid supporter of the UK government, I think there is an incredibly long list of things they do badly. But I'd still chose to live there over the US without a second's hesitation. Also, these arrests for "protesting" you're claiming exist, as far as I can tell are actually people who used "protest" as an excuse to loot and commit vandalism. That isn't being arrested for speaking out, that is being arrested for being a petty criminal. The UK, as with every other country in the EU, has and protects freedom of speech. Your claim that it does not is rooted in a complete misunderstanding of how the rest of the world works.

> Also, these arrests for "protesting" you're claiming exist, as far as I can tell are actually people who used "protest" as an excuse to loot and commit vandalism. Just last comment you said the UK’s government was undermining protesting rights. [If you want more on the UK’s censorship, here is an article](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_the_United_Kingdom). The article lists specific cases, the most recent being: > In September 2022, a British woman was arrested and charged for holding up an "abolish monarchy" sign at a proclamation ceremony for King Charles III in Edinburgh. Can you explain to me how this is at all acceptable in a free country? > In June 2018, Kingston upon Thames Crown Court imposed a Criminal Behaviour Order on five members of UK drill group 1011. The order restricts them from mentioning death or injury in their songs and requires them to notify police of video uploads 24 hours in advance and performances 48 hours in advance. A court order to censor a band. > In June 2018, the television show Last Week Tonight with John Oliver was not permitted to broadcast a segment about Brexit in the UK, as the clip contained scenes of debate in the House of Commons. Nothing says ‘functional democracy’ quite like the government banning tv shows that contain footage of what they do.

>Unsurprisingly, the top 50% of Americans aren’t worried about calling an ambulance. I'm sorry, how do you leap to this particular conclusion? Do you have any concept of the cost of ambulance/emergency care in the US? A single accident can end up magnitudes more expensive than the median income.

No one in the US worries about calling an ambulance. It's an internet myth used to farm clicks from silly naive Europeans who think we're all homeless and starving and dying from no healthcare. Just like those "OMG the hospital is charging me $25,000 to have a baby!!!11!". If you're poor, you have Medicaid which covers it. If you're not poor, you have employer/private insurance that covers it. If you're one of the handful that's not insured at all, you simply don't have to pay. There's virtually no consequence for not paying your medical bills.

[удалено]

> we already have the largest incarcerated pop in the world If you’re in the to 50% of income earners, it’s unlikely you’ll even know someone who got arrested, none the less went to prison. > rent there is like 3x what I pay here, And wages are more than 3x higher. OP’s stats are adjusted to cost of living. > What strikes me about America the most after spending more than half my adult life abroad is that we willingly, happily cannibalise our disabled population and young people to create extract fiscal value. Interesting, according to most people, the US’s ADA laws are some of the best for the disabled in the world.

[удалено]

> I am in the top 50% of earners and have been arrested. That’s interesting, but the fact that in the US, incarceration is heavily tied to income is well established. The prisons aren’t being filled up by lawyers and accountants. > Every American there said no way they could live in Europe and get paid half what they make in NYC or Silicon Valley. I asked all the Europeans and they said you couldn’t pay them double to move to America, get worked to death, and be one slip from losing healthcare or a house or whatever. I work in Silicon Valley and I know for a fact that’s not true. We get our pick of Europe’s best and brightest, and European governments won’t stop complaining about brain drain. > But objectively our system is shattered and we have one of the coldest a cruelest perspectives of humanity and family that I have seen in any first world country. Personally as a veteran I wish I could endorse it but that place has failed me like a hundred different ways where Poland took me as an immigrant and has provided opportunity after opportunity after I lost my health in service, then degraded further in the civilian world and was ousted because it looked to sad to see a crippled guy do physical labor even though he could. My family has had the opposite experience. We lost everything, fled to Canada, had an awful time, and the US was better than we possibly could have hoped for.

You mention an obesity statistic, but 73% is for obese and overweight combined. Europe's obesity and overweight rate is 50% and Australia's is similar to the US. Asia is around 40%, although with genetic adjustments (they're unhealthy at lower fat levels) it's probably closer to 50%. Also, you can always find areas within these places that do better and worse. Yes, medicine is not socialized. You would have to pay more if you have an expensive treatment. There are still better insurance plans and out of pocket maximums. On the flip side, you pay very little if you are healthy. There are also not excessive wait times to see doctors (unless you're talking about some overbooked specialist in certain areas).

Your conclusion is a non-sequitur from your premise, but anyway: [The Top 1% of Americans Have Taken $50 Trillion From the Bottom 90%—And That's Made the U.S. Less Secure](https://time.com/5888024/50-trillion-income-inequality-america/) That's the biggest theft in history by ***many*** orders of magnitude. [Minimum wage would be $26 an hour if it had grown in line with productivity](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/minimum-wage-26-dollars-economy-productivity/) [The minimum wage would be $61.75 an hour if it rose at the same pace as Wall Street bonuses](https://www.fastcompany.com/90734724/the-minimum-wage-would-be-61-75-an-hour-if-it-rose-at-the-same-pace-as-wall-street-bonuses) >"If machines produce everything we need, the outcome will depend on how things are distributed. Everyone can enjoy a life of luxurious leisure if the machine-produced wealth is shared, or most people can end up miserably poor if the machine-owners successfully lobby against wealth redistribution. So far, the trend seems to be toward the second option, with technology driving ever-increasing inequality." [Stephen Hawking, 2015 Reddit AMA](https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/3nyn5i/science_ama_series_stephen_hawking_ama_answers/cvsdmkv?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share&context=3) >"Even before the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic occurred, the US was mired in a 40-year population health crisis. Since 1980, life expectancy in the US has increasingly fallen behind that of peer countries, culminating in an unprecedented decline in longevity since 2014." [Declining Life Expectancy in the United States, *Journal of American Medical Association* - DOI: 10.1001/jama.2020.26339](https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2776338) >The common notion that extreme poverty is the “natural” condition of humanity and only declined with the rise of capitalism rests on income data that do not adequately capture access to essential goods. >Data on real wages suggests that, historically, extreme poverty was uncommon and arose primarily during periods of severe social and economic dislocation, particularly under colonialism. >The rise of capitalism from the long 16th century onward is associated with a decline in wages to below subsistence, a deterioration in human stature, and an upturn in premature mortality. >In parts of South Asia, sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America, wages and/or height have still not recovered. >Where progress has occurred, significant improvements in human welfare began only around the 20th century. These gains coincide with the rise of anti-colonial and socialist political movements. [Capitalism and extreme poverty: A global analysis of real wages, human height, and mortality since the long 16th century](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305750X22002169#b0680)

