Americans Outearn Europeans, Vol. 366

[Libertas Vel Mors]

https://twitter.com/StatisticUrban/status/1779287521110962409



Very interesting comparison. Of course, it is nothing new -- but it is yet another reminder of the staggering quality of life differences between here and there.

[Libertas Vel Mors]

/snip

Very interesting comparison. Of course, it is nothing new -- but it is yet another reminder of the staggering quality of life differences between here and there.

Naturally, this is also a piece of evidence for the superiority of the free market system.

[dead0man]

the average home in Utah is 3.5 times bigger than the average home in the UK

[jojoju1998]

/snip

Very interesting comparison. Of course, it is nothing new -- but it is yet another reminder of the staggering quality of life differences between here and there.

Naturally, this is also a piece of evidence for the superiority of the free market system.

This is a bad comparison to make. Really. For one thing, you can't compare a country that has a very low population density ( relatively speaking ) to countries, that have both very high population densities, and cities that have been built over thousands of years. Compare for instance Brussells Belgium to Houston Texas. Of course, Brussells is going to have smaller houses. They don't have anywhere else to build ! Meanwhile, Houston is going to keep on sprawling.


Come on man, try better !

A better comparison to make would be the Heritage Foundation's very own economic freedom index. https://www.heritage.org/index/pages/report#indexExecSummary

The US is at a paltry 25th place. In the top ten ? Singapore, Switzerland, Ireland, ( countries with smaller homes by the way ), and guess what ? They all have Universal Healthcare.

[Skill and Chance]

the average home in Utah is 3.5 times bigger than the average home in the UK

Well yeah, that's because they (historically) have 3.5 times more kids LOL

[Libertas Vel Mors]

/snip

Very interesting comparison. Of course, it is nothing new -- but it is yet another reminder of the staggering quality of life differences between here and there.

Naturally, this is also a piece of evidence for the superiority of the free market system.

This is a bad comparison to make. Really. For one thing, you can't compare a country that has a very low population density ( relatively speaking ) to countries, that have both very high population densities, and cities that have been built over thousands of years. Compare for instance Brussells Belgium to Houston Texas. Of course, Brussells is going to have smaller houses. They don't have anywhere else to build ! Meanwhile, Houston is going to keep on sprawling.


Come on man, try better !

A better comparison to make would be the Heritage Foundation's very own economic freedom index. https://www.heritage.org/index/pages/report#indexExecSummary

The US is at a paltry 25th place. In the top ten ? Singapore, Switzerland, Ireland, ( countries with smaller homes by the way ), and guess what ? They all have Universal Healthcare.

If that's the case, then why is there no observable correlation between the population density of these countries and the size of their houses? For example, the Dutch have larger homes than the Germans who have larger homes than the Poles, despite the density relationship being the opposite.

[Storr]

I feel like this is more a reflection of population density and land use than anything. Naturally the UK is going to have smaller a smaller average home size than the US because there's limited land.

[Libertas Vel Mors]

/snip

Very interesting comparison. Of course, it is nothing new -- but it is yet another reminder of the staggering quality of life differences between here and there.

Naturally, this is also a piece of evidence for the superiority of the free market system.

This is a bad comparison to make. Really. For one thing, you can't compare a country that has a very low population density ( relatively speaking ) to countries, that have both very high population densities, and cities that have been built over thousands of years. Compare for instance Brussells Belgium to Houston Texas. Of course, Brussells is going to have smaller houses. They don't have anywhere else to build ! Meanwhile, Houston is going to keep on sprawling.


Come on man, try better !

A better comparison to make would be the Heritage Foundation's very own economic freedom index. https://www.heritage.org/index/pages/report#indexExecSummary

The US is at a paltry 25th place. In the top ten ? Singapore, Switzerland, Ireland, ( countries with smaller homes by the way ), and guess what ? They all have Universal Healthcare.

If that's the case, then why is there no observable correlation between the population density of these countries and the size of their houses? For example, the Dutch have larger homes than the Germans who have larger homes than the Poles, despite the density relationship being the opposite.

Actually, on further thought, the above is wrong, although not wrong in the way that you meant it. There is an observable correlation -- but it is the exact opposite of that you were suggesting, with the denser countries actually having larger houses. Naturally, I don't think this is a causal relationship, so this should put to rest your/Storr's suggestions that the US only/primarily has larger homes because of lower density.

[Libertas Vel Mors]

I feel like this is more a reflection of population density and land use than anything. Naturally the UK is going to have smaller a smaller average home size than the US because there's limited land.

But then why does the Netherlands have a larger average home size (than the UK) with less land (than the UK)?

