We pay high tax here in the Netherlands. We understand why and see it coming back all around us. Look at our infrastructure our schools our health care. It's high on tax but at the end of the line the publicis better off for it! That's what's tax is all about!! You pay your tax your government spents it where it's needed.
@Tinoyevski I dont agree. The US used to be a leader in affordable education 60 years ago. But slowly American politics started to degrade it. Just look at how much US government spends today on education per capita as it did decades ago.
@@Tinoyevski sorry, that is just BS. When you cut funding per student, you end up with less critical thinkers. It’s a proven fact. The rise of great nations in the past had mainly to do with an educated populace.
@@Tinoyevski The culture provided by parents is a certain amount of information, just as knowledge - and also social culture - is provided by the school. They are different in scope and nature but complementary. Besides, parents without prior school education will provide their children with a culture of questionable quality. In caveman times, parents also passed on some kind of culture to their children.
Generally in Europe we indeed pay heavy taxes. Nobody likes to pay taxes so we naturally grumble about them, but... when we get seriously sick, receive expensive healthcare at no cost, when our children attend the university, not to mention our X weeks of yearly paid vacations... we get something in return. Nobody on our side of the ocean goes bankrupt for being ill, and nobody has to reimburse heavy loans for umpteen years after attending college. "Work to live", don't "live to work", that's what most Europeans go by.
I live in Hungary, and yeah you could say the same here that it's not always the truth, like free health is an option, but it's not always the quality you are looking for. But on the other hand, life insurances that contain the "cover your medical costs if you get seriously ill" are not that high priced. Public health is as mostly is for those who can't afford to pay for it. They have the option to get it for free. Of course you may need to wait months for a more serious surgery, but still you can get it for free. Or take a loan and get it sooner. The important is that you have the option. What the Americans doesn't have.
Of coures if you live there, you gonna curse the system everyday and wish the 'good' life of the goverment, but after everything it's a much better system.
Don't look so worried you two!!! you are fine as you are ,people see you as a couple that are very well suited and laid back with life ,just carry on being who you are
Most of what the US considers to be Capitalism is actually Corporate Monopolies. The guy that invented Capitalism was Scottish. Adam Smith argued that the free-market system along with free trade would produce true national wealth, benefiting all social classes, not just the privileged few. Which is what European Socialist Capitalism is supposed to work towards. Monopolies kill the free market and consolidate power and wealth in greater proportion for the wealthy until nothing is left for anyone else.
@@robw6330 I'm from the UK and had to wait a whole 2 days to see my doctor but I didn't have to pay anything to get that service. (because my and everyone else's taxes have already paid for it). However UK Doctors will see you the same day via triage appointments, if they and you deem it to be urgent enough but not so urgent, that you need to got to A&E.
We often hear from Americans that we in the UK are taxed heavily with the starting rate of 20%. However, the first $15,600 of income in the UK is not taxed at all, whereas in the USA, up to $11,600 is taxed at 10%. VAT our sales tax is said to be high at 20% however many otems carry no tax. Most foods are not taxed, and many items are taxed at the lower rates of 10% or 5%. Comparisons are difficult as many taxes in the USA vary by state. However, if you take an average size family on average income in average priced house driving an average car, then the Americans tax burden for those people is roughly 8% higher in the USA than in the UK. For low paid workers the difference increases to about 15%. For high earners, it switches. The USA pays 24 % less than the uk. This is calculation inclued all local and national taxes in both countries. So these figures vary from state to state in the USA. It also takes into account tax credits for low eraners and social secutry payments, which are higher in the UK. However its doent take into account the cost of health insurance and co-pays in the USA when those are taken into account the gaps grow larger in favour of the UK. These comparisons are from sudies done by the OECD and university around the world.
US healthcare expenses are ~50% higher per capita than nations like Germany and Norway, despite offering no universal healthcare. There's a reason why every other developed nation on Earth, has adopted a variant of universal healthcare.
Re taxes, I find it interesting that health insurance costs don't seem to be factored into the proportion of income spent on taxes when Americans say how much less tax they pay than Europeans as this IS included in taxes for us, so a fair comparison ought to include your health insurance costs, including not just the monthly figures, but the crazyily high excesses you have to fork out when you do need to use health care services (I think you call it copay). Factoring all this in, I'd be surprised if we still pay more in taxation. We also have PAYE (pay as you earn) taxation so anyone employed doesn't have to fill in an annual tax return, it's covered by the company they work for and is automatically taken monthly from your salary before your take-home pay is dished out. Paying for an accountant each year is another cost that isn't factored into your supposed low tax rates. I assume most people need an accountant to help them sort their taxes?
Health insurance is not included in taxes in every country (remember there are a lot of countries). But as it is automatically taken together with the taxes most don't think much about it, because in the end it counts whats on your account. We (Austria) have tax returns. But for most people it is automatically done. So you only need to take action if you have some bills which are not considered there and can lower your tax. Look at Type Ashton videos where she compares Germany and the US for typical workers and what remains in their pocket in the end. There is even a family making well over $100K with a negative result in the end. And she doesn't include health problems.
Creating more competition between school is the complete opposite of the solution, the solution is to ensure every school gets the same funding, and that this does not depend on the local taxes and poor communities will then have the necessary funding to provide good education, everyone will have an equal chance
Creating competition is not going to make schools "do bettter" if they have less means. I didn't understand exactly the system he explained about taking back your tax money to use it in another school further away. If you can decide to use tax money for yourself, then you completely lost the whole point of taxes. You are worsening the whole condition of schools in poor neighbourhoods which suffer already from less tax money than other schools. Your tax money has to go wherever it has to go, it's due to the collectivity, not for yourself. If you want to spend extra money and send your kid to a private school, fine for you. Your tax money (which is not yours anymore) goes to help the other inhabitants anyway. Some Americans could say I'm communist (which is not true), but that is what taxes are for.
In sweden we have a system that is similiar to what he explained, each child is worth a certain amount of funding and schools dont set prices, this however means that for profit schools (personally i think they shouldnt excist) can only make proffits by cutting costs, another effect is also grading inflation. Another issue in general with these things of choice is that families with more resources will generally be more informed on their rights and options, leading to greater segregation when it comes to education. The problem is also one of language and news cycles, for example if a child is kidnapped in texas all 50 states will hear of it, wheres in europe only the nation that it happens in will generally get news about it. its a well established fact that ppl constantly think crime is increasing eventho the trend have been towards decrease for the last 100 years or so and part of the reason is that the crimes that do happen are reported about to a much larger degree, wheres before you might hear about crimes in your city or at most your state compared to the whole US.
The Lords in the UK can propose and amend laws too. Their purpose is different (why have two houses doing exactly the same thing vying for power), with the Lords focusing on sanity checking based on their domain expertise. What they can’t do is block a law that was a manifesto commitment or a budget (there are some other situations, but if they come up then the government has to expend a huge amount of political capital to use them and that stops them being too silly most of the time)
In Spain it's not honorary either. I got shocked when I heard that man saying those things. Unbelievable! 😂 He was talking with such an authority almost like if he knew for real what was he talking about! 😂
America does spend a lot on education, but it also spends more than anyone else on healthcare and still has dreadful outcomes; it isn't about raw cost as much as it's about value for money. If your kids are sheltered from responsibility and not allowed to read controversial books, you can throw all the money in the world at them and they're still going to grow up less educated than a kid with broader experience and fewer restrictions on their learning.
The highest paid public person in many places in the US is the school sports coach. Sport is important for a healthy population but those highly paid employees and sports stadia are there so that the city etc will win completions. I wonder how much of the education budget gets diverted to competitive sport.
"Sending your children to a better school of choise" is not a logic we apply en general here in Norway. If you care only about your own children it will be hard to create a society of equality. If your rather take the view that your child is an integrated part of your local society, and all children is equally important, you would rather focus on making your local school better then to improve the spesific condition for your own child. We are not used to looking at other peoples children as competitors with the other children, but rather a little person who integrates with the other children in a community. There are differences of opinion also in Norway, and and usual the "me first" attitude often breaks through on the right wing of politics, but the general political landscape are more community oriented, and you are expected to care about all kids.
Ethan and Angela, please don't get too depressed about this. You are a lovely couple and I know if it was up to you and millions of Americans, your country would be different ♥️
how is the judiciary independant in the US, as judges, AGs and sheriffs are elected and therefore reliant on politics and getting votes from people, and depending on fundings for their campaigns and therefore prone to corruption...
Ok on paper I could potentially agree with you about the uk, but the lack of constitution, and the lords chamber goes a bit against this principle (especially when it comes to peerage in exchange of money), also I’ll be honest I’m not 100% sure how sheriffs and judges are appointed in the uk.
@@maxxie84 We do not have sheriffs our Police chiefs are promoted from within the force. Judges are promoted from lawyers to judges internally in most cases.
12:30 French education is pretty much the same, the school years are divided into 4 main level of institutions. The first one is the "école maternelle", literally "maternal school" which kids have to go through from 3 to 6 years old. During maternal school children learn by playing, it's more akin to a big recess with a teacher making sure that everything is okay. Kids learn how to articulate so they speak better, how to move better, how to behave in a group and in the later years how to read. Then there is the "école primaire" ("primary school") where general learning starts. Kids from 7 to 11 start to learn french, mathematics, english, history, sports and so on. Then "collège" which is akin to middle school in the US, it lasts 4 years and at the end you have an exam to pass. Then you get in high school for 3 years. Time is very scheduled during middle and high school with very full days, 8 am to 6 pm isn't that rare in high school and lunch break is 1 hour in general. There are also 1 recess in the morning and in the afternoon but confined in the school ground. But on a fairly regular basis teachers will organize a "sortie" or "outing" where the entire class goes out to do something elsewhere, generally related to the subject. For exemple when I was in middle school my latin teacher organized a movie outing to the local cinema then a visit to Ambrussum which is a Celtic Oppidum from the 8th century BC that evolved in an important trade post with a large roman road passing through it. There are a lot of remains and you can still walk on the roman road. Another one was during high school where my geography and economics teacher brought the class to Belgium to visit the European parliament and see a piece of the Berlin wall exposed there.
I don't think the Big Think guy was talking about how kids are restricted in school, but about how they are restricted by their parents in their time outside school - because of fear of violence/abduction.
There is almost nothing 'outside school'. Sports, art, library, school meals, school bus, all by school. European kids run home after school, have a cup of tea and cycle to their sportsclub, different group, different rules, different environment. They visit music school, again separated from school. Or an art class with yet again other kids, adults, and other environment. They go all by themselves no or hardly any parent supervision, yet they learn how to deal with different groups and people from a young age.
the funny thing is that if you count all the taxes you pay in usa for food clothing ect.ect you actualy pay more in taxes than what i do in sweden and swedich taxes are acused of beeing one of the highest in the world!!!
The US people will say that only some States have taxes on food or income but they all have taxes for other types of shopping. Their private health insurance is a tax by any other name. Also their groceries are generally twice or more as expensive, as the equivalent products in Europe.
This is more complicated and nuanced than that. I’m in NH, and we have no sales tax. You are taxed if you go out to eat at a restaurant, but not when you buy clothing or groceries. There’s also no state income tax, so we only pay federal income tax. Every state is different, and while almost all have sales taxes, it varies so much. Even some cities have their own sales tax added onto any state tax. Speaking in generalities about taxes in the US, I think, isn’t accurate. However, the healthcare cost compared to a tax is spot on.
