We didn’t gain our independence from the British nanny state by coincidence.
EI (which I assume means Employment Insurance), which I presume is a mandatory fee paid by the employer, pays for the “insurance”. So it’s a compulsory contribution to government revenue, but it’s not a tax. Good to know.
Suppose that I need one person to work the counter at McD’s. If the mother steps out of the workforce and another person steps in, then we have added another job to the economy, right? There are now two people working? Or is it just one? If we have only one register, but I’m paying two people to run it, how many jobs is that?
In other news, somebody just threw a brick through window. Thank God that this happened. Now I can stimulate the economy of Midland by paying the window-fixer to fix my window. If that person hadn’t broken my window, Midland’s economy would be $300 poorer.
I’m sure you were saying this for fun, but at the time of independence, Britain was hardly a nanny state. 
The nanny state was partly a product of WWI and mostly a product of WWII.
Austria Maternity leave: 16 weeks at 100% of pay Leave for either parent: 2 years for either parent unpaid but with state benefits
Croatia Maternity leave: 1 year but 26 weeks at 100% and a flat rate for the rest Leave for either parent: 3 years for either parent unpaid but with state benefits
Czech Republic Maternity leave: 28 weeks at 70% of pay Leave for either parent: 3 years for either parent unpaid but with state benefits
Denmark Maternity leave: 18 weeks for mothers + 32 weeks for either parent both at 100% of pay
France Maternity leave: 16 weeks at 70% of pay Leave for either parent: 3 years for either parent unpaid but with state benefits
Germany Maternity leave: 14 weeks at 100% of pay Leave for either parent: 1 year for either parent at 67% of pay + 2 years unpaid but with state benefits
Ireland Maternity leave: 42 weeks, 26 weeks at 80% unpaid with state benefits for the rest Leave for either parent: 1 year each unpaid but with state benefits
Italy Maternity leave: 22 weeks at 80% Leave for either parent: 26 weeks each at 30% + state benefits
Norway Maternity leave: 25 week with 100% or 45 weeks with 80% + 14 weeks for the father at 100% Leave for either parent:
Sweden Maternity leave: 14 weeks at 80% of pay Leave for either parent: 65 weeks at 80% for either parent + 15 weeks unpaid with state benefits
UK Maternity leave: 6 weeks at 90% of pay + 32 weeks at 90% capped + 14 weeks unpaid Leave for either parent: 2 weeks for father at 90% and 13 weeks each with state benefits
Pretty much every developed nation takes better care of mothers and provides better conditions for starting a family than the US. I wonder if the bottom rank in the social mobility index in the same peer group is a result of these and similar policies. After all, a lot of women stay home because they have no other choice. It may be expensive to provide These levels of social security but it may also be ultimately worth it from a pure economic point of view. Land of opportunity? That would be Sweden or Denmark…
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/80/The_Great_Gatsby_Curve.png
missed this earlier in the thread. Personally I wouldn’t say anything if the guys are more senior. If they were a Brit and I knew them as a colleague I would acknowlegde it as a joke just so they were aware that other people were noticing it. I’d just ask them if their phone handset was broken or something and laugh it off, that’s essentially British for “stop fucking talking with your phone on speaker or I will end you.” Passive aggressive but that’s just how we are.
YEF, low intergenerational mobility and low dispersion is by definition the opposite of opportunity. Apparently you’re so far removed from that you don’t even know what land of opportunity means. Which brings us back to the difference between nanny states and the US (which does just fine without reproduction subsidies). That’s really unfortunate those other backwater countries need that, but I will be praying that the monarchies of many of those countries continue to provide for their loyal subjects.
^ Not sure what you’re referring to. The U.S. has one of the highest generational income persistence in the developed world (lowest intergenerational mobility), other than Italy and the U.K. And by a large amount. The Nordics show little correlation between parental income and that of their children. Tons of mobility up and down there. This is probably due to quality education and health care access, giving kids a more equal shot at life. There may be the opportunity to hit it big in the U.S., but you’re not likely to do so if poor. In the U.S. the poor stay poor and the rich get richer, in general. http://www.oecd.org/centrodemexico/medios/44582910.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwiJk7KP2NvKAhWFLmMKHQ-zCesQFggZMAA&usg=AFQjCNHoMfyUKzuhw9IvvefVtII_DhdBvg&sig2=aqbDcWQgP4WD881V84yz4A
I was using the chart he provided. But yes, I was referring to the opportunity to hit it big in the US. We don’t attract the world’s largest immigrant population by accident.
Also, your link to the chart doesn’t work. So I can’t comment on your income persistence, which may just be code for not taxing the rich back in line.
Look, the root of the problem is we’re talking about open floor plans and lactation suites come up, which prompts Geo to start in about how the US is inferior because of maternity leave of all things because obviously he’s gotta pursue his agenda.
So I jokingly came back at him for it about the US being the best which is apparently a trigger word for literally every foreigner.