[Storr]

/snip

Very interesting comparison. Of course, it is nothing new -- but it is yet another reminder of the staggering quality of life differences between here and there.

Naturally, this is also a piece of evidence for the superiority of the free market system.

This is a bad comparison to make. Really. For one thing, you can't compare a country that has a very low population density ( relatively speaking ) to countries, that have both very high population densities, and cities that have been built over thousands of years. Compare for instance Brussells Belgium to Houston Texas. Of course, Brussells is going to have smaller houses. They don't have anywhere else to build ! Meanwhile, Houston is going to keep on sprawling.


Come on man, try better !

A better comparison to make would be the Heritage Foundation's very own economic freedom index. https://www.heritage.org/index/pages/report#indexExecSummary

The US is at a paltry 25th place. In the top ten ? Singapore, Switzerland, Ireland, ( countries with smaller homes by the way ), and guess what ? They all have Universal Healthcare.

If that's the case, then why is there no observable correlation between the population density of these countries and the size of their houses? For example, the Dutch have larger homes than the Germans who have larger homes than the Poles, despite the density relationship being the opposite.

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/commie_block

[jojoju1998]

I feel like this is more a reflection of population density and land use than anything. Naturally the UK is going to have smaller a smaller average home size than the US because there's limited land.

But then why does the Netherlands have a larger average home size (than the UK) with less land (than the UK)?

Government regulations. The Netherlands mandates a minium average square feet size.

The UK has no such mandate.

[Libertas Vel Mors]

I feel like this is more a reflection of population density and land use than anything. Naturally the UK is going to have smaller a smaller average home size than the US because there's limited land.

But then why does the Netherlands have a larger average home size (than the UK) with less land (than the UK)?

Government regulations. The Netherlands mandates a minium average square feet size.

The UK has no such mandate.

That regulation only bans tiny homes equivalent to 194 square feet. There is no reason to think there is any substantial connection between and the Netherlands' larger home sizes.

[Libertas Vel Mors]

/snip

Very interesting comparison. Of course, it is nothing new -- but it is yet another reminder of the staggering quality of life differences between here and there.

Naturally, this is also a piece of evidence for the superiority of the free market system.

This is a bad comparison to make. Really. For one thing, you can't compare a country that has a very low population density ( relatively speaking ) to countries, that have both very high population densities, and cities that have been built over thousands of years. Compare for instance Brussells Belgium to Houston Texas. Of course, Brussells is going to have smaller houses. They don't have anywhere else to build ! Meanwhile, Houston is going to keep on sprawling.


Come on man, try better !

A better comparison to make would be the Heritage Foundation's very own economic freedom index. https://www.heritage.org/index/pages/report#indexExecSummary

The US is at a paltry 25th place. In the top ten ? Singapore, Switzerland, Ireland, ( countries with smaller homes by the way ), and guess what ? They all have Universal Healthcare.

If that's the case, then why is there no observable correlation between the population density of these countries and the size of their houses? For example, the Dutch have larger homes than the Germans who have larger homes than the Poles, despite the density relationship being the opposite.

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/commie_block

Most of Germany was never under communism, and substitute Spain for Poland then.

[Crumpets]

I'd be more curious to see a comparison of the average square footage of rental units and apartments.

[Born to Slay. Forced to Work.]

American houses are too big and are only getting bigger which is exasperating the housing crisis

[DrScholl]

Larger houses aren't necessarily a good thing. The United States is built out in a lot of areas and large homes occupy lots that could have had smaller homes built on them to accommodate more people.

[dead0man]

the average home in Utah is 3.5 times bigger than the average home in the UK

Well yeah, that's because they (historically) have 3.5 times more kids LOL

I considered adding that caveat and then looked up the relevant data and was kinda surprised.  I didn't expect it to actually be 3.5 times bigger.  Like a 1.9 to 3.8, but alas, we are both wrong, it's actually close.  Utah is the largest in the nation, not a shocker, but it's only 3.19.  UK, on the other hand, is 2.36.

edit-that's 346 sqft per person in the UK and 878 for Utah.

[Independents for Nihilism]

I think the within-continent comparisons are more interesting than between. Why does Iowa have the third smallest homes in the US for example? And how does Denmark have the largest in Europe, they stacking them like Lego?

[Storr]

You can't pull a random statistic and claim that it means one system is better than another. Greater average square footage doesn't equal greater economic success. It just means Americans buy larger homes.

Do higher home ownership rates in former communist countries mean communism was a success? Obviously not. (The country in the graphic between Slovakia and Latvia is Poland.)

