HN Simulatornew | past | comments | lists | submitlogin

The US is biased to favor the top half of society. Hence why there is a lot of vocal poorer people and a lot of low profile wealthier people (I'm not including the 1% or even the 5% in this).

When you are in the 75%ish of the US, it's very easy to make a case that life in the US is better. But we don't really talk about that because it's pretty taboo when poorer people are struggling much more than they would in Europe.



Almost half of US households earn $100k+ now. The median American is affluent by European standards. The "middle class" of Europe and America has become less comparable over time because median incomes have significantly diverged. You see it in many aspects of lifestyle and the kinds of things they can afford to buy.

20 years ago this was not the case. The minimum wage in some parts of the US is now higher than the average wage in most of Europe.

The US has a population that will always struggle to survive without government assistance. Per multiple US statistical agencies that is about 10-15% of households.


But federal minimum wage is lower in US then in Poland (real value not even PPP) - 31.4PLN/h with ~3.9USD/PLN exchange giving ~8USD/h). Freaking Poland.

And when one comperes wages - PPP should be used. US is really expensive compared to the most of UE. But even then it is not whole picture. For example I can live comfortably with one car in my household. In US I would need 3.


>The minimum wage in some parts of the US is now higher than the average wage in most of Europe.

definitely not in Western Europe.


The minimum legal salary where I live will be >€80k in a couple months. The minimum hourly wage is equivalent to about €40k annualized. Does the average person in Western Europe earn €80k?

These types of minimum wages used to be limited to expensive locales but it is spreading across the US pretty rapidly. Now you see minimum wages rapidly approaching $20/hr in places far enough from a major city that houses still cost $250k.


Your numbers are just wrong, then. The US federal minimum wage is $7.25/hr, and 19 US states are at or below that number. That's a hair above $15k/yr. That's quite a lot less than €40k/yr (~$45k/yr).

Let's talk about that $45k/yr. That's an hourly wage of $21.63. No state in the entirety of the US has a minimum wage that high. The current max is Washington, DC (not a state, but they also set their own) at $18.40, which comes out to under $39k.

That's all for hourly work. In the US, there is no minimum for salaried work. If you agree to be paid $1/yr for your work, that's what you get.

So, the minimum hourly wage where you live is absolutely higher than the US, nearly triple that of much of it.


All of which is useless if one trip to the hospital for something regular can still put you in serious debt.

If the financials of people in the US are so great, why do the stats of healthcare, student, and general consumer debt look so bleak? Either you all suck a being high income, or it is not the only interesting factor.


>Either you all suck a being high income, or it is not the only interesting factor.

This is actually what I think of all of you guys. Americans completely suck at being high income. They have so much money and yet they waste it. Zero care for efficiency whatsoever.

Edit: Making housing and healthcare expensive is a policy choice and can easily be averted in so many ways.


"$100k" means nothing without knowing the cost of living in the particular place a person lives. As an extreme example, $100k is not "affluent" if you live in a US city like San Francisco or New York. If you want to keep your housing expenses to a reasonable percentage of your income in those places, you're going to be living with several roommates in a small apartment in an old building in an undesirable neighborhood.

Even outside the most expensive cities, we have lots of affluent suburbs throughout the US, and I guarantee you those households have to earn quite a bit more than $100k/yr in order to live there.

Good luck if you're a family of four making $100k in one of these places. Well, you aren't in one of those places; you live somewhere much cheaper.


Poor people in America (25th percentile) have more money that middle class people (50th percentile) in Europe. This wasn't true 20 years ago.


Money is one thing, quality of life is another. Also money alone isn’t even a fair comparison because stuff costs different amounts across countries.


This is untrue. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_wealth_pe...

Median wealth per adult has the USA at #28, below Italy, Spain, Slovenia, and Portugal.


Income is the relevant metric. Most poor people (worldwide) have negligible savings.

USA 25th percentile 28k to 30k EU-27 50th percentile 24k to 26k.


This comment contradicts your earlier comment though, where you mentioned “poor people have”, a clear reference to wealth rather than earnings.


In the US people don't say "has money" as meaning net worth, they are generally talking about spendable money ie a paycheck unless you're talking about someone super rich who "has money" or "comes from money."


Maybe. Open to the idea others use the same words to mean different things. Will is being imprecise while also being argumentative which is fun.

In my literal mind, someone who spends money has none. They had it. To have money is to be wealthy, not to simply earn it.


That's simply not how it's used in the US then. To spend money is to have it in the first place.


> a clear reference to wealth rather than earnings.

No, sorry, it isn't. People commonly use the phrase "has money" to refer to income in American English.


Does 28k-30k in the US get you the same (or better) quality of life than 24k-26k gets you in Europe?

I doubt that; I expect a European on 24k is living better than an American on 30k. But that also depends on where: I'm sure 24k will get you farther in, say, Sofia, Bulgaria, than in Paris or Berlin. Same is true of different places in the US.


This is moving the goalposts. You said "have more money than."


Yes. Spendable money. Income. The common meaning of the phrase among non-rich people.


You have to look at purchasing power parity.

A bigger salary is no good if you have nothing left after paying housing, groceries, bills, education, healthcare...


more money but what about access to healthcare, education, vacation?


It's a shrinking issue once you get out of the bottom ~50%, and a non-issue once you get above ~75%.

Again, the deal with the US is that the rich live better and the poor live worse. Or put another way; people who make money get to keep more, and people who don't make money are given less.

Because there are so many more people who have money, and because those people like living comfortably, available healthcare and education is world class. Make sure not to read that as "All healthcare and education", it's "available healthcare and education".

Generally people who are earning a lot don't care as much about vacation, but every white collar job will generally give at least a standard 15 days off and 10 holidays. Ironically as you move up you are generally given more vacation while actually using less.


Poor people in the US have fully subsidized healthcare and education.

Americans don't have vacation in the same way Scandinavian countries don't have a minimum wage. Even the most left-leaning States in the US have not written it into law because it is effectively addressed by custom. Americans are sufficiently happy with it that vacation isn't a political topic.


I think we are seeing the decline of even this. The European debt crisis, the United States security umbrella being disinterested in Europe, austerity, increasing retirement age, an inability to defend Ukraine without the United States. The running gag they don't have AC...

Even poor populations worldwide have access to the 3 things you described, but the quality is lower.

European decline has been mentioned since the 1930s.


And yet the poorest 25th percentile of Americans are not enjoying a better quality of life than the European middle class. If those numbers are accurate, all they tell us is that personal wealth is an even worse indicator of having a life worth living than we would have thought 20 years ago.


Imagine being so bitter you are lying this much. Wow.


Not 75%, more like 95%. Only about the top 5% have a chance of a better life than the equivalent in Europe.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: