Jump to content

Alabama’s poor are richer than Europe’s middle class


MDM4AU

Recommended Posts

Alabama’s poor are richer than Europe’s middle class

AUBURN, Ala. — According to the Auburn-based Mises Institute, a free-market think tank named for the famed Austrian economist Ludwig von Mises, lower income Americans, including Alabamians, are actually richer than middle class Europeans.

Democratic politicians, most vocally those running for president, have made the debate over income inequality a centerpiece of the national discussion in recent years. Moving toward an even more redistributive economic system such as those found in many European countries, they say, will lead to a higher standard of living for all.

It is a common refrain, but not one borne out by data, according to thestudy’s author Ryan McMaken.

Continue reading HERE

Link to comment
Share on other sites





Alabama’s poor are richer than Europe’s middle class

AUBURN, Ala. — According to the Auburn-based Mises Institute, a free-market think tank named for the famed Austrian economist Ludwig von Mises, lower income Americans, including Alabamians, are actually richer than middle class Europeans.

Democratic politicians, most vocally those running for president, have made the debate over income inequality a centerpiece of the national discussion in recent years. Moving toward an even more redistributive economic system such as those found in many European countries, they say, will lead to a higher standard of living for all.

It is a common refrain, but not one borne out by data, according to thestudy’s author Ryan McMaken.

Continue reading HERE

Did you actually read this article ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes. Why?

Folks in those socialist bastions of Norway, Luxembourg and Switzerland do much better while having no worries about going bankrupt over healthcare or struggling to send their kids to college. Mises relies on mismanaged countries like Italy and Spain to make it's point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes. Why?

Folks in those socialist bastions of Norway, Luxembourg and Switzerland do much better while having no worries about going bankrupt over healthcare or struggling to send their kids to college. Mises relies on mismanaged countries like Italy and Spain to make it's point.

Wow...:no:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm all about the Nordic model. Feel the Bern.

Gimme that Norwegian spending power!

PS, Bern is in Switzerland. ;)

Dang right.

I'd put one of these on my car if I didn't think it'd get me shot around here.

feel-the-bern-bumper-sticker_87547304-b0c7-4f36-887c-50dd12124456.jpg?v=1441831390

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes. Why?

Folks in those socialist bastions of Norway, Luxembourg and Switzerland do much better while having no worries about going bankrupt over healthcare or struggling to send their kids to college. Mises relies on mismanaged countries like Italy and Spain to make it's point.

It the US would drill for and export oil like Norway we could support a socialist country as well. If the US limited immigration like Luxembourg we could be close to the same. Cheers! I have no answer for Switzerland, but I am sure it is out there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All these European countries benefited from our military presence during the cold war. They didn't really have to contribute a significant amount of resources to defense and therefore could indulge in all these welfare state policies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All these European countries benefited from our military presence during the cold war. They didn't really have to contribute a significant amount of resources to defense and therefore could indulge in all these welfare state policies.

Yep. Most ignore that nugget of info.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes. Why?

Folks in those socialist bastions of Norway, Luxembourg and Switzerland do much better while having no worries about going bankrupt over healthcare or struggling to send their kids to college. Mises relies on mismanaged countries like Italy and Spain to make it's point.

Did you actually read the article? You seem to be looking for an argument that isn't there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes. Why?

Folks in those socialist bastions of Norway, Luxembourg and Switzerland do much better while having no worries about going bankrupt over healthcare or struggling to send their kids to college. Mises relies on mismanaged countries like Italy and Spain to make it's point.

Wow... :no:

Did you read the article?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes. Why?

Folks in those socialist bastions of Norway, Luxembourg and Switzerland do much better while having no worries about going bankrupt over healthcare or struggling to send their kids to college. Mises relies on mismanaged countries like Italy and Spain to make it's point.

Did you actually read the article? You seem to be looking for an argument that isn't there.

I did and I don't follow your argument.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes. Why?

Folks in those socialist bastions of Norway, Luxembourg and Switzerland do much better while having no worries about going bankrupt over healthcare or struggling to send their kids to college. Mises relies on mismanaged countries like Italy and Spain to make it's point.