We have an election every 4 years in Norway. We have like 8-11 different parties. To get anyone from your party elected in to the parliament, you have to get 4% of the votes , minimum.There are some simular parties ,left (socialist)(center) and right (concervative). The parties with the most votes will try and get some of the other parties to join there politics , and then get into government together. This can be two.three and even four different parties. If this is the case , they will dicuss there common policy and then make a platform for the politics they will stand behind , the next 4 years. Not every party will agree to everything on the agenda, but if they want to have seat in the government, so be it. It's a give and take. Some you loose and some you win. It is also fair to say that the biggest perties also gets more of there own policy into this 4 year agenda, and they also get the priminister. But there is not , well more than not, actually that the goverment is formed by parties that not have the majority in the parliament, but if noone else can agree on anything they will just govern from case to case , and seek support from wherever they can get it. So to the gentlemans point about two different equal legislaters in the us. This can never happend in a "normal" parliament, because ; if the parties in the government has the majority , what they decide will pass, ok If they do not have the majority , they will seek support in the parliament, and if they get enough delegates from other parties, it will pass. If they don't get the support they need the majority of the parliament forces the government to make changes that everyone can live with, and the it will pass. If not they have to start over, and make something that is better. Now we have yhe Labour Parti and Center parti governing together with sign support from the SV Solialist Left. Common incometax in Norway is about 33%. VAT on goods are 22% and on food 14%. So we maybe make a little less money, but atleast we dont have to constantly think about what will happend if we suddently get really sick. That must really get on peoples psyckie. Apart from that, this was off the top of my head, and I hope the spelling wasn't to bad.
Don’t let the tax thing distract you, Australia pays less taxes than the USA and still has universal healthcare. The USA has more millionaires than any other country because they are profiting outrageously while denying you the basic human right of healthcare. You deserve better
"socialist" senator - most Americans don't even know what socialism really is, and they label every system with a more "social" approach as socialist. I still haven't found an American mis-using this term who can explain to me what is so vile and horrible about being "social"and caring for your citizens. I would choose what they call socialist over their cut-throat capitalism any time
In Finland, school rides are an usual phenomenon because we are sparsely populated, and some small local schools are being closed down as small villages no longer have enough children. Those school rides are sometimes done by bus, but sometimes also with taxis. So there are costs of transportation here.
If you're interested, look at Switzerland. It is very very similar to the USA. In fact, when modern Switzerland was founded in 1848, they used the american Constitution and Institutions as a model for their own nation. Every Canton (State) has its own Governments, acts very independent and has its own Constitution. What the swiss did though was taking your style of Government and adopted it to their own geographic and cultural differences. Switzerland has a bi chamber system that works very well. And it is on every demographic better off than the US and ranks in almost every list in the top levels. Schools for example are founded mainly by the states (Cantons). And it is, depending on which state you are, breaken down even further to the different cumines inside of the state. The federal Government sets the standard teh states have to match, but how they do it is their responsibility. And since the federal Government is made by the states and the people, it reassures that they set the standards in the best interest of the states and its people. And the states and the federal Government simply comes to aid poorer communities and schools (keep in mind that what I just said is very very simplified) Same with healthcare. Federal law in Switzerland demands that every resident in the country needs to have health insurance. Health insurances are provided by private companies and have to cover the basics as a non profit. Only additional benefits can make profits. So Switzerland technically doesn't have universal health insurance but a general-privatized-yet-supported system. And again, each state regulates those rules independently, overseen by the federal government. And if a resident can't afford those health insurances, it is the duty of the states to jump in and subsidize those. These are just two, simplified, examples. There are many more. Is the system perfect? Absolutely not! And it has it's own challenges. But to compare the US and the European systems, I think Switzerland is a good way to start
I think some of the problems in America are not enough zoning is designed around the community and not enough things like local open spaces and play areas and not having things within walking distance and not having local transport, but saying that I live within walking distance of work and still take the car because I like to pop home for dinner
The TLDR news youtube channels do have some explainer videos in how the UK parliament works if you want to look that up. I dont think that guy entirely represented how other political systems work for example though not ideal our system does have a number of checks and balances which under normal circumstances work pretty well, for example if laws get delayed long enough by the house of lords it eats up parliamentary time so the government may run out of time to get bills through. Also the delay may bring a bill to public attention and the government may drop it because it has upset voters.
TLDR is a great suggestion for learning about what is happening in the world and how things are different. There is more than one channel to make it easier to find what you are interested in.
If you taxed the rich in America too high, they could go to another country and take their money with them, but which country would they go to???? Especially as the UK and Europe would tax them more.
Ask Elon Musk how it goes for TESLA in Sweden right now. He thought for some reason that his company could avoid Swedish workers rules. He still do belive this, but as any other company from the US who tried to overwrite the laws of countries in Europe, they will soon realise they either sign or move out of the country.
There are two incompatible arguments here though - tax in the rest of the world is higher then the US and if taxes in the US gets higher the rich will go abroad.
@@charlestaylor9424 Well, because of that moving thing most countries that doesn't destroy their economy usually ends up reaching some kind of equilibrium. With different taxes, but still taxes in roughly the same range. So foe instance, Norway has a *way* higher income tax and VAT, but our corporate tax and property tax is lower then in the US from what I gather.
I think the main difference in wages from Europe to the states is Europe pays its servers/waiting staff substantially more. Europe tends to be governed by a minimum wage system whereas the states pays its staff a really low rate where its staff rely on tips where as Europe's pay is much higher plus they still have the bonus of tips.
Here's what's so great about our "Social" system when you're unemployed you'll get the chance to train and get paid to learn a new "Skill", That's how I became a commercial Diver for the ridiculous amount of 2500 Euro's instead of my American counterparts who pay 30K for the same education and less chance to be employed.
When I went to school - decades ago - walked 400 yards to Primary/Junior School, and when I went to High School - cycled 1.5 miles each way no problem. No other option, my siblings also did the same.
3:25 No, the US does not have the most billionaires per capita. It's 15th on the list, after European countries like Monaco, Liechtenstein, Cyprus, Switzerland, Sweden and Norway . If we take a look at the list of US states, when it comes to billionaires per capita, Sweden has more billionairs per capita than 34 of the US states, for instance. But if you're talking about millionaires, not billionaires, then the US have more per capita 9.7 % of the population, compared to 7.3 % in Sweden.
If you want to learn more about the differences between living in Denmark and the US there are some great videos by an American couple living in Denmark - Robe Trotting. They've done videos about the differences in regards to tax, health care and a ton of other things...
There are a few reaction channels that I like but they frequently respond to the same videos as each other. I really appreciate how you find videos from sources other than the "usual suspects", and give a wider perspective compared with your own experiences. ... Also love the Welsh 🏴 flag in the background ☺
The US government is largely an 18th century version of what UK parliament. Dressed up a bit and slightly changed but UK along with other European countries have evolved and changed where as the US is stuck in the 18th century so to speak. But that’s American culture just like with gun laws and that. You guys don’t like change. Not you guys personally just in general. There is one guy on RUclips David Starkey Talks. He’s got a couple videos where he describes it very well.
20:40 Among the member nations of the EU there are; unitary parliamentary constitutional monarchies (i.e. Sweden), a federal parliamentary constitutional monarchy (Belgium), federal parliamentary republics (i.e. Germany), unitary parliamentary republics (i.e. Italy), unitary semi-presidential republics (i.e France), & a unitary presidential republic (Cyprus).
By the way, France is SUPPOSED to be semi-presidential, but since 2002, the president (well... more the Representatives and the Senate) changed the constitution to have the presidential election every 5 years instead of 7, and only 2 months BEFORE the election of the Representatives (Assemblée Nationale). Since 2002, the Assemblée is basically the President's. He always controls it and does basically whatever he wants during 5 years. The Assemblée doesn't play its role of balancing the President's power which was already too big and he is now basically a monarch with expiration date. I can tell you, that is not good AT ALL for the social/political climate in the country as the population doesn't feel represented by the politics. Actually, the problem is kind of the same as in the US with their 2-party system.
OMG So often countries with single payer health care are demonized in the USA as taxing their populations outrageously. This is particularly true of how Americans view Canada and Canada's tax system. Well, I did some calculations and discovered if I lived in the United States (Arizona) my income tax would be $3,500.00 more than I pay in Canada. Also the sales tax in Arizona, (my winter home), where I do most of my shopping, is around 10%. Where I live in Canada the sales tax in 5%. In Canada I have never paid a penny for health care. I am far better off tax wise in Canada than I would be in the USA. Now if I had a high 6 figure income (above $300,000.00) or more in the USA I would pay significantly less than I would in Canada. Of course most of the power in the USA resides with the 1% so the tax situation is unlikely to change any time soon. As much as I love the USA, I am so glad I am a Canadian.
In regard to your perceptive comment on some people avoiding tax by receiving "perks"(company cars for your own use, company shares etc) instead of higher, taxable salaries used to be a problem here in NZ until one government responded to public pressure and addressed it by making these benefits taxable. For example if your company car was available for your use as a family car when not required for work it is relatively easy to calculate the value of this and tax you as if it were cash. This has been in place now for some time and the main result is a reduction in benefits (perks) and salary increases at least partially replacing these. Another point is that while taxes do pay for social services such as health, by having a single main provider, a government agency they cost much less for the same service than if they were privately run, having no profit scraped off the top, no promotional costs, no legal actions for unpaid bills and economies of scale in purchase of pharmaceuticals and equipment. Treatment for an illness or condition is about half of what it is in the US and has a comparable quality of delivery. Also there is no exclusion or penalty for pre-existing or congenital conditions.
Maybe a video by formerly The Black Forest Family (Type Ashton now) is more what you are looking for. There are a couple of videos by this channel on this topic. "THE BIG DEBATE: American Capitalism vs. German "Socialism" - SALARIES, TAXES, & SOCIAL CONTRIBUTIONS" is probably the most comprehensive one. Maybe you think it's too long for a reaction, but there are a lot of people who don't mind longer videos, as long as there is content in the videos.
In my opinion the major problem in USA is the two ,party system. In Denmark we have 9 parties in the parlament. No party has a majority on their own, so they simply has to work together to form a government. Right now the government consist of 3 parties, one is a bit left wing, one a bif right wing and one is in the center. So in order to govern aĺl of them have to make compromizes.
I agree. We now have the same situation in the UK with only two parties to choose from. There used to be three larger parties, but not anymore. There are other parties, but you could be wasting your vote. It's very frustrating. The 'first past the post' system makes it almost impossible to change the balance. Other options are starting to be used in certain circumstances, but not in the General Elections.
In the Netherlands, children go to school usually by bicycle. Junior schools up to 12 years old are always found close by where people live. They are usually not all too large. In my town they are not begged then 300 children per school max. Up till about 8 years old they are usually accompanied by a parent on their way to and from school. Senior schools are much larger and often situated a bit further away but mostly still within cycling distance ( within 10 to 20 kms max) but older children can cycle longer distances. We have no school buses, with the exception for schools for children with special needs. They are collected from their homes by mini buses. The transport is not payed by the schooling system but by the local authorities.
About the governance in Europe: most countries have the Parliamentary system, which means that the party (-ies) that have the majority in the Parliament give the Prime Minister who chooses his ministers. And this is the executive branch, the PM is the decision maker. In such a system, the President has no power, it is usually only a honorific title. That is to say that, when a party or a coalition of parties wins an election and has majority in the Parliament, the Parliament always agrees with the Prime Minister, because it's their man/woman (usually the President of the party which won the most votes). No disagreement on policy, unlike the U.S. where the decision-maker, the President, may come from a party that does not have the majority in the Congress.
