Today's discussion about the news
Comments
-
I think you've lost track of your own argument to be honest. You seem to be back suggesting that they are spending more on housing but get better quality for their money. If you're earning $100k and spending $50k on housing that's no different to earning $75k and spending $25k on housing. Yes, they are still left with more than their UK counterparts (in some parts of the economy) but it is far less than their initial salary would suggest. That is what the article is saying.
0 -
. . . I'm lost here
I may be as thick as the metaphorical whale omlette but how does spending more on housing, insurance, transport and health whilst spending approximately the same on everything else make USAnians better off? I guess that's what several people have pointed out further up but . . .
Wilier Izoard XP0 -
This is a result of focusing on the top line figures instead of disposable left over after paying all bills.
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Spending more doesn't automatically make it better. I mean, poll after poll suggests that America isn't all that happy with their lot.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
-
Hadn’t realised how skewed everyone is that the idea that people with more money spend more money is so difficult to get your head around.
Millionaires probably spend more than people on minimum wage but just because their lambo cost them £350k does not suddenly mean they are £350k poorer because the minimum wage person takes the bus.
0 -
I think most people assumed that you implied it with comments like “Americans spend loads of on things like nice cars, housing and high quality healthcare so they’re actually as poor as we are”. That sounds like you were suggesting they pay more but get something better (high quality). I know I also assumed that your comment about living in Eritrea was making the point i.e. a house in the US costs more than in Eritrea but is much better. You also made a point about disposable income - if you are spending more on something that is (questionably) better but a 'necessity' you still don't have more disposable income. Your argument is all over the place.
0 -
-
Erm... not sure that this is the best way to dismiss all the counter arguments presented by, well, everyone but you. You're not doing yourself any favours here.
0 -
You spend more on housing than boomers, so yours is better presumably?
0 -
-
-
Sure and this nicely highlights the problems of trying to reverse engineer an extreme example from a population level average.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
-
No it isn't. According to the graph.
0 -
It's been your own argument for the previous 65 pages.
0 -
Do you think property costs are suitably low in the UK?
0 -
Ah, now I'm convinced. If only you'd posted that scientific analysis earlier.
0 -
This is quite entertaining.
RC are you saying the USAianans spend more on housing and health because they can, and could easily buy smaller houses and spend less on healthcare if they wanted to.
Well, in quite a lot of the country the size of a continent, it's hard to find an 800st ft flat. And yes, you are correct that healthcare spending is discretionary, depending whether or not you want any.
Thank you for your robust analysis that in no way backs up what anyone has ever tried to tell you before.
0 -
-
-
I'm sure in Hong Kong they spend more on housing and have much smaller flats. Paupers.
But then Hong Kong is 4th on the UN development index, so something doesn't quite compute.
0 -
Too many sitting ducks. I need a break.
0 -
-
Thanks for confirming yet another thing I've told you.
0 -
It was housing and healthcare wasn't it?
0 -
-
So, yes, then.
Bummer about a large country with space for bigger homes is that it costs more to travel around it.
Same thing with adjusted for costs; if the next nearest country is a thousand miles away, makes it hard to benefit from your buying power anywhere else.
Have you got any other splendid points to make?
0 -
Weren't you saying earlier today that Russia was only a stones throw?
- Genesis Croix de Fer
- Dolan Tuono0 -
What does "... have more transportation and housing" even mean?
And again if everything is so much 'more' in the US, how come they die three years earlier and are so pissed off with their lot?
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0