Wow... :no:

Wow what? I'm no socialist and have my doubts that we can implement or afford the Nordic model here even if I was in favor. But I noticed that the author was lumping some pretty poorly run countries in the mix as well. If the argument is that you can't compare the US to smaller more homogeneous populations like Norway, then the argument must also be that you can't compare countries like Portugal, Spain, Greece and Italy to the US either. They simply aren't analogous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I believe the Mises crowd are ideologues, not economists. Their faith in Austrian economics seems more emotional than supported by facts and data. Considering how much more aggregate wealth is held by the citizens of the United States, as opposed to any other country, I fail to see a genuine point being made. It sounds more like an excuse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's also this:

The numbers seem to back it up. Americans' average wealth tops $301,000 per adult, enough to rank us fourth on the latest Credit Suisse Global Wealth report.

But that figure doesn't tell you how the middle class American is doing.

Americans' median wealth is a mere $44,900 per adult -- half have more, half have less. That's only good enough for 19th place, below Japan, Canada, Australia and much of Western Europe.

"Americans tend to think of their middle class as being the richest in the world, but it turns out, in terms of wealth, they rank fairly low among major industrialized countries," said Edward Wolff, a New York University economics professor who studies net worth.

Why is there such a big difference between the two measures?

Super rich Americans skew average wealth upwards. The U.S. has 42% of the world's millionaires, and 49% of those with more than $50 million in assets.

This schism secures us the top rank in one net worth measure -- wealth inequality.

There's one main reason why the average Spaniard or Italian has more to his name than the typical American: real estate.

Home ownership rates are higher in many European countries than in the U.S., giving Joe European more assets to his name than his American counterpart. Plus, it's easier for Americans to borrow money, which eats away at their net worth, said Jim Davies, an economics professor at Western University in Ontario, Canada, and co-author of the Credit Suisse report.

Middle class Americans were also hurt greatly by the housing collapse at the end of the last decade. The median wealth of families was $77,300 in 2010, a nearly 40% drop from 2007, according to Federal Reserve statistics.

"Changes in home prices have a big effect on the wealth in the middle," Davies said.

Middle class Australians, by comparison, are leading the pack. The country's residents have the highest median net worth, coming in at $219,500. Australia also has low wealth inequality.

This is in part because Australians have a strong tradition of home ownership, though escalating prices have made it tougher for young adults to secure the Australian Dream. Those down under also have a mandatory retirement savings program, where they must squirrel away more than 9% of their income for their Golden Years, and they carry relatively low credit card and student loan debt.

Americans, meanwhile, are having trouble building wealth because wages have stagnated for more than a decade. Median household income was $51,017 in 2012, compared to $56,080 in 1999, according to the Census Bureau's most recent statistics.

There are many reasons why middle class incomes are suffering, including the decline of unions' power, the shift of jobs overseas and the increasing use of technology in the workplace, said Kenneth Thomas, professor of political science at University of Missouri, St. Louis.

Also, Americans have to pay more out of pocket for basics, such as health care and higher education, reducing their ability to build their nest egg.

"Middle class families haven't been able to save anything," Wolff said.

http://money.cnn.com/2014/06/11/news/economy/middle-class-wealth/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes. Why?

Folks in those socialist bastions of Norway, Luxembourg and Switzerland do much better while having no worries about going bankrupt over healthcare or struggling to send their kids to college. Mises relies on mismanaged countries like Italy and Spain to make it's point.

Did you actually read the article? You seem to be looking for an argument that isn't there.

I did and I don't follow your argument.

The article actually states,

So while there are still some disparities between incomes in the United States, the Mises study concludes, advocating for an economy closer to that of most European nations would actually leave Americans, and Alabamians, significantly worse off.

Didn't say all...

But you seem to want to argue with me that there is a claim made that the US or Alabama is better off than "Norway, Luxembourg and Switzerland" based on a comparison to Spain and Italy. Furthermore, when you ask someone on here, "Did you actually read this article ?" you usually aren't really wanting to discuss things but argue with them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I believe the Mises crowd are ideologues, not economists. Their faith in Austrian economics seems more emotional than supported by facts and data. Considering how much more aggregate wealth is held by the citizens of the United States, as opposed to any other country, I fail to see a genuine point being made. It sounds more like an excuse.

Fair enough. I don't know that much about them. I thought this article was relevant to this forum since the "income equality" and comparisons to other countries is "NEWS" right now and the study came out of Auburn. I think that looking at the "buying power" was an interesting take.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the Mises article:

"the US has lower childhood poverty rates than Greece, Spain, Mexico, Latvia, and Israel, all of which are OECD countries or regarded as peer countries."

That statement should tell you something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's also this:

The numbers seem to back it up. Americans' average wealth tops $301,000 per adult, enough to rank us fourth on the latest Credit Suisse Global Wealth report.

But that figure doesn't tell you how the middle class American is doing.

Americans' median wealth is a mere $44,900 per adult -- half have more, half have less. That's only good enough for 19th place, below Japan, Canada, Australia and much of Western Europe.

"Americans tend to think of their middle class as being the richest in the world, but it turns out, in terms of wealth, they rank fairly low among major industrialized countries," said Edward Wolff, a New York University economics professor who studies net worth.

Why is there such a big difference between the two measures?

Super rich Americans skew average wealth upwards. The U.S. has 42% of the world's millionaires, and 49% of those with more than $50 million in assets.

This schism secures us the top rank in one net worth measure -- wealth inequality.

There's one main reason why the average Spaniard or Italian has more to his name than the typical American: real estate.

Home ownership rates are higher in many European countries than in the U.S., giving Joe European more assets to his name than his American counterpart. Plus, it's easier for Americans to borrow money, which eats away at their net worth, said Jim Davies, an economics professor at Western University in Ontario, Canada, and co-author of the Credit Suisse report.

Middle class Americans were also hurt greatly by the housing collapse at the end of the last decade. The median wealth of families was $77,300 in 2010, a nearly 40% drop from 2007, according to Federal Reserve statistics.

"Changes in home prices have a big effect on the wealth in the middle," Davies said.

Middle class Australians, by comparison, are leading the pack. The country's residents have the highest median net worth, coming in at $219,500. Australia also has low wealth inequality.

This is in part because Australians have a strong tradition of home ownership, though escalating prices have made it tougher for young adults to secure the Australian Dream. Those down under also have a mandatory retirement savings program, where they must squirrel away more than 9% of their income for their Golden Years, and they carry relatively low credit card and student loan debt.

Americans, meanwhile, are having trouble building wealth because wages have stagnated for more than a decade. Median household income was $51,017 in 2012, compared to $56,080 in 1999, according to the Census Bureau's most recent statistics.

There are many reasons why middle class incomes are suffering, including the decline of unions' power, the shift of jobs overseas and the increasing use of technology in the workplace, said Kenneth Thomas, professor of political science at University of Missouri, St. Louis.

Also, Americans have to pay more out of pocket for basics, such as health care and higher education, reducing their ability to build their nest egg.

"Middle class families haven't been able to save anything," Wolff said.

http://money.cnn.com...e-class-wealth/

Very insightful. Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes. Why?

Folks in those socialist bastions of Norway, Luxembourg and Switzerland do much better while having no worries about going bankrupt over healthcare or struggling to send their kids to college. Mises relies on mismanaged countries like Italy and Spain to make it's point.

Did you actually read the article? You seem to be looking for an argument that isn't there.

I did and I don't follow your argument.

The article actually states,

So while there are still some disparities between incomes in the United States, the Mises study concludes, advocating for an economy closer to that of most European nations would actually leave Americans, and Alabamians, significantly worse off.

Didn't say all...

But you seem to want to argue with me that there is a claim made that the US or Alabama is better off than "Norway, Luxembourg and Switzerland" based on a comparison to Spain and Italy. Furthermore, when you ask someone on here, "Did you actually read this article ?" you usually aren't really wanting to discuss things but argue with them.

I wasn't trying to be personal and I'm sorry if you took it that way.

My issue is with the article and the title makes a broad and grossly misleading statement: "Alabama’s poor are richer than Europe’s middle class"

That's a conclusion not even supported by a thorough reading of the article.

I pointed out Norway because it's social welfare net is one of the most comprehensive in the world and yet their population still has more buying power than Americans. This is a strong refutation of the Mises, and most so-called Conservative economic philosophy.

I've traveled throughout Europe and Alabama and I can tell you without hesitation that if the choice was between being poor in Alabama or middle class in Europe, it's not even a close call.

Titan's post provided a good elaboration of my point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...