Not long ago, GB used a gun thread to start on the US and how backwards it is despite that not being the topic. Everytime there’s a gun event in the US there’s a long line of people that have to start about the US being so X, Y and Z.
Maybe in the 60’s through 80’s there was a shift as the US saw it’s wealth increase where our travelers were very uneducated and arrogant that made the ROW irritated or maybe it is our role as a superpower that makes them feel that way.
But it never ceases to make me laugh when I watch a foreigner (usually European) nose their way into a conversation without catalyst to explain why the US is inferior. The best part is always the finale when they wrap up the monologue with a quip devoid of all self awareness calling Americans arrogant and rude, then walk away.
Literally no where is it acceptable to walk around telling countries what is wrong with their culture for no reason. I’ve never seen an American walk around Europe or South / Central America and just address someone that way out of the blue or do it to a visiting foreigner, but I’ve seen the reverse enough times I could lip sync the conversation.
You can go on about foreign policy in the ME, but I think when heads start getting chopped off you can begin to make exceptions, not to mention the UK was along for the ride and the fact that it took less than a day after the Paris attacks for France to bust out the rhetoric and call on the US for support.
^BS just pwned y’all.
Case settled. Breastfeeding is totally sexy.
i thought bieber = canada’s sinatra?
^ Not really. And its completely normal to discuss pros and cons of different approaches to handling things. I don’t think the U.S. is inferior… There are many things about the U.S. that are far superior to other countries. My views on this topic are certainly supported by some if not many Americans. It’s not some left field view. And come on, Americans don’t comment on how other countries work? Give me a break. I’m sure no American on here has ever made a comment about India or China or Europeans… It’s just comments like BS’s land of opportunity nonsense that are factually wrong that need to be address. I don’t care if the U.S. chooses to have one of the lowest intergenerational mobility as part of their culture, just don’t say that the U.S. is so much better than other countries at meritocracy and social mobility when it’s factually untrue. Just like the immigration comment… As a percentage of population, many countries have much higher immigration levels than the U.S. But that doesn’t fit BS’s worldview.
Jeez. A bit sensitive, are we? What are you blabbering on about? Nobody said something was wrong with your culture. Nobody suggested that the US is inferior. I just meant to point out that the standard in the developed world is very different and that the US might have potential here to catch up. That’s what we do here right? Just have a discussion?
And if you are up for that maybe you want to revisit the chart and give it a second look? You wrote “low intergenerational mobility and low dispersion is by definition the opposite of opportunity”. Absolutely. The US has one of the highest scores of intergenerational immobility. This means low mobility. This means little opportunity. Clear now?
No, it’s not a score, it’s measured by elasticity and the US has a higher elasticity, meaning, higher mobility. Higher elasticity + higher dispersion = more opportunity. Next time if you’re going to use a chart, make sure you understand it. I actually went to the source page and clarified to be sure.
I still haven’t seen any evidence of this. Your link didn’t work and you just seem to be saying things. But taking your point, the US has similar mobility to the UK and Italy (not exactly caste societies) and then you’re comparing the Nordic societies. I’d say two things. The Nordes have like 4 big companies and they’re essentially the size of Florida from a population standpoint (combined) with the diversity of Wyoming, I don’t htink there’s a whole lot the US can take from them that will have practical applications. Maybe another factor is that Norway in particular is an oil rich nation with a lower population than many US cities. I mean, lets be serious in our comparisons if we’re going to play the policy game. If intergenerational mobility means moving from clerk at your local municipal office to senior clerk, then yes, the nordes have that on lockdown.
Singapore and Belgium are also killing it, but the US, can’t be a homogeneous isolated city state dependent on a single service industry with an infrastructural zone the size of Pittsburgh and the global influence of a fruit fly so what’s your point?
Secondly, Americans by and large do not parade around judging China or Europe to the degree other countries do. Case in point, the threads I’ve mentioned. You just have to look around to see the behavior.
^ IIRC, generally intergenerational mobility tends to be sticky. I think (without looking at stats) is that in the US you wind up with a lot more really wealthy, and a lot more really poor people than other countries like the Northern European countries, Canada, etc. Countries with higher taxes, social safety net, etc. Not to mention the nordic countries have homogenous populations that are the size of the greater Houston. The comparisons can me made sure but it’s really are not apples to apples.
check out Australia mate
I don’t think BS realises how diverse Europe is… Sweden for example is 20% first and second gen immigrants. Way more than the U.S. Belgium can fit into that boat too (an example he provided). Again, not grounded in reality. I’ll try to post that link again, I’m on my phone so its not easy. It’s a PDF. http://www.oecd.org/centrodemexico/medios/44582910.pdf
Boy, you are stubborn. Yes it measures elasticity but it is still a score. You honestly think up there in the right top corner with China and Brazil people have the most opportunity and the most mobility? Why do you think it is called the gatsby curve?
This one should be more clear:
Ok, economist chalks that up to higher stratification, rather than lower overall mobility: