Prayers before Legislative Bodies

[pErvinalia]

I've talked to you about this oecd better life index multiple times before. I'm pretty sure you've never responded. Averages don't tell the story of the average person. Medians are a far better indicator. Particularly in a society like the US with such stark wealth and income inequality. All those at the top skew the averages a long way from the medians. That's not to say the US doesn't do ok with medians, but it puts it more in with the pack, not way ahead like you (and the index) portray.

[Forty Two]

Did you see the wealth inequality of the Netherlands? They have about the biggest wealth inequality in all of Europe, even with their supposed efforts to combat it. The top 10% of Netherlands -- despite all their efforts, as Dutchy will tell you about, to eliminate wealth inequality - own over 60% of everything there. Yet he wants to brag, because the US is higher than that - which we all know is because billionaires and millionaires tend to be Americans. The US has 17.3 million millionaires - highest in the world. 25% of all billionaires are American (and those American billionaires have 34% of all the wealth owned by billionaires).

The US is ahead of most of the pack, as is Australia, by the way.

Continental Europe likes to brag, but it's the Brits and its former colonies that tend to have the better systems. Capitalism, FTW!

I agree that the averages don't tell the whole story - and the high end can skew things up, etc. However, it must also be acknowledged that the same issue is exactly why mere wealth disparity does NOT provide a picture of how well people live in a given country. So often in these discussions, certain folks have found wealth disparity to be the only relevant measure. I.e. - wealth disparity = bad. However, understanding what you have just stated you understand, it means that wealth disparity is NOT the only factor to consider - and we have to consider the whole picture. The OECD information does not provide 100% of the picture, but it is additional information -- over and above wealth distribution - to consider whether one country is doing better than another.

Clearly, a country that has completely equal wealth for 100% of its citizens might sound good to someone who values equality most. However, if they are all equally destitute, one might well suggest that a system that has some inequality, but which results in a greater good for a greater number, might well be a better system. Don't you agree?

[Scot Dutchy]

Once again troll central kicks with a load of bollocks. Never fails. he lives in a dump of country but cant see it. Like poverty, bad health, bad education and bad social conditions they dont exist.

Just one point to prove the bollocks he writes:

More People Probably Work Multiple Jobs Than The Government Realizes

In America you have no idea who is unemployed.

Accurately knowing the number of people working jobs on the side is difficult. If you talk about the gig economy, for example, the government has three completely different estimates of what it includes. (There isn't even a single definition of unemployment.)

So stop quoting figures which are useless.

[laklak]

Is there nothing comparable in the US? If you owe money to someone and refuse to pay, surely, at some point the police will come and make you pay?

Sort of the same, but different. Depends on how much money is involved. In most states, if it's under $5000 you can go to small claims court and get a judgement against the debtor. Then you try to collect. If you're really, really pissed off and have lots of time and money, you can chase them and chase them, and eventually go back to court and get a court order that directs the deputies to confiscate the debtor's property, which is then auctioned to satisfy the debt. You can be jailed for refusing to pay a debt under some circumstances, particularly if you don't pay your taxes, or if you willfully violate a court order and are held in contempt of court. The latter happens in child support cases fairly often, but I've never seen it happen for consumer debt. If you owe a soccer club money and, decide not to pay it's basically tough shit for the soccer club.

For larger sums it gets more complicated, because there could be some level of fraud involved. If fraud is committed then you could be jailed for that offense, but not for just owing money.

[Scot Dutchy]

Nine ours is exactly the same. An American ex-pat my wife knew ignored a €16 parking fine by the time the court officials (bailiffs I suppose) it had risen to €2500 and they were knocking on her door.

[laklak]

You'd eventually go to jail for failure to pay a court fine here, too, in fact my youngest was arrested and hauled off to jail from work because she ignored (repeatedly) orders to pay a speeding ticket. But that's not private debt like soccer club dues, and there is no such thing as a "debt" owed to a church over tithes. How can there be? There's no consideration and therefore no contractual obligation.