FYI, what Scalia was saying about only very few countries in the world like the USA have actual divided branches of government was utter and complete BS. The only reason he got away with saying that is because the general public in the USA thinks what he said was correct. Then again, Scalia was not afraid from lying through his teeth, he was afterall a republican appointee and like the ones that come after him, he told lots of lies and half truths
The thing is Tax in european countries didnt just go up to 60-70% over night it happend slowly 4% here and 5% there over 20+ years like having your feet in cold water and slowly turning up the heat :p
Which countries are you referring to, with taxes at 60-70%? The UK's highest rate of tax is 45% and there's no tax on the first £12,570 earned (for everyone), 20% on the £12,571 to £50,270 range, 40% on the £50,271 to £125,140 range and 45% on earnings over £125,140. Thats top 1% is for just over half a million people.
This is why Parliamentary systems are superior = more responsive to the voters wishes and more responsible for its own actions. Electoral systems also make a difference. Canada ( A federation) has a first past the post like the US and UK. Other countries have some form of mixed member proportional or single transferable vote.
What Americans need to understand when it comes to single payer health care yes you may pay more income tax *BUT* there won't be the cost of health insurance or any co-pays so at end of the tax year the average American family will be better off
9:56 Well, not having to pay for armed guards or metal detectors definitely helps... 12:24 He's not talking about the school system, but about parenting. 12:43 Not just that. 6 year olds will literally take public transportation alone to school, changing bus midway, regular busses used by others, and busses these kids will use on their spare time too. 13:37 I get that you're enthusiastic, but you're *really* interrupting hef a lot... 20:28 I think that this video demonstrates why joining the EU is a bad idea for my country. Having different laws all over the place is a *good* thing, it allows you to ro experiment and learn from what goes wrong. If everyone has roughly the same system you don't have anything to compare it with...
When comparing, you should not only look at taxes, but at the amount people pay for health insurance as well. And then also look what you need to pay on top of that if you need to use healthcare. How well are the roads taken care of? What happens if you lose your job? How much will that cost you? How much do you pay for education? How much do you have left to spend and what can you do with it? What is left after your monthly costs. And also counting in somehow the periods where you are not the standard worker with a fixed income, like being sick, getting fired, or being pregnant. I am a pretty average office worker. I save 250EUR a month by not having a car. Sold it 8 years ago. If I get fired, I can still live of the money they give me. Not enough to get rich, but enough not to end up on the streets and die.If I get sick, I do not go bankrupt. If i had kids and they were smart and they wanted to study more than what I did, they would have the opportunity to do so, without be having money or not a huge issue. And schools should not be in a competition. That would be not in the best interest of education. Instead they should work together to see what works best. If there are 3 schools and 1 has a great idea on how to do maths better and the second on how to do their finances better, the best is to work together. That way all THREE get better at Maths AND their finances. Competition would make 1 school better in Maths and the other make more money and the third stay behind.
I've never seen a US tax form or where it all goes to, but i'd guess you pay more in taxes to healthcare for the few that are covered my medicade etc, because the prices aren't regulated. Thats without the monthly premiums and all the other insurance bs.
The prices are regulated. The federal government determines what is paid for medicaid. We all likely spend more on health insurance premiums and deductibles and copays for our own personal healthcare than we do for our taxes that contribute to medicaid.
Hospitals must charge a lower price for patients under a state-financed system because they have high bargainiing power. Basically one body negociates the price for a huge part of the population. At the end of the day thos who are charged the most are paradoxically uninsured, the hospitals can charge them whatever they want as uninsured patients have basically no bargaining power.
We want the taxes because we like the benefits. The middle-class pay way more than 40% in the UK. And if people realised what the Scandinavian get we’d all want to pay more tax.
The reason why europe don't pay as much for school transportation is not better public transportation, it is city planning. Schools are close to residential areas, so children can walk to school, or take their bike. It is rare that children in the urban area would ever need to use a motor vehicle to go to school. Of course the higher school the longer you have to travel to it, so some might have to take a bus to go to a high school for example. And it depend heavily of where you live, if you live in a countryside and have like 20km to a nearest village where there is only an elementary school, and you have to travel 50km to a bigger town with junior high, then naturally you use a motor transport of some kind (or often a couple of different kinds, for example parents drive the child to a bus stop, then child takes a bus to town).
In the Netherland we have house of representatives, a senate. provincial parliaments, municipal counsils and we also vote for water boards and the European Parliament. DA's, mayors are not things we vote for. We don't have something similar to Sheriff. We have a King, but he has no political power. At least not officially.
In Germany the distribution of power is like this: the EU, the Federal Republic of Germany, states, county and cities. There are cities that have the rank of a county and cities that have the rank of a state. In the US the distribution of power is exactly the other way around. City, County, States and then Washington DC ...
True in England we do have boroughs but ministers elected in these Boroughs can't pick and vote on their own separate laws as you do in states, all they do is decide how to run the borrow and what issues to fix first but they still must comply to all legislation and laws coming from the government in power!
The big thing that identifies the issue with the US political system is when you have federal shutdowns because the houses do not agree, this does not happen in European countries, as the essential workings continue regardless of what is happening politically.
Tuition fee for university is around € 2.300 per year in the Netherlands. That is for EU citizens. For students from outside the EU tuition fee may vary from € 9.000 up to € 15.000 per year. And yes, we use a dot as a thousands seperator and a comma for decimals. That's also different.
There is a difference between your usable income and the raw income (lack of better terms sorry). But most europeans will tell you their usable income, meaning the income they make after the social taxes and sometimes (depending on the country) even after the income taxes are taken from their salaries. Take a country like France, in 2023 the average raw salary (called "salaire brut" in french) is 39800€ per year, but the average usable salary (called "salaire net" in french) is 31044€ per year. The difference being all social welfare taxes, meaning mostly medical insurance and retirement, and maybe also income taxes as they are taken directly from your salary. I don't know the system in USA, so i cannot say if it works the same way.
I know this probably doesn't apply to other European countries, but when they said in that video that European countries don't have a Senate and a Congress, or that one doesn't legislate against the other, in my country it *could* happen, but when there's an election, the party that gets the most votes is usually benefitted (by the electoral law) in the Senate. But during one legislature the Senate was ruled by the conservatives while Parliament was ruled by Labour (not that very progressive, center-left at best) and both institutions clashed a few times. But not to the level of what's been happening in the US these past 10 years lol
In some ways, you could see the EU as the federal government like you see in the US, I know it's not the same thing, but there are enough things that overlap each other, then you can look at EU countries like you look at US states, again, there are many overlaps and difference. EU countries still have more powers when it comes to military matters, forign policy and so on, but a lot of policy for EU countries are now done at EU level and I wonder if maybe in the US, doing things like universal health care and other social programs at a state level could work better than doing it at a federal level, for one, you wouldn't need to get the entire country onboard, states on their own can move ahead with it, and if they make it work, others will likely follow. I feel that trying to push many of these policies at a national level is where the gridlock is happening in the US. As for balance of power, there's a fine line in what powers the EU, countries and regions in a country should have, just like there is with the US government, states and regions within a state, getting the right balance isn't easy as we see in the EU which is a union that's still being created, but it's not hard to see the overlaps with how the US is, just done in a different way with hopefully lessons learned from mistakes the US have made. Personally, I think powers should always be at a local level, in other words, region level and then only move up to country, state level where it makes sense and then EU, US level where it makes sense there, a few examples that make sense at an EU, US level is boarder controls, military, forign policy and so on and other areas where it makes sense to have set standards across the entire union, but in most other areas, there's no reason why it can't be done at a local level, in fact, I suspect it would be better when it comes to competitive advantage, just as long as they are competing without lowering standards, but those standards could be set at the EU, US level, which is more or less what the EU does already, it sets standards that the members can't go below them but can have higher standards if they wish. I feel both the EU and US could learn a lot from each other in many areas, the EU can learn from many of the mistakes the US made over its history and to try and avoid them, whereas the US can learn from the EU in how to balance the economy better that is more balanced for growth, fairness and well-being of its citizens, especially on equality and social programs.
I'll give you an example of how the Portuguese system works, for you to have a notion of a tipical european country government system. In Portugal we have about 8 to 9 parties that have representatives on the parliment. We have election for the President and election for the parliment. When we have parlimentar elections, people for on the party of their choice. The party with the most votes, is invited by the president to form government. That party doesn't have to have more than 50% of the votes. That party will get into power and will appoint a Prime minister and he's cabinet (formed by the remaining ministers that will occupy the different ministries. Like Minister of Health, the Finance Minister, the Defence Minister, etc. That government will present laws and bill in the parliment and those bills will be voted by the representatives of each parties in the parliment. If the law or bill gets the vote of the majority, the it goes throw. Then, the president may: Approve the law (or bill), send the law (or bill ) to be reviewed by the Constitiunal Judge to see if there is something there that goes against the countries constitution, or can simply block the law. If the law is blocked, the president must specify why and the law goes back to the government that may change it or not. The law then goes back to the parliment to get a new vote. If the law gets the vote of the majority, the president then has to approve it. The Constitutional judges may find something in the law that goes against the constitution. If that's the case, the government has to change the law and take it again to the parliment to be voted. Only after a law has been voted and then approved by the president, the law is in vigor. Since a government is formed by the party with the most votes and since that party may have less than 50% of the seats in the parliment, the government has to negociate consensus with other parties to convince them have enough votes that make the law viable and that get more than 50% of the votes and goes throw the all process. It happens, from time to time, that a government that has less than 50% of the seats in parliment, try to pass laws and they fail again and again. Usually, if a government can't get into aggreements with enough parties for their laws to pass, a party in the parliment gets fed up of the situation and ask for a "Confidance vote". That's a vote where every party in the parliment votes to assess if the government is fit to govern. If more than 50% of the member of the parliment vote to disqualify the government. The Government falls and whe have new elections to vote for a new parliment. And, just like in the beginning, people vote, the parties elect a new percentage of seats into parliment, and the president invites the party with more seats to form a new government. In our system the laws are proposed by the government. The president doesn't propose laws. The president job is to approve the laws the parliment votes, and keep the government in check. He is the top representative of the country but, it's not him that governs the country. It's the Prime Minister. Sorry for my english. It's not my first language. I hope this explanation is enough to give you a glimps about how a typical european country government system works. :)
It is true that people are more "income-balanced" in Europe and it's easier to tax (almost) everyone. With that in mind, the thing about increasing the taxes for rich people and businesses is not a solution for a problem, but I think it's a good start to bring more of this balance, as a first step. And it's definitely not the only variable in that equation. But if people with lower income are better supported (health, education, infrastructure etc.) and some of the cost are better "offloaded" by the system, they will come in situation where they will be able to spend more. Bottom line, you (as a country) are practically investing in your population so you could tax them better.
😂😂😂. They both work for the same corporate donors. They have exactly the same donors. They only difference in the 2 parties is the Democrats run on identity politics, lgbq horse 💩 & abortion. The Democrats could have codified Rowe vrs Wade countless times when they had control of both houses & the Republicans couldn't have changed the abortion laws. But then they wouldn't have that fear of abortion rights to run on. They're ALL scum.
Europeans may pay more taxes, but we have a lot of benefits included in those taxes, which means, at the end of the month, when we get our salary, we can use it for everyday life entirely. In the USA, at the end of the moth, you get your salary, and then, you need to still substracte health issurances - college or medical debt. Plus globaly, the cost of living is less expansive in Europe, so even if we earn less, we actually have more money on our account after every essential spending. Your Senator, about the 2 chaber system, he is saying crap. in France, we have 2 representative Assembly. They don't have the same purpose, but they are as powerful as the other. The Assemblée Nationale mostly propose new laws ; and then passed it to the Senat, who review it, make modifications. If there is modifications, the law proposal go back to the Assemblée, for another check-up, and then, when everybody is OK, the law is proved. Also, an other thing, we have multiple parties, but the opposition between them is really not as strong as in the USA. they can work together. Wherewhile, in the USA, I got the impression that if a Republican want to pass a law, Republican will say YES on principle and the Democrate would say NO on principale
Just for commparison the money in the US and Germany Type Ashton made two videos on this 10 month ago and compared a single man and a couple with to kids, with the same education and same job, what they have after all expenses. You may look at that. But both videos are more than 40 minutes long, as it is not so easy. According legislation: In Germany we have the Bundestag, voted for on federal level. The Bundeskanzler will be elected by the coalition in charge of the Bundestag. A second legislation, that has to agree on most new laws, is the Bundesrat. But there is no seperate election for the Bundesrat, as every Federal State in Germany (Bundesland) has one vote in the Bundesrat. So every time, when the government of on Bundesland changes, their vote in the Bundesrat may be difference.
my daughter will study languages after she finishes her school... i dont need to save money to pay for it, my monthly wage is enough to pay the €800 to €1000 per year fee for the university! btw: we dont need colleges here, here you learn at school!
here in Italy, under 8,174 euros you pay no taxes, up to 15,000 euros 23%, up to 28,000 euros 25%, up to 50,000 euros 35%. Of these taxes 20% goes to healthcare, 21% goes to social security, the rest security and more. The poor have free healthcare.
You get ultra rich off the backs of other people. You can have as many Cadillacs/Rolls Royces as you want - but without the roads made by the State taxes you are going nowhere.
US has strange and not too democratic 2-party system. In most European countries there are lot of political parties and it is not uncommon for new parties to born and to get very popular.
Re: the lack of separation of powers in Europe / UK. Yep, and in fact that's how it is in all democracies apart from the USA. Most democracies are, in effect, short-term elected dictatorships. It's the only way one can guarantee that something can actually be done. The benefits are that one can have the someone in charge with dynamism of a dictator, whilst ensuring that their incentive to retire is strong and so they generally don't fall off the rails and changes laws to make them President for Life.
A whole thing most americans do, like you did, was to negelct the social aspect of school. Which somehow has been cut from the entire american school system. When your kids go to school, they sociallize, which is a very important part of growing up. Going to the 'nice' school, but living in the other part of town and not being able to be around the kids you go to school with handicaps your social developlment. Kids need friends. Why that construct got lost on so many american parents is something I do not understand
Why is there even such a big difference between schools? I think this is the main problem here that you don't even seem to notice. We don't have homeschooling for this reason: the level of education has to have a certain level that needs to be controlled regularly. That is why schools are all equally good, there so little to no difference even between private and public schools. Often private schools are worse even, but have more fancy programs and activities that all don't have a lot to do with the mandatory curriculum.
Well I don’t think the EU is very bad for millionaires and billionaires. My country is in the EU and has 1.8% millionaires, the US has 0.67%, we have 0.00025% billionaires, the US has 0.00022% of citizens being a billionaire. So with our country’s high taxation (first bracket of income tax is 37%, second bracket is 49.5%, sales tax is 9% on food and craft work, and 21% on non-food and services) Americans will call it a socialist country, we still have more millionaires and more billionaires than the US, percentage wise. So it has little to do with high or low taxation. We have more quality of life overhere, cheaper healthcare, cheaper education and better median quality for both of them, while the US has higher peaks of quality at education (like Harvard and MIT) and healthcare (like Johns Hopkins and Mayo Clinic), they have a lower median quality at both healthcare and education. We have an urge to carry the burden together, to distribute the burden fairly, while in the US everyone has to carry it individually. We have 2.5% of people living in poverty (according to our Central Bureau of Statistics or 5.7% if you believe the Central Planning Bureau) and the US has 11.5% of people living in poverty (according to the US Census Bureau). We have less poor people and more rich people, but living overhere isn’t that bad for either poor or rich. It is just poignant that the poor in the US are poorer and the rich are richer than in my country.
Do not underestimate the fact that european countries are very much in competition with each other, exactly as US states are, not matter how culturally different they can be. Imagine what would happen if california would start offering affordable and accessible single payer universal healthcare, removing any risk of health related bankruptcy, high grade free education removing student debt, great infrastructure and cheap public transport systems, social support and housing limiting extreme poverty and homelessness, 4+ mandatory weeks of paid vacations, 12+ weeks of paid parental leave, enforced 40h or 4 days work weeks, minimum fair wages as well as providing economic opportunities.. You would then probably not be surprised that there's been in the past century and still is, fairly large population migration inside europe itself and that each state had to adjust to the competition, usually through the help of other european countries which seem to believe that the more we are alike, the best it is for the whole group. Well except the UK of course, which kinda reminded everyone that nothing comes without effort and that when people are mistreated they tend to be driven by their emotions and can be convinced by deceitful and irresponsible politicians, to put the blame on their neighbors.
The issue with parents having the right to access the 'best' schools in their wider area is that these schools will only have a certain number of places available, so you are just going to have problems with over subscribed good schools, and other schools where no-one wants to go. It's much better to raise the standards for all schools, and make them more equal. American Elementary teacher earn a LOT more than British Primary school teachers. The average US Elementary school teacher earns about £55,000 pa and the average pay for a UK Primary school teacher is £27,000.
about the US having higher payed jobs, that is not for everyone the vast majority id bet are on minimum wages and that for the states that's $7.25 per hour or if you earn tips its $2.13 per hour here in the uk no mater the job the minimum wage is $13 per hour
Hello Ethan and Angela. The US is like how Britain was when the Lords were like the Senate and the King was like the President. The Commons, like your Representatives, took more and more power as ordinary working people got the vote and demanded representation. This is not how some other European countries work. The rights were so hard won in Britain, without your Revolution , that many did not want to devolve power to the EU, which unlike how you said, is taking financial action to stop countries deviating from the standard legal thinking. This gave rise to tensions in the EU, such that UK ended up leaving. The map with such as UK, Norway, Switzerland and Turkey under an EU flag just looks really odd as a result. The US map does not have Canada, Mexico or even the coveted Greenland. The main difference is of course that we usually do not mix the peanut butter with jam, before anyone takes me too seriously or thinks I am only on the side of peanut butter because I did not say jello.
The difference between Europe and the USA is really simple: if any of the European Countries has something that work better, the other Countries adopt it. USA think that americans are better, Merica is always the best!
Roe Vs Wade is a prime example of how US politics works, load the judiciary up with one side of politics and they will find a legal way to change anything. The judiciary should be an independent body, not left or right leaning, political affiliation should be taken into account as the judges are appointed for life. The political system works good on paper but in reality is an absolute shambles.
A degree of socialism is considered a good thing in Europe, with national health services, welfare benefits for the jobless and disabled, decent holidays for workers, and strong trade unions.
O well I haven't looked at every country so yea I probably shouldn't generalize like that. Just from what I've seen in videos and people told me it sounded pretty standard.
the description of european second chambers by A. Scalia, is hightly US oriented opinion.... i, as a french, don't agree. the "Senat" don't have the same powers as the other chamber (Assemblée Nationale), but it's not only honorific at all. it's a local indirect representation of the french territories. And it can modify the laws. And it has an importance when both assemblies are reunited in the congress ("congrés") when it's needed to modify the constitution.
In Europe people pay more tax… but in the US in the end pay MORE because companies ask higher prices to make profits to make the rich people richer than they need to be.
The pay more because they have to pay 3000 to give birth, 300 for an inhaler and on and on… they don’t get that every single one of them is going to get ill, have and accident or any other health issues …. And just an ambulance is expensive as f&&@ck
Here in the UK we have no idea what you mean by 'subsidies' - We pay our taxes whether employed, self-employed, or unemployed. We just get the same it's divided equally for all. From what I've learned we don't have lobbyists and donors - or we have and they will be found out and fined.
Both lobbyists and wealthy donors are part of the main problem with the U.S Government, no matter the level be it Fed, State, or Local, it is just most known, done at, and reported about when it comes to the Federal level. If it where to come up on a National voting by the People in that there would be a Law that says 'There will no longer be any lobbyists, and that politicians could only take in so much money so that the wealthy could no longer give an extreme amount'. I am willing to bet that the voting by the People would say 'Yes! Put That Law into Place!'. But at the moment, unfortunately, what I just said is nothing more then speculation.
Let’s make something clear once and for all: European countries are not socialist’s countries… their economic system is capitalism, their government systems are democracy or republic… after all that you can find political parties with a more socialist, fascist or whatever ideology… all of the countries have in common prioritizing certain social standards that are provide by the state… it is not socialism
We don't pay any tax on food and also on books and printed matter. I wouldn't mind paying for health care but not to the extent where it could leave me bankrupt.!! Our taxes don't leave me bankrupt, and not anywhere near.! I do OK, and there's plenty of opportunity to travel and take time off.
![Jack Harlow - Hello Miss Johnson [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Q86_nlRoIGw/mqdefault.jpg)
Life expectancy in Spain: 83.18
Life expectancy in the USA: 76.33
Why they think to be the greatest nation on the Earth I've no idea.
We pay high tax here in the Netherlands. We understand why and see it coming back all around us. Look at our infrastructure our schools our health care. It's high on tax but at the end of the line the publicis better off for it! That's what's tax is all about!! You pay your tax your government spents it where it's needed.
I think very simplified, you can say that, in the EU at least, the population is viewed as an asset in which you invest.
It's also a case that the philosophy is that the people are in charge more than in America.
@Tinoyevski I dont agree. The US used to be a leader in affordable education 60 years ago. But slowly American politics started to degrade it. Just look at how much US government spends today on education per capita as it did decades ago.
@@Tinoyevski sorry, that is just BS. When you cut funding per student, you end up with less critical thinkers. It’s a proven fact. The rise of great nations in the past had mainly to do with an educated populace.
@@Tinoyevski Man, education is an integral part of what we call "culture". There is no contradiction here at all.
@@Tinoyevski The culture provided by parents is a certain amount of information, just as knowledge - and also social culture - is provided by the school. They are different in scope and nature but complementary. Besides, parents without prior school education will provide their children with a culture of questionable quality. In caveman times, parents also passed on some kind of culture to their children.
Generally in Europe we indeed pay heavy taxes. Nobody likes to pay taxes so we naturally grumble about them, but... when we get seriously sick, receive expensive healthcare at no cost, when our children attend the university, not to mention our X weeks of yearly paid vacations... we get something in return. Nobody on our side of the ocean goes bankrupt for being ill, and nobody has to reimburse heavy loans for umpteen years after attending college. "Work to live", don't "live to work", that's what most Europeans go by.
It depends where in Europe you live. Where I am if you get seriously sick you better have money. Eather to get better or your funeral costs.
@@bee12117where do you live ?
@@teresadavilasoares6136 NOT in the west
I live in Hungary, and yeah you could say the same here that it's not always the truth, like free health is an option, but it's not always the quality you are looking for. But on the other hand, life insurances that contain the "cover your medical costs if you get seriously ill" are not that high priced. Public health is as mostly is for those who can't afford to pay for it. They have the option to get it for free. Of course you may need to wait months for a more serious surgery, but still you can get it for free. Or take a loan and get it sooner.
The important is that you have the option. What the Americans doesn't have.
Of coures if you live there, you gonna curse the system everyday and wish the 'good' life of the goverment, but after everything it's a much better system.
Don't look so worried you two!!! you are fine as you are ,people see you as a couple that are very well suited and laid back
with life ,just carry on being who you are
Most of what the US considers to be Capitalism is actually Corporate Monopolies. The guy that invented Capitalism was Scottish. Adam Smith argued that the free-market system along with free trade would produce true national wealth, benefiting all social classes, not just the privileged few. Which is what European Socialist Capitalism is supposed to work towards. Monopolies kill the free market and consolidate power and wealth in greater proportion for the wealthy until nothing is left for anyone else.
America say they are not taxed as much as Europe but then take hundreds month out of their pay packets for health care. Ours is included
True BUT we can not get a docs appoiment
@@robw6330there are waiting lists for hospital appointments over there too, no matter what they will have us believe.
@@robw6330NHS?
@@robw6330 I'm from the UK and had to wait a whole 2 days to see my doctor but I didn't have to pay anything to get that service. (because my and everyone else's taxes have already paid for it). However UK Doctors will see you the same day via triage appointments, if they and you deem it to be urgent enough but not so urgent, that you need to got to A&E.
@@robw6330bs..
We often hear from Americans that we in the UK are taxed heavily with the starting rate of 20%. However, the first $15,600 of income in the UK is not taxed at all, whereas in the USA, up to $11,600 is taxed at 10%.
VAT our sales tax is said to be high at 20% however many otems carry no tax. Most foods are not taxed, and many items are taxed at the lower rates of 10% or 5%.
Comparisons are difficult as many taxes in the USA vary by state.
However, if you take an average size family on average income in average priced house driving an average car, then the Americans tax burden for those people is roughly 8% higher in the USA than in the UK.
For low paid workers the difference increases to about 15%. For high earners, it switches. The USA pays 24 % less than the uk.
This is calculation inclued all local and national taxes in both countries. So these figures vary from state to state in the USA. It also takes into account tax credits for low eraners and social secutry payments, which are higher in the UK.
However its doent take into account the cost of health insurance and co-pays in the USA when those are taken into account the gaps grow larger in favour of the UK.
These comparisons are from sudies done by the OECD and university around the world.
US healthcare expenses are ~50% higher per capita than nations like Germany and Norway, despite offering no universal healthcare. There's a reason why every other developed nation on Earth, has adopted a variant of universal healthcare.
Re taxes, I find it interesting that health insurance costs don't seem to be factored into the proportion of income spent on taxes when Americans say how much less tax they pay than Europeans as this IS included in taxes for us, so a fair comparison ought to include your health insurance costs, including not just the monthly figures, but the crazyily high excesses you have to fork out when you do need to use health care services (I think you call it copay). Factoring all this in, I'd be surprised if we still pay more in taxation. We also have PAYE (pay as you earn) taxation so anyone employed doesn't have to fill in an annual tax return, it's covered by the company they work for and is automatically taken monthly from your salary before your take-home pay is dished out. Paying for an accountant each year is another cost that isn't factored into your supposed low tax rates. I assume most people need an accountant to help them sort their taxes?
Tax allowances and subsidies are ^never^ included in the figures.
Health insurance is not included in taxes in every country (remember there are a lot of countries). But as it is automatically taken together with the taxes most don't think much about it, because in the end it counts whats on your account. We (Austria) have tax returns. But for most people it is automatically done. So you only need to take action if you have some bills which are not considered there and can lower your tax.
Look at Type Ashton videos where she compares Germany and the US for typical workers and what remains in their pocket in the end. There is even a family making well over $100K with a negative result in the end. And she doesn't include health problems.
Creating more competition between school is the complete opposite of the solution, the solution is to ensure every school gets the same funding, and that this does not depend on the local taxes and poor communities will then have the necessary funding to provide good education, everyone will have an equal chance
Exactly - this is it across the board, education, and health/social care.
Creating competition is not going to make schools "do bettter" if they have less means. I didn't understand exactly the system he explained about taking back your tax money to use it in another school further away. If you can decide to use tax money for yourself, then you completely lost the whole point of taxes. You are worsening the whole condition of schools in poor neighbourhoods which suffer already from less tax money than other schools. Your tax money has to go wherever it has to go, it's due to the collectivity, not for yourself. If you want to spend extra money and send your kid to a private school, fine for you. Your tax money (which is not yours anymore) goes to help the other inhabitants anyway. Some Americans could say I'm communist (which is not true), but that is what taxes are for.
In sweden we have a system that is similiar to what he explained, each child is worth a certain amount of funding and schools dont set prices, this however means that for profit schools (personally i think they shouldnt excist) can only make proffits by cutting costs, another effect is also grading inflation. Another issue in general with these things of choice is that families with more resources will generally be more informed on their rights and options, leading to greater segregation when it comes to education.
The problem is also one of language and news cycles, for example if a child is kidnapped in texas all 50 states will hear of it, wheres in europe only the nation that it happens in will generally get news about it. its a well established fact that ppl constantly think crime is increasing eventho the trend have been towards decrease for the last 100 years or so and part of the reason is that the crimes that do happen are reported about to a much larger degree, wheres before you might hear about crimes in your city or at most your state compared to the whole US.
Senate is not honorary in Italy: it is elected and it has equal power with the House. Laws have to be passed in both the branches to be promoted
Can your senate propose laws or modify laws?
@@Luredreier Absolutely
Same in France
The Lords in the UK can propose and amend laws too. Their purpose is different (why have two houses doing exactly the same thing vying for power), with the Lords focusing on sanity checking based on their domain expertise. What they can’t do is block a law that was a manifesto commitment or a budget (there are some other situations, but if they come up then the government has to expend a huge amount of political capital to use them and that stops them being too silly most of the time)
In Spain it's not honorary either. I got shocked when I heard that man saying those things. Unbelievable! 😂 He was talking with such an authority almost like if he knew for real what was he talking about! 😂
America does spend a lot on education, but it also spends more than anyone else on healthcare and still has dreadful outcomes; it isn't about raw cost as much as it's about value for money.
If your kids are sheltered from responsibility and not allowed to read controversial books, you can throw all the money in the world at them and they're still going to grow up less educated than a kid with broader experience and fewer restrictions on their learning.
The highest paid public person in many places in the US is the school sports coach.
Sport is important for a healthy population but those highly paid employees and sports stadia are there so that the city etc will win completions. I wonder how much of the education budget gets diverted to competitive sport.
@@johnclements6614 --- Remember the slogan of the Roman Empire (Bread and Games) --- Apparently this still works ;-)
you forgot to mention, your people rather spend money for a machine gun to use money to treat children in hospitals for free!
"Sending your children to a better school of choise" is not a logic we apply en general here in Norway. If you care only about your own children it will be hard to create a society of equality. If your rather take the view that your child is an integrated part of your local society, and all children is equally important, you would rather focus on making your local school better then to improve the spesific condition for your own child. We are not used to looking at other peoples children as competitors with the other children, but rather a little person who integrates with the other children in a community. There are differences of opinion also in Norway, and and usual the "me first" attitude often breaks through on the right wing of politics, but the general political landscape are more community oriented, and you are expected to care about all kids.
Ethan and Angela, please don't get too depressed about this. You are a lovely couple and I know if it was up to you and millions of Americans, your country would be different ♥️
how is the judiciary independant in the US, as judges, AGs and sheriffs are elected and therefore reliant on politics and getting votes from people, and depending on fundings for their campaigns and therefore prone to corruption...
Absolutely. They have this the wrong way round. It is the US that does nto have properly independent judiciary. The UK, for instance, absolutely does.
Ok on paper I could potentially agree with you about the uk, but the lack of constitution, and the lords chamber goes a bit against this principle (especially when it comes to peerage in exchange of money), also I’ll be honest I’m not 100% sure how sheriffs and judges are appointed in the uk.
@@maxxie84 We do not have sheriffs our Police chiefs are promoted from within the force. Judges are promoted from lawyers to judges internally in most cases.
@@1erkyrob2 are they really? so why are there police commissioner elections? I am not sure about judges
12:30 French education is pretty much the same, the school years are divided into 4 main level of institutions. The first one is the "école maternelle", literally "maternal school" which kids have to go through from 3 to 6 years old. During maternal school children learn by playing, it's more akin to a big recess with a teacher making sure that everything is okay. Kids learn how to articulate so they speak better, how to move better, how to behave in a group and in the later years how to read.
Then there is the "école primaire" ("primary school") where general learning starts. Kids from 7 to 11 start to learn french, mathematics, english, history, sports and so on.
Then "collège" which is akin to middle school in the US, it lasts 4 years and at the end you have an exam to pass. Then you get in high school for 3 years.
Time is very scheduled during middle and high school with very full days, 8 am to 6 pm isn't that rare in high school and lunch break is 1 hour in general. There are also 1 recess in the morning and in the afternoon but confined in the school ground. But on a fairly regular basis teachers will organize a "sortie" or "outing" where the entire class goes out to do something elsewhere, generally related to the subject.
For exemple when I was in middle school my latin teacher organized a movie outing to the local cinema then a visit to Ambrussum which is a Celtic Oppidum from the 8th century BC that evolved in an important trade post with a large roman road passing through it. There are a lot of remains and you can still walk on the roman road.
Another one was during high school where my geography and economics teacher brought the class to Belgium to visit the European parliament and see a piece of the Berlin wall exposed there.
Great insight guys! Much love!
I don't think the Big Think guy was talking about how kids are restricted in school, but about how they are restricted by their parents in their time outside school - because of fear of violence/abduction.
There is almost nothing 'outside school'. Sports, art, library, school meals, school bus, all by school.
European kids run home after school, have a cup of tea and cycle to their sportsclub, different group, different rules, different environment. They visit music school, again separated from school. Or an art class with yet again other kids, adults, and other environment. They go all by themselves no or hardly any parent supervision, yet they learn how to deal with different groups and people from a young age.
the funny thing is that if you count all the taxes you pay in usa for food clothing ect.ect you actualy pay more in taxes than what i do in sweden and swedich taxes are acused of beeing one of the highest in the world!!!
The US people will say that only some States have taxes on food or income but they all have taxes for other types of shopping. Their private health insurance is a tax by any other name. Also their groceries are generally twice or more as expensive, as the equivalent products in Europe.
This is more complicated and nuanced than that. I’m in NH, and we have no sales tax. You are taxed if you go out to eat at a restaurant, but not when you buy clothing or groceries. There’s also no state income tax, so we only pay federal income tax. Every state is different, and while almost all have sales taxes, it varies so much. Even some cities have their own sales tax added onto any state tax. Speaking in generalities about taxes in the US, I think, isn’t accurate.
However, the healthcare cost compared to a tax is spot on.
@@leftiesoutnumbered thanks for the information
We have an election every 4 years in Norway. We have like 8-11 different parties. To get anyone from your party elected in to the parliament, you have to get 4% of the votes , minimum.There are some simular parties ,left (socialist)(center) and right (concervative). The parties with the most votes will try and get some of the other parties to join there politics , and then get into government together. This can be two.three and even four different parties. If this is the case , they will dicuss there common policy and then make a platform for the politics they will stand behind , the next 4 years. Not every party will agree to everything on the agenda, but if they want to have seat in the government, so be it. It's a give and take. Some you loose and some you win. It is also fair to say that the biggest perties also gets more of there own policy into this 4 year agenda, and they also get the priminister. But there is not , well more than not, actually that the goverment is formed by parties that not have the majority in the parliament, but if noone else can agree on anything they will just govern from case to case , and seek support from wherever they can get it. So to the gentlemans point about two different equal legislaters in the us. This can never happend in a "normal" parliament, because ; if the parties in the government has the majority , what they decide will pass, ok If they do not have the majority , they will seek support in the parliament, and if they get enough delegates from other parties, it will pass. If they don't get the support they need the majority of the parliament forces the government to make changes that everyone can live with, and the it will pass. If not they have to start over, and make something that is better. Now we have yhe Labour Parti and Center parti governing together with sign support from the SV Solialist Left. Common incometax in Norway is about 33%. VAT on goods are 22% and on food 14%. So we maybe make a little less money, but atleast we dont have to constantly think about what will happend if we suddently get really sick. That must really get on peoples psyckie. Apart from that, this was off the top of my head, and I hope the spelling wasn't to bad.
Don’t let the tax thing distract you, Australia pays less taxes than the USA and still has universal healthcare. The USA has more millionaires than any other country because they are profiting outrageously while denying you the basic human right of healthcare. You deserve better
"socialist" senator - most Americans don't even know what socialism really is, and they label every system with a more "social" approach as socialist. I still haven't found an American mis-using this term who can explain to me what is so vile and horrible about being "social"and caring for your citizens. I would choose what they call socialist over their cut-throat capitalism any time
In Finland, school rides are an usual phenomenon because we are sparsely populated, and some small local schools are being closed down as small villages no longer have enough children. Those school rides are sometimes done by bus, but sometimes also with taxis. So there are costs of transportation here.
If you're interested, look at Switzerland. It is very very similar to the USA. In fact, when modern Switzerland was founded in 1848, they used the american Constitution and Institutions as a model for their own nation. Every Canton (State) has its own Governments, acts very independent and has its own Constitution. What the swiss did though was taking your style of Government and adopted it to their own geographic and cultural differences. Switzerland has a bi chamber system that works very well. And it is on every demographic better off than the US and ranks in almost every list in the top levels.
Schools for example are founded mainly by the states (Cantons). And it is, depending on which state you are, breaken down even further to the different cumines inside of the state. The federal Government sets the standard teh states have to match, but how they do it is their responsibility. And since the federal Government is made by the states and the people, it reassures that they set the standards in the best interest of the states and its people. And the states and the federal Government simply comes to aid poorer communities and schools (keep in mind that what I just said is very very simplified)
Same with healthcare. Federal law in Switzerland demands that every resident in the country needs to have health insurance. Health insurances are provided by private companies and have to cover the basics as a non profit. Only additional benefits can make profits. So Switzerland technically doesn't have universal health insurance but a general-privatized-yet-supported system. And again, each state regulates those rules independently, overseen by the federal government. And if a resident can't afford those health insurances, it is the duty of the states to jump in and subsidize those.
These are just two, simplified, examples. There are many more. Is the system perfect? Absolutely not! And it has it's own challenges. But to compare the US and the European systems, I think Switzerland is a good way to start
Hahaha Switzerland, you are nothing. Only a realy realy smal State without everything.
I think some of the problems in America are not enough zoning is designed around the community and not enough things like local open spaces and play areas and not having things within walking distance and not having local transport, but saying that I live within walking distance of work and still take the car because I like to pop home for dinner
I"m a Brit. Lived here for 22 years. You two are a class act. intelligent and good humoured. Keep it up.
The TLDR news youtube channels do have some explainer videos in how the UK parliament works if you want to look that up. I dont think that guy entirely represented how other political systems work for example though not ideal our system does have a number of checks and balances which under normal circumstances work pretty well, for example if laws get delayed long enough by the house of lords it eats up parliamentary time so the government may run out of time to get bills through. Also the delay may bring a bill to public attention and the government may drop it because it has upset voters.
TLDR is a great suggestion for learning about what is happening in the world and how things are different. There is more than one channel to make it easier to find what you are interested in.
If you taxed the rich in America too high, they could go to another country and take their money with them, but which country would they go to???? Especially as the UK and Europe would tax them more.
Ask Elon Musk how it goes for TESLA in Sweden right now. He thought for some reason that his company could avoid Swedish workers rules. He still do belive this, but as any other company from the US who tried to overwrite the laws of countries in Europe, they will soon realise they either sign or move out of the country.
Back in the 1970 s in the U.K. taxes for the rich was at 98% that’s why a lot of celebrities and entrepreneurs moved from the U.K. to America
And what was the comparable rate in the UsA?
There are two incompatible arguments here though - tax in the rest of the world is higher then the US and if taxes in the US gets higher the rich will go abroad.
You mean ultra rich.
It was not 98% on ALL their income. Like everyone there are tax free allowances in stages rising to the maximum.
@@charlestaylor9424
Well, because of that moving thing most countries that doesn't destroy their economy usually ends up reaching some kind of equilibrium.
With different taxes, but still taxes in roughly the same range.
So foe instance, Norway has a *way* higher income tax and VAT, but our corporate tax and property tax is lower then in the US from what I gather.
I think the main difference in wages from Europe to the states is Europe pays its servers/waiting staff substantially more. Europe tends to be governed by a minimum wage system whereas the states pays its staff a really low rate where its staff rely on tips where as Europe's pay is much higher plus they still have the bonus of tips.
Here's what's so great about our "Social" system when you're unemployed you'll get the chance to train and get paid to learn a new "Skill", That's how I became a commercial Diver for the ridiculous amount of 2500 Euro's instead of my American counterparts who pay 30K for the same education and less chance to be employed.
When I went to school - decades ago - walked 400 yards to Primary/Junior School, and when I went to High School - cycled 1.5 miles each way no problem. No other option, my siblings also did the same.
3:25 No, the US does not have the most billionaires per capita. It's 15th on the list, after European countries like Monaco, Liechtenstein, Cyprus, Switzerland, Sweden and Norway .
If we take a look at the list of US states, when it comes to billionaires per capita, Sweden has more billionairs per capita than 34 of the US states, for instance.
But if you're talking about millionaires, not billionaires, then the US have more per capita 9.7 % of the population, compared to 7.3 % in Sweden.
If you want to learn more about the differences between living in Denmark and the US there are some great videos by an American couple living in Denmark - Robe Trotting. They've done videos about the differences in regards to tax, health care and a ton of other things...
There are a few reaction channels that I like but they frequently respond to the same videos as each other.
I really appreciate how you find videos from sources other than the "usual suspects", and give a wider perspective compared with your own experiences.
... Also love the Welsh 🏴 flag in the background ☺
The US government is largely an 18th century version of what UK parliament. Dressed up a bit and slightly changed but UK along with other European countries have evolved and changed where as the US is stuck in the 18th century so to speak. But that’s American culture just like with gun laws and that. You guys don’t like change. Not you guys personally just in general. There is one guy on RUclips David Starkey Talks. He’s got a couple videos where he describes it very well.
Our government has changed a lot, just not always in the direction of progress, or in results that benefit the majority.
Their constitution is still stuck in the 18th century and barely had any changes. What do you expect?
That guy talking about the liberty of the judiacy doesnt give one country as example😂😂😂 hes all talk
20:40 Among the member nations of the EU there are; unitary parliamentary constitutional monarchies (i.e. Sweden), a federal parliamentary constitutional monarchy (Belgium), federal parliamentary republics (i.e. Germany), unitary parliamentary republics (i.e. Italy), unitary semi-presidential republics (i.e France), & a unitary presidential republic (Cyprus).
For reference, the USA is a federal presidential constitutional republic.
Yep, the government systems are not at all similar across Europe
By the way, France is SUPPOSED to be semi-presidential, but since 2002, the president (well... more the Representatives and the Senate) changed the constitution to have the presidential election every 5 years instead of 7, and only 2 months BEFORE the election of the Representatives (Assemblée Nationale).
Since 2002, the Assemblée is basically the President's. He always controls it and does basically whatever he wants during 5 years. The Assemblée doesn't play its role of balancing the President's power which was already too big and he is now basically a monarch with expiration date.
I can tell you, that is not good AT ALL for the social/political climate in the country as the population doesn't feel represented by the politics. Actually, the problem is kind of the same as in the US with their 2-party system.
OMG So often countries with single payer health care are demonized in the USA as taxing their populations outrageously. This is particularly true of how Americans view Canada and Canada's tax system. Well, I did some calculations and discovered if I lived in the United States (Arizona) my income tax would be $3,500.00 more than I pay in Canada. Also the sales tax in Arizona, (my winter home), where I do most of my shopping, is around 10%. Where I live in Canada the sales tax in 5%. In Canada I have never paid a penny for health care. I am far better off tax wise in Canada than I would be in the USA. Now if I had a high 6 figure income (above $300,000.00) or more in the USA I would pay significantly less than I would in Canada. Of course most of the power in the USA resides with the 1% so the tax situation is unlikely to change any time soon. As much as I love the USA, I am so glad I am a Canadian.
In regard to your perceptive comment on some people avoiding tax by receiving "perks"(company cars for your own use, company shares etc) instead of higher, taxable salaries used to be a problem here in NZ until one government responded to public pressure and addressed it by making these benefits taxable. For example if your company car was available for your use as a family car when not required for work it is relatively easy to calculate the value of this and tax you as if it were cash. This has been in place now for some time and the main result is a reduction in benefits (perks) and salary increases at least partially replacing these.
Another point is that while taxes do pay for social services such as health, by having a single main provider, a government agency they cost much less for the same service than if they were privately run, having no profit scraped off the top, no promotional costs, no legal actions for unpaid bills and economies of scale in purchase of pharmaceuticals and equipment. Treatment for an illness or condition is about half of what it is in the US and has a comparable quality of delivery. Also there is no exclusion or penalty for pre-existing or congenital conditions.
Bla.bla.bla. en Europa occidental se vive mejor, hay más justicia social, igualdad, bienestar y seguridad.🤗
Maybe a video by formerly The Black Forest Family (Type Ashton now) is more what you are looking for. There are a couple of videos by this channel on this topic. "THE BIG DEBATE: American Capitalism vs. German "Socialism" - SALARIES, TAXES, & SOCIAL CONTRIBUTIONS" is probably the most comprehensive one. Maybe you think it's too long for a reaction, but there are a lot of people who don't mind longer videos, as long as there is content in the videos.
👍great channel
@@arnodobler1096 Totally agree Arno :o).
In my opinion the major problem in USA is the two ,party system. In Denmark we have 9 parties in the parlament. No party has a majority on their own, so they simply has to work together to form a government. Right now the government consist of 3 parties, one is a bit left wing, one a bif right wing and one is in the center. So in order to govern aĺl of them have to make compromizes.
I agree. We now have the same situation in the UK with only two parties to choose from. There used to be three larger parties, but not anymore. There are other parties, but you could be wasting your vote. It's very frustrating. The 'first past the post' system makes it almost impossible to change the balance. Other options are starting to be used in certain circumstances, but not in the General Elections.
In the Netherlands, children go to school usually by bicycle. Junior schools up to 12 years old are always found close by where people live. They are usually not all too large. In my town they are not begged then 300 children per school max. Up till about 8 years old they are usually accompanied by a parent on their way to and from school.
Senior schools are much larger and often situated a bit further away but mostly still within cycling distance ( within 10 to 20 kms max) but older children can cycle longer distances. We have no school buses, with the exception for schools for children with special needs. They are collected from their homes by mini buses. The transport is not payed by the schooling system but by the local authorities.
About the governance in Europe: most countries have the Parliamentary system, which means that the party (-ies) that have the majority in the Parliament give the Prime Minister who chooses his ministers. And this is the executive branch, the PM is the decision maker. In such a system, the President has no power, it is usually only a honorific title. That is to say that, when a party or a coalition of parties wins an election and has majority in the Parliament, the Parliament always agrees with the Prime Minister, because it's their man/woman (usually the President of the party which won the most votes). No disagreement on policy, unlike the U.S. where the decision-maker, the President, may come from a party that does not have the majority in the Congress.
FYI, what Scalia was saying about only very few countries in the world like the USA have actual divided branches of government was utter and complete BS. The only reason he got away with saying that is because the general public in the USA thinks what he said was correct.
Then again, Scalia was not afraid from lying through his teeth, he was afterall a republican appointee and like the ones that come after him, he told lots of lies and half truths
The thing is Tax in european countries didnt just go up to 60-70% over night it happend slowly 4% here and 5% there over 20+ years like having your feet in cold water and slowly turning up the heat :p
You might pay that in tax if you are a billionaire.
@@charlestaylor9424 True I was refering when they where talking about the rich in general but yes middleclass pay less tax for sure :)
Which countries are you referring to, with taxes at 60-70%? The UK's highest rate of tax is 45% and there's no tax on the first £12,570 earned (for everyone), 20% on the £12,571 to £50,270 range, 40% on the £50,271 to £125,140 range and 45% on earnings over £125,140. Thats top 1% is for just over half a million people.
German income tax is 30%.
@@Thurgosh_OG that's England. However taxes have been as high as 99.25%
This is why Parliamentary systems are superior = more responsive to the voters wishes and more responsible for its own actions. Electoral systems also make a difference. Canada ( A federation) has a first past the post like the US and UK. Other countries have some form of mixed member proportional or single transferable vote.
To start with USA is a country and Europe is a continent
What Americans need to understand when it comes to single payer health care yes you may pay more income tax *BUT* there won't be the cost of health insurance or any co-pays so at end of the tax year the average American family will be better off
(American here) There’s such a scarcity mindset among many in the US, so many are afraid of having to “share”.
9:56
Well, not having to pay for armed guards or metal detectors definitely helps...
12:24
He's not talking about the school system, but about parenting.
12:43
Not just that.
6 year olds will literally take public transportation alone to school, changing bus midway, regular busses used by others, and busses these kids will use on their spare time too.
13:37
I get that you're enthusiastic, but you're *really* interrupting hef a lot...
20:28
I think that this video demonstrates why joining the EU is a bad idea for my country.
Having different laws all over the place is a *good* thing, it allows you to ro experiment and learn from what goes wrong.
If everyone has roughly the same system you don't have anything to compare it with...
When comparing, you should not only look at taxes, but at the amount people pay for health insurance as well. And then also look what you need to pay on top of that if you need to use healthcare. How well are the roads taken care of? What happens if you lose your job? How much will that cost you? How much do you pay for education? How much do you have left to spend and what can you do with it? What is left after your monthly costs. And also counting in somehow the periods where you are not the standard worker with a fixed income, like being sick, getting fired, or being pregnant.
I am a pretty average office worker. I save 250EUR a month by not having a car. Sold it 8 years ago. If I get fired, I can still live of the money they give me. Not enough to get rich, but enough not to end up on the streets and die.If I get sick, I do not go bankrupt. If i had kids and they were smart and they wanted to study more than what I did, they would have the opportunity to do so, without be having money or not a huge issue.
And schools should not be in a competition. That would be not in the best interest of education. Instead they should work together to see what works best. If there are 3 schools and 1 has a great idea on how to do maths better and the second on how to do their finances better, the best is to work together. That way all THREE get better at Maths AND their finances. Competition would make 1 school better in Maths and the other make more money and the third stay behind.
I've never seen a US tax form or where it all goes to, but i'd guess you pay more in taxes to healthcare for the few that are covered my medicade etc, because the prices aren't regulated. Thats without the monthly premiums and all the other insurance bs.
The prices are regulated. The federal government determines what is paid for medicaid.
We all likely spend more on health insurance premiums and deductibles and copays for our own personal healthcare than we do for our taxes that contribute to medicaid.
Hospitals must charge a lower price for patients under a state-financed system because they have high bargainiing power. Basically one body negociates the price for a huge part of the population. At the end of the day thos who are charged the most are paradoxically uninsured, the hospitals can charge them whatever they want as uninsured patients have basically no bargaining power.
We want the taxes because we like the benefits. The middle-class pay way more than 40% in the UK. And if people realised what the Scandinavian get we’d all want to pay more tax.
The reason why europe don't pay as much for school transportation is not better public transportation, it is city planning. Schools are close to residential areas, so children can walk to school, or take their bike. It is rare that children in the urban area would ever need to use a motor vehicle to go to school. Of course the higher school the longer you have to travel to it, so some might have to take a bus to go to a high school for example.
And it depend heavily of where you live, if you live in a countryside and have like 20km to a nearest village where there is only an elementary school, and you have to travel 50km to a bigger town with junior high, then naturally you use a motor transport of some kind (or often a couple of different kinds, for example parents drive the child to a bus stop, then child takes a bus to town).
In the Netherland we have house of representatives, a senate. provincial parliaments, municipal counsils and we also vote for water boards and the European Parliament. DA's, mayors are not things we vote for. We don't have something similar to Sheriff. We have a King, but he has no political power. At least not officially.
In Germany the distribution of power is like this:
the EU, the Federal Republic of Germany, states, county and cities.
There are cities that have the rank of a county and cities that have the rank of a state.
In the US the distribution of power is exactly the other way around.
City, County, States and then Washington DC ...
True in England we do have boroughs but ministers elected in these Boroughs can't pick and vote on their own separate laws as you do in states, all they do is decide how to run the borrow and what issues to fix first but they still must comply to all legislation and laws coming from the government in power!
The big thing that identifies the issue with the US political system is when you have federal shutdowns because the houses do not agree, this does not happen in European countries, as the essential workings continue regardless of what is happening politically.
Tuition fee for university is around € 2.300 per year in the Netherlands. That is for EU citizens. For students from outside the EU tuition fee may vary from € 9.000 up to € 15.000 per year. And yes, we use a dot as a thousands seperator and a comma for decimals. That's also different.
There is a difference between your usable income and the raw income (lack of better terms sorry).
But most europeans will tell you their usable income, meaning the income they make after the social taxes and sometimes (depending on the country) even after the income taxes are taken from their salaries.
Take a country like France, in 2023 the average raw salary (called "salaire brut" in french) is 39800€ per year, but the average usable salary (called "salaire net" in french) is 31044€ per year. The difference being all social welfare taxes, meaning mostly medical insurance and retirement, and maybe also income taxes as they are taken directly from your salary.
I don't know the system in USA, so i cannot say if it works the same way.
I know this probably doesn't apply to other European countries, but when they said in that video that European countries don't have a Senate and a Congress, or that one doesn't legislate against the other, in my country it *could* happen, but when there's an election, the party that gets the most votes is usually benefitted (by the electoral law) in the Senate. But during one legislature the Senate was ruled by the conservatives while Parliament was ruled by Labour (not that very progressive, center-left at best) and both institutions clashed a few times. But not to the level of what's been happening in the US these past 10 years lol
In some ways, you could see the EU as the federal government like you see in the US, I know it's not the same thing, but there are enough things that overlap each other, then you can look at EU countries like you look at US states, again, there are many overlaps and difference.
EU countries still have more powers when it comes to military matters, forign policy and so on, but a lot of policy for EU countries are now done at EU level and I wonder if maybe in the US, doing things like universal health care and other social programs at a state level could work better than doing it at a federal level, for one, you wouldn't need to get the entire country onboard, states on their own can move ahead with it, and if they make it work, others will likely follow.
I feel that trying to push many of these policies at a national level is where the gridlock is happening in the US.
As for balance of power, there's a fine line in what powers the EU, countries and regions in a country should have, just like there is with the US government, states and regions within a state, getting the right balance isn't easy as we see in the EU which is a union that's still being created, but it's not hard to see the overlaps with how the US is, just done in a different way with hopefully lessons learned from mistakes the US have made.
Personally, I think powers should always be at a local level, in other words, region level and then only move up to country, state level where it makes sense and then EU, US level where it makes sense there, a few examples that make sense at an EU, US level is boarder controls, military, forign policy and so on and other areas where it makes sense to have set standards across the entire union, but in most other areas, there's no reason why it can't be done at a local level, in fact, I suspect it would be better when it comes to competitive advantage, just as long as they are competing without lowering standards, but those standards could be set at the EU, US level, which is more or less what the EU does already, it sets standards that the members can't go below them but can have higher standards if they wish.
I feel both the EU and US could learn a lot from each other in many areas, the EU can learn from many of the mistakes the US made over its history and to try and avoid them, whereas the US can learn from the EU in how to balance the economy better that is more balanced for growth, fairness and well-being of its citizens, especially on equality and social programs.
Bernie would be considered centerright in Denmark, which is odd since he's allways compared to us like a 'socialist'
I'll give you an example of how the Portuguese system works, for you to have a notion of a tipical european country government system.
In Portugal we have about 8 to 9 parties that have representatives on the parliment.
We have election for the President and election for the parliment.
When we have parlimentar elections, people for on the party of their choice.
The party with the most votes, is invited by the president to form government. That party doesn't have to have more than 50% of the votes.
That party will get into power and will appoint a Prime minister and he's cabinet (formed by the remaining ministers that will occupy the different ministries. Like Minister of Health, the Finance Minister, the Defence Minister, etc.
That government will present laws and bill in the parliment and those bills will be voted by the representatives of each parties in the parliment. If the law or bill gets the vote of the majority, the it goes throw.
Then, the president may: Approve the law (or bill), send the law (or bill ) to be reviewed by the Constitiunal Judge to see if there is something there that goes against the countries constitution, or can simply block the law. If the law is blocked, the president must specify why and the law goes back to the government that may change it or not. The law then goes back to the parliment to get a new vote. If the law gets the vote of the majority, the president then has to approve it.
The Constitutional judges may find something in the law that goes against the constitution. If that's the case, the government has to change the law and take it again to the parliment to be voted.
Only after a law has been voted and then approved by the president, the law is in vigor.
Since a government is formed by the party with the most votes and since that party may have less than 50% of the seats in the parliment, the government has to negociate consensus with other parties to convince them have enough votes that make the law viable and that get more than 50% of the votes and goes throw the all process.
It happens, from time to time, that a government that has less than 50% of the seats in parliment, try to pass laws and they fail again and again. Usually, if a government can't get into aggreements with enough parties for their laws to pass, a party in the parliment gets fed up of the situation and ask for a "Confidance vote". That's a vote where every party in the parliment votes to assess if the government is fit to govern. If more than 50% of the member of the parliment vote to disqualify the government. The Government falls and whe have new elections to vote for a new parliment.
And, just like in the beginning, people vote, the parties elect a new percentage of seats into parliment, and the president invites the party with more seats to form a new government.
In our system the laws are proposed by the government. The president doesn't propose laws. The president job is to approve the laws the parliment votes, and keep the government in check. He is the top representative of the country but, it's not him that governs the country. It's the Prime Minister.
Sorry for my english. It's not my first language.
