George Bush, the Tax cuts and the collapse of American Power

[GePap]

Originally posted by Lord Merciless


Credibility is something you said you would do and then do it.

So far Bush has been true to his words. (not that I necessarily agree with him.)

Well,except with the catching Osama, Saddam, finding WMD's, being able to finish off the taliban and to make Iraq safe....

Oh, and create jobs with his tax cuts...beyond those minor points he is a model of credibility.

[HershOstropoler]

Originally posted by Lord Merciless


Credibility is something you said you would do and then do it.

So far Bush has been true to his words. (not that I necessarily agree with him.)

On the things he likes - quick wars and large tax cuts.

On everything else, as GePap has listed, he's an airbag.

[Ted Striker]

Hey, hey, this isn't the Hapsburg Empire we are talking about...

[el freako]

Nope, that lasted for 400 years - I wonder if the US will last as long

[pchang]

US is #4

Latest UN labor report ranks productivity as follows:
Norway $38/hr
France $35/hr
Belgium $34/hr
US $32/hr
However, because US workers work so many more hours than those lazy Europeans, the US ranks #1 in productivity per worker. There is a lot of reverence here for what they call the "puritan work ethic". Damn bunch of fools.

[DanS]

Well the trend I referred to (that stopped in the US since the early 1970's) has been going on since the 1850's
Do you really think it will stop completely?
And if it does don't you think that maybe the US will 'catch up' with the increased leisure time at some point?

I don't know why the trend was arrested in the 1970s for the US, so I can't really judge whether this is just temporary, or whether other industrialized countries will also arrest their descent.

Sometimes I think we're working at an unhealthy high level and wonder how much longer it can last. But on another level, there are benefits to working so much. I would be much happier being a client of an ambitious attorney who works 70 or 80 hours a week than one who isn't, for instance (just using an example in an area that I know well).

Maybe Americans just haven't had a structure for working less that seems right to them. For instance, maybe a 4 day work week, 8 hour day would seem right, but a month and a half of vacation, or 6 hour work day, would not seem right. I don't know who in society has the moral authority or power (the president?) to put working less into place. The unions certainly don't have any power to push society like that. It could be done through more national holidays.

Maybe Americans just have an outsized and growing appetite for services, while others see no need. As we've discussed, we consume no more or less useless sh!t than most in the industrialized world. Or maybe we've just seen an opportunity to work the same amount and get paid for it (unemployment not really a huge problem), so we have done so. Maybe we have too much debt, so we feel obliged to keep up the pace.

All possibilities.

[Chemical Ollie]

Re: US is #4

Originally posted by pchang

However, because US workers work so many more hours than those lazy Europeans, the US ranks #1 in productivity per worker. There is a lot of reverence here for what they call the "puritan work ethic". Damn bunch of fools.

A buddy of mine who just moved home after working four years in US told me that they surely have longer workdays, but they do about as much work per day as us, which means they are actually less effective per hour.

[HershOstropoler]

Dan:

"Maybe Americans just have an outsized and growing appetite for services, while others see no need."

Or have no need, like for many legal services, or prison services.

"Or maybe we've just seen an opportunity to work the same amount and get paid for it (unemployment not really a huge problem)"

The european countries with low unemployment have nowhere near your hours/year.

"Maybe we have too much debt, so we feel obliged to keep up the pace."

That may explain some of it. But I really don't get that service sector. I could easily imagine spending an extra 10000 euros per year on goods, but not on services.

[DanS]

That may explain some of it. But I really don't get that service sector. I could easily imagine spending an extra 10000 euros per year on goods, but not on services.

I think a more systematic approach to this is warranted. For instance, do you have a breakdown of how much is spent on our services versus your services?

I bet it's just an accumulation of services--a little here and a little there. Like spending more on higher education. At least on higher education, there's quite a variation within the EU. Maybe it's just that in the aggregate, it's the way our society is built versus yours. Y'all just haven't made the choices that we have. An argument could be made that we just have more services for which to spend our money, so we do.

[GePap]

In the US healthecare is an extra service, not one provided by the state. That adds a lot to what American spend on services.

[DanS]

There are European countries for which health care is not provided by the State. They spend no more on health care as a percentage of the economy do their other European brethren.

[HershOstropoler]

"For instance, do you have a breakdown of how much is spent on our services versus your services?"

I took a quick look at this some time ago, but the data categories have some differences, and there are different price structures. Would have to check the library for detailed data. Health spending (not identical with value add in national accounts) used to be about 5000 $ for you, 2000-2500 € for us. Are you twice as healthy?

"Maybe it's just that in the aggregate, it's the way our society is built versus yours."

Has a lot to do with it.

[Kropotkin]

The existance of for example public health care probably messes up the productivity figures as compared to countries with a mostly private health sector. In the first case productivity has to be proxied by the cost. In the latter you got profits that are usually a better indicator.

[HershOstropoler]

Originally posted by GePap
In the US healthecare is an extra service, not one provided by the state. That adds a lot to what American spend on services.

Yes, but only for the household spending side, not for the full consumption view in GDP.

[GePap]

Wasn;t the issue whether Hersh ould ever see himself spending 10,000 on services? Any trips to the doctor to be paid out of pocket would do plenty to get you on yur way there.