Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Study discovers Swedes are less well-off than the poorest Americans
Reuters via Haaretz ^ | 5/4/2002 | Reuters

Posted on 05/04/2002 3:41:42 PM PDT by l33t

STOCKHOLM - Swedes, usually perceived in Europe as a comfortable, middle class lot, are poorer than African Americans, the most economically-deprived group in the United States, a Swedish study showed yesterday.

The study by a retail trade lobby, published in the liberal Dagens Nyheter newspaper 19 weeks before the next general election, echoed the center-right opposition's criticism of the weak state of Sweden's economy, following decades of almost uninterrupted Social Democratic rule.

The Swedish Research Institute of Trade (HUI) said it had compared official U.S. and Swedish statistics on household income, as well as gross domestic product, private consumption and retail spending per capita between 1980 and 1999.

Using fixed prices and purchasing power parity adjusted data, the median household income in Sweden at the end of the 1990s was the equivalent of $26,800, compared with a median of $39,400 for U.S. households, HUI's study showed.

"Weak growth means that Sweden has lost greatly in prosperity compared with the United States," HUI's president, Fredrik Bergstrom, and chief economist, Robert Gidehag, said.

International Monetary Fund data from 2001 show that U.S. GDP per capita in dollar terms was 56 percent higher than in Sweden, while in 1980, Swedish GDP per capita was 20 percent higher.

"Black people, who have the lowest income in the United States, now have a higher standard of living than an ordinary Swedish household," the HUI economists said.

If Sweden were a U.S. state, it would be the poorest, measured by household gross income before taxes, Bergstrom and Gidehag said.

They said they had chosen that measure for their comparison to get around the differences in taxation and welfare structures. Capital gains such as income from securities were not included.

The median income of African American households was about 70 percent of the median for all U.S. households, while Swedish households earned 68 percent of the overall U.S. median level.

This means that Swedes stood "below groups, which, in the Swedish debate, are usually regarded as poor and losers in the American economy," Bergstrom and Gidehag said.

Between 1980 and 1999, the gross income of Sweden's poorest households increased by just over 6 percent, while the poorest in the United States enjoyed a three times higher increase, HUI said.

If the trend persists, "things that are commonplace in the United States will be regarded as the utmost luxury in Sweden," the authors said. "We are not quite there yet, but the trend is clear."

According to HUI figures, during the period 1998-1999, U.S. GDP per capita was 40 percent higher than in Sweden, while U.S. private consumption and retail sales per capita exceeded Swedish levels by more than 80 percent.

The HUI economists attributed the much bigger difference in consumption and sales mainly to the fact that U.S. households pay themselves for education and health care, services that are tax-financed and come for free or at low user charges in Sweden.

According to recent opinion polls Sweden's Social Democrats are comfortably ahead of the center-right opposition in the run-up to the September 15 elections.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Foreign Affairs
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 261-267 next last
To: Torie
Schedule A is mischievious, albeit less than before.

As much as I hate them, the AMT, and more importantly, the phase out of itemized deductions limit the distorting effect of Congressional willingness to monkey with the tax code. Of course, lower marginal rates would be a better way to achieve the same result.

121 posted on 05/04/2002 6:25:12 PM PDT by the bottle let me down
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: Texas_Longhorn
LOL! Well done.

I am off to bed as I have to go WORK tomorrow, on a Sunday at that.

I have enjoyed this thread but I would enjoy it even more if I could be told by Torie how I can take the day off and still make money.

The reason why I need all of this money is because I live in Massachusetts and thier "Economy," dictates that a crappy flea ridden house costs 400,000$ I believe that in San Fran it is much the same.

The more "Enlightened," the community is the more it costs to live there. So, they have two classes... rich, elitist bastards that are removed from the tax burden (Because of connections.), and a poor servant underclass. Great neighborhood!

I cant wait to move the hell away and let the "Enlightened ones," run the economy. There IS good news! Once Mass runs itself inot the ground, the FED will make sure all of YOU pay for it! F'ing bastards.

If it makes things more "Effecient," for the country to pay for Mass's IMAGINERY programs then so be it. In the real world, this is theft.

Oh, and Torie I would bet my seven employees that are hard-nosed workers that dont know the MEANING of a day off could MOP THE FLOOR with seven European Workers that hold to the 35 hour work week, siestas and all that other crap. Obviously, I would win.

Thats why I prefer REALITY!

122 posted on 05/04/2002 6:25:37 PM PDT by Arioch7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: the bottle let me down
Well said.
123 posted on 05/04/2002 6:26:59 PM PDT by Arioch7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

Comment #124 Removed by Moderator

To: Torie
I sock 25K a year into the pension, now up to 40K, along with my two partners, and we give the secretary about 2K. Isn't that grand?

Nothing in the American system prevents you from doing what's right for your secretary.

Your imbalanced pay plan is not American, per se; it does, however, demonstrate that you and your partners are greedy.

You used the Enron model?

125 posted on 05/04/2002 6:28:08 PM PDT by ninenot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: ninenot
Resisting greed when it is legal requires the fortitude of a saint. I am not a saint.
126 posted on 05/04/2002 6:29:15 PM PDT by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: ninenot
Actually, the money that goes to the secretary is fully vested (at my demand), and goes into well diversified low cost Vanguard index funds (per my advice). I hope that helps. I am not a saint, but neither am I a bastard.
127 posted on 05/04/2002 6:31:12 PM PDT by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

Comment #128 Removed by Moderator

To: Polybius
I'm wondering if she speaks English

I am certain that you will be able, with long nights and weekends, to teach her a few rudimentary English terms.

129 posted on 05/04/2002 6:35:40 PM PDT by ninenot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: abwehr
See post 124 and entertain me with your babbitry.

So the folks at Morgan/Chase had a conflict of interest. Did they breach their fiduciary duty as a trustee in deciding how to vote? If they did and the beneficiaries of the trusts can prove that they were harmed, Morgan/Chase should pay through the nose. I don't know if they did, neither do you, and, in fact, it probably can't be proven either way. Doesn't change a thing about my earlier post.

130 posted on 05/04/2002 6:38:24 PM PDT by the bottle let me down
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: Torie
I should add that the WSJ ranted for years that the Laffer Curve "proved" that reducing tax rates would increase revenues.

Tax rates have been cut after which revenue increased. Of course whether a cut causes an increase depends upon the what was the rate was and how much was the cut. But that's what Laffer was saying. He may have been flakey -- I'll take your word since I didn't know him -- but he was certainly right about this particular concept.

131 posted on 05/04/2002 6:39:10 PM PDT by Tribune7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: Torie
that would be a good start.
132 posted on 05/04/2002 6:39:37 PM PDT by ItisaReligionofPeace
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: abwehr
Of course there is a conflict of interest. If you read Capitalism Magazine, you would have sold them as well. Believe it or not, the evil right-wing magazine said Enron was a joke way back when... like two years ago..

I am investing heavily into Russia right now and let me tell you, it is a lot more risky then ENron. However, I am confident and it is MY MONEY!

If I lose my shirt it should not matter to you. Enron employees had ample time to relocate thier portfolios and as far as JP Morgan goes... what can I say?

They did give me an excellant car loan though!

Night-Night! Its been a pleasure talking to you all and if someone wants to press this issue they can talk to me via Freep Mail.

Have a good week end gang!

133 posted on 05/04/2002 6:41:10 PM PDT by Arioch7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: Tribune7
To close this off, a 70% rate, which is what we had pre Reagan for unearned income, is too high. A 50% rate for earned income is pushing it, if local taxes are on top. And distinguishing between earned and unearned income is nefarious ecnomically. It may not reduce revenues, but it does probably distort. But to invoke supply side when we are talking about top rates of 30% to 45% is just silly. There is no evidence that Laffer's napkin comes into play in that zone at all. And arguing for a break for capital gains over other income is even more dubious, although it would, and to the extent it is play does, benefit moi hugely.
134 posted on 05/04/2002 6:44:34 PM PDT by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: Torie
Perhaps Sweden needs a bit more tough love, and a lot more spankings.

Hopefully that's a service that the Swedish Bikini Team provides during the winter season.

135 posted on 05/04/2002 6:44:40 PM PDT by Washington-Husky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Washington-Husky
Good point!
136 posted on 05/04/2002 6:45:49 PM PDT by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

Comment #137 Removed by Moderator

To: ItisaReligionofPeace
The problem is that I might be stereotyped as a pointy headed intellectual. We really can't have that.
138 posted on 05/04/2002 6:47:27 PM PDT by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: the bottle let me down
The question merely is at what tax rate produces maximum revenue to the government over a period of time

And if torie were so well educated in Econ, she may remember Econ 101 (MY prof was Les Aspin...)

In 101, you learn that there is a pair of curves describing increasing price and decreasing sales. The idea, of course, is to maximize sales. Thus you pick the point on the curve which represents the maximum volume as the sales price--and figure out how to make your profit at that price.

Only difference with Gummint is that Gummint has no interest in economic niceties--only in self-perpetuation.

In THAT sense, the Laffer curve is a myth. Nobody in Gummint takes seriously the idea that 'less cost' is important.

139 posted on 05/04/2002 6:49:40 PM PDT by ninenot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: abwehr
I am not adverse to facing reality but extending a little help is not an inhuman thing to do.

And under a government which did not tax income or business entities and honored freedom of contract, you would still be completely free to do so.

140 posted on 05/04/2002 6:52:07 PM PDT by SteamshipTime
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 261-267 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson