What is a good wage?

DaggerDigwillow

Reading: The Authority Gap by Mary Sieghart
Joined
Dec 8, 2013
Messages
200

DaggerDigwillow

Reading: The Authority Gap by Mary Sieghart
Joined
Dec 8, 2013
Messages
200
Being middle class in USA seems pretty terrible compared to what we get in Sweden and the difference between poor seems even more extreme. I think upper middle class and rich probably also are better of in Sweden simply because the country overall seems more functional and developed and probably still spend less time on working and have better life expectency. There are about twice the number of $ billionaires per capita in Sweden and children have something like 75% chance to earn more than their parents with overall net increase in incomes for all deciles since the 90s.

Because the areas you tend to earn $100,000 is much more expensive than the areas people tend to earn $50k so overall what people may afford can be pretty similar. Seems like you need to earn very well in USA compared to other countries in order to support a family, probably because things like childcare and college is extreamly expensive in USA compared to other countries.
Being middle class in America from my experience is pretty baller. Having nothing in America much like having nothing anywhere kinda sucks but is all a matter of perspective and desire. Getting off the bottom is pretty easy unless you'v got some time inhibiting you. I'd assume the same is true in Sweden but correct me if I'm wrong. Do you think the work-life balance difference is a result of cultural choices? What's the per capita number of trillionaires in Sweden? According to WaPo 84% of Americans earn more than their parents.

I don't know if the areas with $100k is necessarily true anymore. Working from home in the pandemic has caused a huge amount of people to move out of cities and into rural areas where the cost of living is really cheap and $100k in wages isn't really that much anymore. Childcare is certainly expensive in my experience but unnecessary in most cases unless both parents are working in which case you have a double income which is probably the majority of households today. College really should be paid by the child from a financial and responsibility perspective.
 

Angst

Rambling and inconsistent
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
Messages
14,574
Location
A Silver Mt. Zion
the nordics have better social mobility than the us.

less trillionaires per capita, but as you outlined, it doesn't actually matter that much in regards to happiness.

sweden's also magnificently wealthy in spite of not having anything comparable to the us' natural resources
 

DaggerDigwillow

Reading: The Authority Gap by Mary Sieghart
Joined
Dec 8, 2013
Messages
200
the nordics have better social mobility than the us.

less trillionaires per capita, but as you outlined, it doesn't actually matter that much in regards to happiness.

sweden's also magnificently wealthy in spite of not having anything comparable to the us' natural resources
Taking the first two lines of your response does social mobility matter after $60k in Sweden more than in the US? If trillionaires per capita don't matter do millionaires per capita in your initial response? Just trying to understand the argument being applied in one case but not the other.

I think the US is still considered an information-based economy. This would be an interesting question to explore as I'm honestly not sure what the role of natural resources of the US plays on a per capita level or GDP percentage of the economy.
 

DaggerDigwillow

Reading: The Authority Gap by Mary Sieghart
Joined
Dec 8, 2013
Messages
200
According to TheGlobalEconomy.com, natural resources account for less than 1% of GDP but I've no idea if this is accurate or reliable. Sources look like the World Bank
Interestingly and by pure coincidence USA between 1970-2020 accounts for an average of 0.42% GDP while Sweden during that time accounts for 0.41% and while USA is ranked 125 in the world for resource % based GDP Sweden is 126. That's kinda funny given this discussion at hand.
 
Last edited:

DaggerDigwillow

Reading: The Authority Gap by Mary Sieghart
Joined
Dec 8, 2013
Messages
200
What do you think what I said means?
I've only heard it in relation to SJW, LGTB, and PC culture as a response from right-wing pundits as mockery.
Although perhaps as you are the one who said it, the explanation might best be provided by yourself.
I don't mind if you are mocking me I just didn't think anything I said was offensive or related to those topics.
 

Angst

Rambling and inconsistent
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
Messages
14,574
Location
A Silver Mt. Zion
Taking the first two lines of your response does social mobility matter after $60k in Sweden more than in the US? If trillionaires per capita don't matter do millionaires per capita in your initial response? Just trying to understand the argument being applied in one case but not the other.

I think the US is still considered an information-based economy. This would be an interesting question to explore as I'm honestly not sure what the role of natural resources of the US plays on a per capita level or GDP percentage of the economy.
not sure what you're asking. $60k is probably from somewhere in the thread (maybe from you), but i haven't put up a number. i just plainly noted that social mobility is higher in the nordics, and that number of tr/b/whatevillionaires don't matter much really. we also have monarchs here. some people care about it, and it adds to their happiness. not sure whether the cost is worth it tho. it's a lot of money that could be spent elsewhere.

so the resources
According to TheGlobalEconomy.com, natural resources account for less than 1% of GDP but I've no idea if this is accurate or reliable. Sources look like the World Bank
Interestingly and by pure coincidence USA between 1970-2020 accounts for an average of 0.42% GDP while Sweden during that time accounts for 0.41% and while USA is ranked 125 in the world for resource % based GDP Sweden is 126. That's kinda funny given this discussion at hand.
no, resources are not deterministic. i raised the point not for you specifically, but because the moment people learn the nordic countries aren't tundra, they sometimes default to the nordics being like germany, or, well, the states. a lot of the proponents against the nordic model claim the key to the prosperity is oil. it's not
 

DaggerDigwillow

Reading: The Authority Gap by Mary Sieghart
Joined
Dec 8, 2013
Messages
200
not sure what you're asking. $60k is probably from somewhere in the thread (maybe from you), but i haven't put up a number. i just plainly noted that social mobility is higher in the nordics, and that number of tr/b/whatevillionaires don't matter much really. we also have monarchs here. some people care about it, and it adds to their happiness. not sure whether the cost is worth it tho. it's a lot of money that could be spent elsewhere.

so the resources
$60k is about happiness, satisfaction, and motivation not being altered beyond that income for the vast majority of people. You are saying the money from the Mill/Bill/Whatevers should be taken and spent elsewhere?

sweden's also magnificently wealthy in spite of not having anything comparable to the us' natural resources
no, resources are not deterministic. i raised the point not for you specifically, but because the moment people learn the nordic countries aren't tundra, they sometimes default to the nordics being like germany, or, well, the states. a lot of the proponents against the nordic model claim the key to the prosperity is oil. it's not
Glad you clarified that, I would not have concluded the point being made in the latter was your goal from the former.
So that leaves Swedish economic mobility? Denktes was commenting on this sharing a point on 74% of Swedish children doing better than their parents and I shared an article from WaPo on 84% of America Children earning more than their parents. Would you say this is in line with your assessment and reasoning or are you looking at other factors too?
 
Last edited:

Angst

Rambling and inconsistent
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
Messages
14,574
Location
A Silver Mt. Zion
$60k is about happiness, satisfaction, and motivation not being altered beyond that income for the vast majority of people. You are saying the money from the Mill/Bill/Whatevers should be taken and spent elsewhere?
alrighty, so that's what your number means.

in regards to mill/bill/whatevers (thanks for following up on my crap word salad, it's wholesome! no cap :)) - it's not that their wealth should be taken and spent elsewhere. there's nothing inherently wrong with being rich. redistribution is not punitive. so rather, good for them. what can instead be talked about is how resources can be best allocated to maximize both happiness and possibility for growth. mill/bill/whatevers have earned a lot on the backs of the infrastructure they live in; all the money they have earned, it's by virtue of the society that's taxing them. there's no real categorical moral indication then, on the degree of taxation. so if their customers/workers are suffering and the wealth is neither productive nor matters to them, might as well go elsewhere, honestly.

Glad you clarified that I would not have concluded the point being made in the latter was your goal from the former.
So that leaves Swedish economic mobility? Danktes was commenting on this sharing a point on 74% of Swedish children doing better than their parents and I shared an article from WaPo on 84% of America Children earning more than their parents. Would you say this is in line with your assessment and reasoning or are you looking at other factors too?
first off, sidenote, social mobility is what it is. like, abstractly, if there was a nation of bliss in the world, where everything worked out and everyone was happy, social mobility would be a red herring. the point of it is to achieve prosperity. if prosperity's already there, doesn't matter. this also has implications for another point: social mobility also tracks downward. at least the data i tracked. it's about whether you can fulfil a mechanistic liberal economy (in the classical sense), according to your ability, not your heritage.

that said, of course we want the social mobility we like. we want people to get richer and more capable, to break their heritage and be able to do things they're good at. in this comparison, yes, your source comparison notes the us is doing better.

so i may be working with outdated economic data, or the stuff i learned was taking other things into consideration (i may be wrong, i may be right). in the case of the former, yes, it's been a while since i rigidly looked into these things. i did not study politics and have most of my mental space for numbers invested on the economics of climate policy atm.
 

Angst

Rambling and inconsistent
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
Messages
14,574
Location
A Silver Mt. Zion
Do you think that 84% figure will survive any sort of meta-analysis?
it surprises me because social mobility is one of the core concessions that entrenched right wing economists usually bring up about scandinavia
 

aelf

Ashen One
Joined
Sep 16, 2005
Messages
17,400
Location
Tir ná Lia
I've only heard it in relation to SJW, LGTB, and PC culture as a response from right-wing pundits as mockery.
Although perhaps as you are the one who said it, the explanation might best be provided by yourself.
I don't mind if you are mocking me I just didn't think anything I said was offensive or related to those topics.
Thanks. Your answer is very informative - dropped the mask.
 

Hygro

soundcloud.com/hygro/
Joined
Dec 1, 2002
Messages
25,238
Location
California
Being middle class in USA seems pretty terrible compared to what we get in Sweden and the difference between poor seems even more extreme. I think upper middle class and rich probably also are better of in Sweden simply because the country overall seems more functional and developed and probably still spend less time on working and have better life expectency. There are about twice the number of $ billionaires per capita in Sweden and children have something like 75% chance to earn more than their parents with overall net increase in incomes for all deciles since the 90s.

Because the areas you tend to earn $100,000 is much more expensive than the areas people tend to earn $50k so overall what people may afford can be pretty similar. Seems like you need to earn very well in USA compared to other countries in order to support a family, probably because things like childcare and college is extreamly expensive in USA compared to other countries.
By "here" I mean my same metropolitan area, in regards to many people here doing fine on $50,000

50k salary is 66% the take the home pay of 100k salary.
 

Birdjaguar

Hanafubuki
Super Moderator
Supporter
Joined
Dec 24, 2001
Messages
50,302
Location
Albuquerque, NM
Being middle class in USA seems pretty terrible compared to what we get in Sweden and the difference between poor seems even more extreme. I think upper middle class and rich probably also are better of in Sweden simply because the country overall seems more functional and developed and probably still spend less time on working and have better life expectency. There are about twice the number of $ billionaires per capita in Sweden and children have something like 75% chance to earn more than their parents with overall net increase in incomes for all deciles since the 90s.
It is interesting that you only compare the US and Sweden along one or two dimensions as if the rest doesn't matter.

Sweden is a bit bigger than California with the population of NYC.

Nations are multi dimensional and it is pretty easy to cherry pick what one wants to compare while ignoring the rest. You can look at life expectancy for the 10 million Swedes and say it is better than that of 330 million USians. Well duh! The problem is not the same. let's compare the US to India on life expectancy and wealth and see what happens! I know you are rah rah Sweden and that is great, but national problem solving is driven by scope and scale, the diversity of the nation's population and its politics.

The US is a nation that has lots of issues that are difficult to solve given its size and population even though it has great wealth. If you like your Swedish statistics, there are many places in the US where those same stats can be found where life is as good or even better than in Sweden. :p
 

Angst

Rambling and inconsistent
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
Messages
14,574
Location
A Silver Mt. Zion
sweden is awful

i saw a bear there once

hellhole of a country

damn swedes
 

Hygro

soundcloud.com/hygro/
Joined
Dec 1, 2002
Messages
25,238
Location
California
I thinks some of our lower life expectancy is simply first like firstest world problems, harms of opulence, here in the USA.

The amount of cocaine shipped here per year has to be going somewhere. The volume is staggering. While I do believe other criminal money is being prewashed as fake cocaine money (yes, you heard it here first) surely much of it is going into the bodies of the affluent.
 

Lexicus

Deity
Joined
Aug 28, 2007
Messages
28,698
Location
Sovereign State of the Have-Nots
I thinks some of our lower life expectancy is simply first like firstest world problems, harms of opulence, here in the USA.

The amount of cocaine shipped here per year has to be going somewhere. The volume is staggering. While I do believe other criminal money is being prewashed as fake cocaine money (yes, you heard it here first) surely much of it is going into the bodies of the affluent.

If you're talking about average life expectancy for the whole country, I'm pretty sure it's appallingly bad outcomes among the poor that bring the average down.
 

El_Machinae

Colour vision since 2018
Retired Moderator
Joined
Nov 24, 2005
Messages
48,098
Location
Pale Blue Dot youtube=wupToqz1e2g
Socioeconomic factors would be the variable I'd control for directly after controlling for sex when it comes to life-expectancy. You could then see the increase/decreases after controlling for those correlates. The following is just one of the first results I found, for illustrative purposes only.



This image probably means something to people who can see color
Figure 2. Life Expectancy in California by Census Tract Median Household Income Percentile, 2015-2021

1667765585392.png
 

Hygro

soundcloud.com/hygro/
Joined
Dec 1, 2002
Messages
25,238
Location
California
If you're talking about average life expectancy for the whole country, I'm pretty sure it's appallingly bad outcomes among the poor that bring the average down.
I’m talking about the life expectancy of the top decile or two, which is about as high as anywhere but not quite.

We already discussed life expectancy averages earlier in the thread and why looking at USA averages wasn’t making any case whatsoever for why I should believe a SWE Swedish salary is better pay than SWE in my metro
 
Top Bottom