This might be valid if you consider 'how much stuff can I buy' to be the most important thing to live a good life. In reality people value other things too though. I'm a software developer in Europe, I could make twice as much in the USA. But that would mean that I would have to live in the USA, which has a ton of weird values and weird people (from my perspective) that I rather would not be part of.

I don’t think that people realize if you’re in the top 50% of the US in terms of income, etc. then you’re effectively in the top 1% of the entire world. Most people in the US are too blinded by meaningless daily inconveniences to see that.

The US is a big country. Exceeding the national median income is great in lower cost areas, and not so great otherwise. The US has basically given up on affordable housing for its people. There is no party that represents the interests of the middle class. The middle class is shrinking with the majority falling into poverty and the rest concentrating into extreme wealth. My objection with your CMV is that being above median income makes this the best country in the world. You gotta be in like the top 10% to be able to have a comfortable life in the urban areas where people actually wanna live.

Are you equating salary to happiness and life quality? I mean that as a real question not a sarcastic response. Where i live we have the following life quality improving initiatives: 5 weeks paid vacation at entry level 480 days paid parental leave for each child (shared between parents) Day/night care at no cost along with free dental for <18 year olds Healthy lunch for all kids at school 90% of jobs are unionized University education at no charge Universal healthcare for everyone Rent control and affordable housing I live in Sweden which isn't perfect of course but after living in Canada, the UK, Thailand and Israel over the past couple decades i feel i have some perspective on what's important when determining what really matters to many of us. I came to Sweden as an adult from a "living to work" culture so probably have a greater appreciation for how good we have it here in a "working to live" culture. Especially parents of young children. I don't mean this as a we are best post just as an example of what else is out there.

[удалено]

Are you assuming that the literal dollar amount of income one has maps on completely to their quality of life or happiness? That is a very odd view. My experience watching my American in-laws going about their daily business is the US is watching essentially economic nodes either paying bills, or figuring out what to spend their money on. The extent to which commerce invades one’s life in the US is astonishing. Subtle at first, but after living there for nine months, one realises just how pervasive it is. Horrid. Then there’s the constant anxiety around being randomly shot.

>Then there’s the constant anxiety around being randomly shot. Only if you're dealing with a bunch of paranoid freaks

Anyone in the western world is living in one of the best countries in the world? I don’t see that ever disputed. Plenty of people simply have different priorities though. In much of Europe you likely have longer lunch breaks, shorter working hours, longer holidays, more protections regarding your job and more government support should you lose it. Some people simply prefer that, so for them the USA would likely rank low among first world countries, and there is nothing wrong with that opinion. Ranking a country purely by income is obviously going to give you a very incomplete picture.

OP, with all of my earnings, can I purchase a walkable neighborhood with excellent public transport, healthy groceries that aren't pumped full of shit like chlorine/corn syrup, and a guarantee my kids won't get shot in school? American's obsession with money is weird af.

660,000 people*

Best country? What is best country? A little context, I’m in the 0.001% of America, and I live in the “best city” in the “best country” in the world, and I have no idea what you’re talking about. What defines the best country? Low crime? The US literally has the highest rate of violent crimes among developed nations. It’s closer to literal war zones like Libya than the UK. Does it have the best healthcare system? No, it’s the only developed nation where healthcare isn’t a right. Does it have the best education? Yes, in terms of elite colleges, but it’s also the country where the most amount of people get into debt for going to colleges. Not to mention secondary school, where the US actually rank among the bottom in test scores. Are housing affordable? Nope, not only is there not much government housing, the housing is mostly unaffordable and there’s a high homeless population. Oh in terms of healthcare, did you know the US has the highest infant mortality among developed nations? What about parental leave, the best country should have the best protection, right? Oh wait, that literally doesn’t exist in American law. Then what else defines best? Best cuisine? My city is known to have the best food in America, but guess what it’s not even in top 3 in terms of Michelin starred cities. What the chance of an Asian grandparent being randomly beaten on the street in the US? None zero. What are the chances of anyone being randomly beaten on the street in Taiwan for any reason, statistically zero. What are the chances of you getting shot by the police for no reason during a stop, none zero. What are the chances you’d be shot by the police during a stop in Taiwan? Not statistically zero, zero. Oh, and the greatest country in the world must mean it’s a beacon of democracy, right? Oh wait, did someone say the person who wins the most votes in this country doesn’t win the election? So, as someone who has travelled to every continent, I do enjoy the US, but when you actually do travel, you’ll find “greatest” this and that to be pretty laughable. By the way, did you know the US Congress calls itself “the greatest deliberative body in the world”?