[Scot Dutchy]

We have a lovely court here with an odd name; "Kantongerechtshof". It deals with a vast array of small claims, contract claims, industrial claims and small fines. A football club could and does use it. It is semi-formal but has considerable powers. It is a very old institution where burgers could sort out problems with a judge present

[NineBerry]

Soccer clubs should have the same right to try to get money someone owes them as the state. Why not? And why should religions organizations not demand membership fees just as soccer clubs do?

[Forty Two]

Soccer clubs should have the same right to try to get money someone owes them as the state. Why not? And why should religions organizations not demand membership fees just as soccer clubs do?

They can do what they want, but if you had churches here in the US asking to have citizens required to register as either Catholic or some other denomination (or non-religious) and then if one picked a denomination, a State mandated 8% tax would be imposed and paid over to the official churches/synagogues, then you'd have a rather fair bit of outrage here that church and state are being mixed.

The ability to "demand" membership fees does not require the taxing authority to collect it for them.

[Scot Dutchy]

Soccer clubs should have the same right to try to get money someone owes them as the state. Why not? And why should religions organizations not demand membership fees just as soccer clubs do?

Exactly.

[laklak]

Sure they can, but the issue here, at least to my uncivilized American mind, is giving the government authority to collect my soccer club dues using the entire repressive appartus of the police state. That goes for my cell phone bill, mortgage, credit card bills, and any and all other private debts. If y'all are OK with that level of intrusion that's great, I would resist it with every fiber of my being and all my horded ammunition. Fuck them. Governments are, by their very nature, totalitarian, and must be resisted, blocked, stymied, and otherwise restrained by all right-thinking citizens. That is why we have a Constitution that severely limits their power and a 2nd Amendment for when that fails.

[Sean Hayden]

I don't think I've understood it, because it sounds absurd. Do German churches own all Protestants everywhere or only those within Germany, and how does that work? Why should a German citizen be expected to pay a centralized Protestant authority in Germany on account of their being that particular faith? Perhaps they are, but they would rather support another authority or choose to recognize no authority? They can't claim to be of that faith then? Tough shit, you'll pay this Protestant authority?

German churches are mighty full of themselves aren't they?

[Scot Dutchy]

Sure they can, but the issue here, at least to my uncivilized American mind, is giving the government authority to collect my soccer club dues using the entire repressive appartus of the police state. That goes for my cell phone bill, mortgage, credit card bills, and any and all other private debts. If y'all are OK with that level of intrusion that's great, I would resist it with every fiber of my being and all my horded ammunition. Fuck them. Governments are, by their very nature, totalitarian, and must be resisted, blocked, stymied, and otherwise restrained by all right-thinking citizens. That is why we have a Constitution that severely limits their power and a 2nd Amendment for when that fails.

Yes lak. A total lack of comprehension. Never mind.

[Hermit]

Comparatively, the Netherlands has disposable income of $28,000 per capital, which is less than 2/3 that of Americans. Average American lives in a home about 2500 square feet, compared to a puny 1200 in the Netherlands.

How much, did you say, you pay for health insurance? Public transport and other amenities?

As for the size of homes, do keep population density in mind. US: 33/km². Netherlands: 417. Yes, it does make homes more expensive per square metre. Most people in western Europe don't even own houses. They live in apartments. I don't think that's a measure of well-being or lack thereof, though. I'd rather live in a small residence and have a tram or bus stop near my front door and shops within easy walking distance than live in a huge house where nobody gets anywhere unless they have a car, and I bet most Europeans would not like to swap with your conditions either. In the US two or more cars per household are not signs of wealth. They are utilities of necessity.

[laklak]

Yes lak. A total lack of comprehension. Never mind.

If you're OK with the government supervising your personal finances and sending police to collect dues for the lawn bowls club then who am I to criticize? I'd get the fuck out of that particular Dodge, but that's just me, I'm an anachronistic individualist and have no place in this modern, fair, collectivist society. Lucky for me I've pretty much dropped out of it, at least as far as is possible.