So many varied thoughts come to mind. (a) _self reported_ well being is not so meaningful. It's subjective and specific to culture. Maybe people in the US report less happiness because they recognize they have unmet potential, and/or their expectations are higher. (b) Given that the US is _the_ innovation engine for the whole world, othe…
So many varied thoughts come to mind. (a) _self reported_ well being is not so meaningful. It's subjective and specific to culture. Maybe people in the US report less happiness because they recognize they have unmet potential, and/or their expectations are higher. (b) Given that the US is _the_ innovation engine for the whole world, other countries have the luxury of destroying their citizens' drive and letting them essentially parasite off of the innovations of the US. Tech and pharma come to mind right away. If the US followed similar policies, we'd all be on a much more dismal trajectory. (c) Don't Scandanavian countries have significant natural resources they can just lean on? (d) When talking about any kind of outcomes comparing US to Sweden, we can't ignore the homogeneity of them compared to us. A smaller country filled with people of similar background/race/etc. can tolerate redistribution better since people feel less bitter about giving, and may feel some misgivings about over-taking. In the US we don't have that solidarity and a huge number of people are more than happy to take anything they can get with no guilt. (e) How can over-regulation not be considered a violation of rights? Almost by definition it impinges on my "rights" to do many things that really don't harm anyone else, and most especially my freedom of association. Taking 70% of my income for services I don't want or need is surely a rights violation too. The "all or nothing" notion Sehon keeps bringing up isn't really that convincing. Taxing me for _anything_ is indeed a form of theft, but as a practical matter nobody has really figured out a viable alternative for police, courts and national defense. As far as we know, it's the least bad option.
It’s politically easier to redistribute income in an ethnically homogeneous society. Unfortunately, there are indications that income redistribution undermines social cohesion. The number of freeloaders, never zero, increases. Productive citizens look for an exit.
So many varied thoughts come to mind. (a) _self reported_ well being is not so meaningful. It's subjective and specific to culture. Maybe people in the US report less happiness because they recognize they have unmet potential, and/or their expectations are higher. (b) Given that the US is _the_ innovation engine for the whole world, other countries have the luxury of destroying their citizens' drive and letting them essentially parasite off of the innovations of the US. Tech and pharma come to mind right away. If the US followed similar policies, we'd all be on a much more dismal trajectory. (c) Don't Scandanavian countries have significant natural resources they can just lean on? (d) When talking about any kind of outcomes comparing US to Sweden, we can't ignore the homogeneity of them compared to us. A smaller country filled with people of similar background/race/etc. can tolerate redistribution better since people feel less bitter about giving, and may feel some misgivings about over-taking. In the US we don't have that solidarity and a huge number of people are more than happy to take anything they can get with no guilt. (e) How can over-regulation not be considered a violation of rights? Almost by definition it impinges on my "rights" to do many things that really don't harm anyone else, and most especially my freedom of association. Taking 70% of my income for services I don't want or need is surely a rights violation too. The "all or nothing" notion Sehon keeps bringing up isn't really that convincing. Taxing me for _anything_ is indeed a form of theft, but as a practical matter nobody has really figured out a viable alternative for police, courts and national defense. As far as we know, it's the least bad option.
It’s politically easier to redistribute income in an ethnically homogeneous society. Unfortunately, there are indications that income redistribution undermines social cohesion. The number of freeloaders, never zero, increases. Productive citizens look for an exit.
Great point about self selection, Chuck.