I hope this explanation is enough to give you a glimps about how a typical european country government system works. :)
It is true that people are more "income-balanced" in Europe and it's easier to tax (almost) everyone. With that in mind, the thing about increasing the taxes for rich people and businesses is not a solution for a problem, but I think it's a good start to bring more of this balance, as a first step. And it's definitely not the only variable in that equation. But if people with lower income are better supported (health, education, infrastructure etc.) and some of the cost are better "offloaded" by the system, they will come in situation where they will be able to spend more. Bottom line, you (as a country) are practically investing in your population so you could tax them better.
Rich people benefit from financial assistance and legal voids… anyway, they are not charge much more than average people
In the US vote blue down the line then the US will become more equal.
By equle I take it you mean no white people
😂😂😂. They both work for the same corporate donors. They have exactly the same donors. They only difference in the 2 parties is the Democrats run on identity politics, lgbq horse 💩 & abortion. The Democrats could have codified Rowe vrs Wade countless times when they had control of both houses & the Republicans couldn't have changed the abortion laws. But then they wouldn't have that fear of abortion rights to run on. They're ALL scum.
No. The US needs a Centrist party to sort out the mess the Reds and Blues have made of the US.
lol. Everyone will be poor, less safe and freeze in the dark by voting blue. Equally poor.
Blue is Tory filth
Europeans may pay more taxes, but we have a lot of benefits included in those taxes, which means, at the end of the month, when we get our salary, we can use it for everyday life entirely. In the USA, at the end of the moth, you get your salary, and then, you need to still substracte health issurances - college or medical debt.
Plus globaly, the cost of living is less expansive in Europe, so even if we earn less, we actually have more money on our account after every essential spending.
Your Senator, about the 2 chaber system, he is saying crap. in France, we have 2 representative Assembly. They don't have the same purpose, but they are as powerful as the other. The Assemblée Nationale mostly propose new laws ; and then passed it to the Senat, who review it, make modifications. If there is modifications, the law proposal go back to the Assemblée, for another check-up, and then, when everybody is OK, the law is proved.
Also, an other thing, we have multiple parties, but the opposition between them is really not as strong as in the USA. they can work together. Wherewhile, in the USA, I got the impression that if a Republican want to pass a law, Republican will say YES on principle and the Democrate would say NO on principale
Here in England you have more chance of winning the lottery than being shot or abducted.
I think America is more about the individual. Having universe of healthcare systems et cetera show that we care more at each other.
Just for commparison the money in the US and Germany Type Ashton made two videos on this 10 month ago and compared a single man and a couple with to kids, with the same education and same job, what they have after all expenses.
You may look at that.
But both videos are more than 40 minutes long, as it is not so easy.
According legislation:
In Germany we have the Bundestag, voted for on federal level. The Bundeskanzler will be elected by the coalition in charge of the Bundestag.
A second legislation, that has to agree on most new laws, is the Bundesrat.
But there is no seperate election for the Bundesrat, as every Federal State in Germany (Bundesland) has one vote in the Bundesrat. So every time, when the government of on Bundesland changes, their vote in the Bundesrat may be difference.
my daughter will study languages after she finishes her school...
i dont need to save money to pay for it, my monthly wage is enough to pay the €800 to €1000 per year fee for the university!
btw: we dont need colleges here, here you learn at school!
here in Italy, under 8,174 euros you pay no taxes, up to 15,000 euros 23%, up to 28,000 euros 25%, up to 50,000 euros 35%. Of these taxes 20% goes to healthcare, 21% goes to social security, the rest security and more. The poor have free healthcare.
You get ultra rich off the backs of other people. You can have as many Cadillacs/Rolls Royces as you want - but without the roads made by the State taxes you are going nowhere.
US has strange and not too democratic 2-party system. In most European countries there are lot of political parties and it is not uncommon for new parties to born and to get very popular.
Re: the lack of separation of powers in Europe / UK. Yep, and in fact that's how it is in all democracies apart from the USA. Most democracies are, in effect, short-term elected dictatorships. It's the only way one can guarantee that something can actually be done. The benefits are that one can have the someone in charge with dynamism of a dictator, whilst ensuring that their incentive to retire is strong and so they generally don't fall off the rails and changes laws to make them President for Life.
I must be getting old as i find more and more chatting includes the the word ( like ) a lot more often than is needed
In Romania we have the Deputy Room and The Senate .The both have legislative power
A whole thing most americans do, like you did, was to negelct the social aspect of school. Which somehow has been cut from the entire american school system.
When your kids go to school, they sociallize, which is a very important part of growing up.
Going to the 'nice' school, but living in the other part of town and not being able to be around the kids you go to school with handicaps your social developlment.
Kids need friends.
Why that construct got lost on so many american parents is something I do not understand
USA is 1st in 3 metrics.
Your economy is 1st.
You have biggest military in the world.
You have most guns owned by civilians.
Why is there even such a big difference between schools? I think this is the main problem here that you don't even seem to notice. We don't have homeschooling for this reason: the level of education has to have a certain level that needs to be controlled regularly. That is why schools are all equally good, there so little to no difference even between private and public schools. Often private schools are worse even, but have more fancy programs and activities that all don't have a lot to do with the mandatory curriculum.
Well I don’t think the EU is very bad for millionaires and billionaires. My country is in the EU and has 1.8% millionaires, the US has 0.67%, we have 0.00025% billionaires, the US has 0.00022% of citizens being a billionaire. So with our country’s high taxation (first bracket of income tax is 37%, second bracket is 49.5%, sales tax is 9% on food and craft work, and 21% on non-food and services) Americans will call it a socialist country, we still have more millionaires and more billionaires than the US, percentage wise. So it has little to do with high or low taxation. We have more quality of life overhere, cheaper healthcare, cheaper education and better median quality for both of them, while the US has higher peaks of quality at education (like Harvard and MIT) and healthcare (like Johns Hopkins and Mayo Clinic), they have a lower median quality at both healthcare and education. We have an urge to carry the burden together, to distribute the burden fairly, while in the US everyone has to carry it individually. We have 2.5% of people living in poverty (according to our Central Bureau of Statistics or 5.7% if you believe the Central Planning Bureau) and the US has 11.5% of people living in poverty (according to the US Census Bureau). We have less poor people and more rich people, but living overhere isn’t that bad for either poor or rich. It is just poignant that the poor in the US are poorer and the rich are richer than in my country.
Do not underestimate the fact that european countries are very much in competition with each other, exactly as US states are, not matter how culturally different they can be.
Imagine what would happen if california would start offering affordable and accessible single payer universal healthcare, removing any risk of health related bankruptcy, high grade free education removing student debt, great infrastructure and cheap public transport systems, social support and housing limiting extreme poverty and homelessness, 4+ mandatory weeks of paid vacations, 12+ weeks of paid parental leave, enforced 40h or 4 days work weeks, minimum fair wages as well as providing economic opportunities..
You would then probably not be surprised that there's been in the past century and still is, fairly large population migration inside europe itself and that each state had to adjust to the competition, usually through the help of other european countries which seem to believe that the more we are alike, the best it is for the whole group.
Well except the UK of course, which kinda reminded everyone that nothing comes without effort and that when people are mistreated they tend to be driven by their emotions and can be convinced by deceitful and irresponsible politicians, to put the blame on their neighbors.
Type Ashton (formerly Black Forest Family) did a great comparison of income & taxes btw US & Germany.
The issue with parents having the right to access the 'best' schools in their wider area is that these schools will only have a certain number of places available, so you are just going to have problems with over subscribed good schools, and other schools where no-one wants to go. It's much better to raise the standards for all schools, and make them more equal.
American Elementary teacher earn a LOT more than British Primary school teachers. The average US Elementary school teacher earns about £55,000 pa and the average pay for a UK Primary school teacher is £27,000.
about the US having higher payed jobs, that is not for everyone the vast majority id bet are on minimum wages and that for the states that's $7.25 per hour or if you earn tips its $2.13 per hour here in the uk no mater the job the minimum wage is $13 per hour
Hello Ethan and Angela. The US is like how Britain was when the Lords were like the Senate and the King was like the President. The Commons, like your Representatives, took more and more power as ordinary working people got the vote and demanded representation.
This is not how some other European countries work. The rights were so hard won in Britain, without your Revolution , that many did not want to devolve power to the EU, which unlike how you said, is taking financial action to stop countries deviating from the standard legal thinking. This gave rise to tensions in the EU, such that UK ended up leaving.
The map with such as UK, Norway, Switzerland and Turkey under an EU flag just looks really odd as a result.
The US map does not have Canada, Mexico or even the coveted Greenland.
The main difference is of course that we usually do not mix the peanut butter with jam, before anyone takes me too seriously or thinks I am only on the side of peanut butter because I did not say jello.
The difference between Europe and the USA is really simple: if any of the European Countries has something that work better, the other Countries adopt it. USA think that americans are better, Merica is always the best!
Roe Vs Wade is a prime example of how US politics works, load the judiciary up with one side of politics and they will find a legal way to change anything.
The judiciary should be an independent body, not left or right leaning, political affiliation should be taken into account as the judges are appointed for life.
The political system works good on paper but in reality is an absolute shambles.
A degree of socialism is considered a good thing in Europe, with national health services, welfare benefits for the jobless and disabled, decent holidays for workers, and strong trade unions.
I am 40 and live in Europe. I NEVER had 6 weeks paid vacation. 2 was priviledge.
O well I haven't looked at every country so yea I probably shouldn't generalize like that. Just from what I've seen in videos and people told me it sounded pretty standard.
Sweden actually have more millionaires per capita then USA. The point is that Sweden focus on equality of income, not wealth.
the description of european second chambers by A. Scalia, is hightly US oriented opinion.... i, as a french, don't agree. the "Senat" don't have the same powers as the other chamber (Assemblée Nationale), but it's not only honorific at all. it's a local indirect representation of the french territories. And it can modify the laws. And it has an importance when both assemblies are reunited in the congress ("congrés") when it's needed to modify the constitution.
In Europe people pay more tax… but in the US in the end pay MORE because companies ask higher prices to make profits to make the rich people richer than they need to be.
The pay more because they have to pay 3000 to give birth, 300 for an inhaler and on and on… they don’t get that every single one of them is going to get ill, have and accident or any other health issues …. And just an ambulance is expensive as f&&@ck
Here in the UK we have no idea what you mean by 'subsidies' - We pay our taxes whether employed, self-employed, or unemployed. We just get the same it's divided equally for all. From what I've learned we don't have lobbyists and donors - or we have and they will be found out and fined.
Both lobbyists and wealthy donors are part of the main problem with the U.S Government, no matter the level be it Fed, State, or Local, it is just most known, done at, and reported about when it comes to the Federal level. If it where to come up on a National voting by the People in that there would be a Law that says 'There will no longer be any lobbyists, and that politicians could only take in so much money so that the wealthy could no longer give an extreme amount'. I am willing to bet that the voting by the People would say 'Yes! Put That Law into Place!'. But at the moment, unfortunately, what I just said is nothing more then speculation.
it works decently in Sweden but the US got some other problems that needs solving before they are ready for it.
Let’s make something clear once and for all: European countries are not socialist’s countries… their economic system is capitalism, their government systems are democracy or republic… after all that you can find political parties with a more socialist, fascist or whatever ideology… all of the countries have in common prioritizing certain social standards that are provide by the state… it is not socialism
We don't pay any tax on food and also on books and printed matter.
I wouldn't mind paying for health care but not to the extent where it could leave me bankrupt.!!
Our taxes don't leave me bankrupt, and not anywhere near.! I do OK, and there's plenty of opportunity to travel and take time off.
Eastern Europe tends to be more Centre-Right on economics than Western Europe, in part because of their experiences under Communism.