[Libertas Vel Mors]

You can't pull a random statistic and claim that it means one system is better than another. Greater average square footage doesn't equal greater economic success. It just means Americans buy larger homes.

Do higher home ownership rates in former communist countries mean communism was a success? Obviously not. (The country in the graphic between Slovakia and Latvia is Poland.)

No, but I think one can plausibly argue that home ownership rates and home size reflect different things.

[ingemann]

Here’s my perspective on USA being richer than Europe, I think few Americans understand how much UHC, relative low medicine price, a mostly functioning school system, a social security net, low inequality, high food safety standard, and low crimes rates means, and it’s not really something most Europeans are willing to trade for bigger houses and bigger cars.

Honestly looking at American and European politics and culture today, while both have their dysfunctional moments, do Americans really come across as happier? Because Americans to me come across as a people deeply unhappy about the way USA is going and much more unhappy about their institutions and political system. Only the British really seem to compete with USA, and among them there’s this feeling that soon their long national nightmare will soon end and they can build back Britain better.

[jojoju1998]

Here’s my perspective on USA being richer than Europe, I think few Americans understand how much UHC, relative low medicine price, a mostly functioning school system, a social security net, low inequality, high food safety standard, and low crimes rates means, and it’s not really something most Europeans are willing to trade for bigger houses and bigger cars.

Honestly looking at American and European politics and culture today, while both have their dysfunctional moments, do Americans really come across as happier? Because Americans to me come across as a people deeply unhappy about the way USA is going and much more unhappy about their institutions and political system. Only the British really seem to compete with USA, and among them there’s this feeling that soon their long national nightmare will soon end and they can build back Britain better.

Reminder : the US doesn’t have a singular school system. It has 35,000 decentralized autonomous school districts.


Crime rates also vary and depend by state, city, county, even neighborhood.


It’s the same for healthcare. The US doesn’t have a national healthcare system. It has 50 states with varying laws, and rules. We have public and private hospitals. Great insurance and bad. Great doctors and crap doctors.

[jojoju1998]

Here’s my perspective on USA being richer than Europe, I think few Americans understand how much UHC, relative low medicine price, a mostly functioning school system, a social security net, low inequality, high food safety standard, and low crimes rates means, and it’s not really something most Europeans are willing to trade for bigger houses and bigger cars.

Honestly looking at American and European politics and culture today, while both have their dysfunctional moments, do Americans really come across as happier? Because Americans to me come across as a people deeply unhappy about the way USA is going and much more unhappy about their institutions and political system. Only the British really seem to compete with USA, and among them there’s this feeling that soon their long national nightmare will soon end and they can build back Britain better.

The US and Europe are still far happier than East Asia.

[Benjamin Frank 2.0]

Redo the wealth comparisons (not that that's what's being compared here directly) but it's the OPs claim, with the United States $ no longer being the world reserve currency/petrodollar.

There are some on the political right (like the OP) who crow about U.S wealth that's greatly boosted by this $ status that the U.S gained 50+ years ago and that, mostly thanks to the enormous deficits of right wing Republican Presidents, the United States $ seems to be slowly losing.

Also, if you don't understand how this status boosts the U.S economy relative to other economies, then you probably shouldn't be making posts about economics when you have no understanding of economics.

[jojoju1998]

Here’s my perspective on USA being richer than Europe, I think few Americans understand how much UHC, relative low medicine price, a mostly functioning school system, a social security net, low inequality, high food safety standard, and low crimes rates means, and it’s not really something most Europeans are willing to trade for bigger houses and bigger cars.

Honestly looking at American and European politics and culture today, while both have their dysfunctional moments, do Americans really come across as happier? Because Americans to me come across as a people deeply unhappy about the way USA is going and much more unhappy about their institutions and political system. Only the British really seem to compete with USA, and among them there’s this feeling that soon their long national nightmare will soon end and they can build back Britain better.

Reminder : the US doesn’t have a singular school system. It has 35,000 decentralized autonomous school districts.


Crime rates also vary and depend by state, city, county, even neighborhood.


It’s the same for healthcare. The US doesn’t have a national healthcare system. It has 50 states with varying laws, and rules. We have public and private hospitals. Great insurance and bad. Great doctors and crap doctors.

It's the same thing regarding social safety nets.

We have 50 state social safety nets. And colletively, spending on social welfare averages about 800 billion a year.

https://www.urban.org/policy-centers/cross-center-initiatives/state-and-local-finance-initiative/state-and-local-backgrounders/public-welfare-expenditures

Things like Medicaid, SNAP, are all handled and administered at the state and local levels.