Michael C. Moynihan | May 14, 2009
A fascinating piece in Prospect by UCLA professor Peter Baldwin arguing that Europe and the United States have far more in common than most critics assume. For instance, on economic equality:
It is universally observed that America is an economically more unequal society than Europe, with greater stratification between rich and poor. Much of this is true. Income is more disproportionately distributed in the US than in Western Europe. In 1998, for example, the richest 1 per cent of Americans took home 14 per cent of total income, while in Sweden the figure was only about 6 per cent. Wealth concentration is another matter, however. The richest 1 per cent of Americans owned about 21 per cent of all wealth in 2000. Some European nations have higher concentrations than that. In Sweden-despite that nation's egalitarian reputation-the figure is 21 per cent, exactly the same as for the Americans. And if we take account of the massive moving of wealth offshore and off-book permitted by Sweden's tax authorities, the richest 1 per cent of Swedes are proportionately twice as well off as their American peers.
On health care, Baldwin recognizes the problems inherent in the current system, but challenges the European myth of 40 million uninsured Americans dying in the streets:
Yet despite the too large fraction of those who are not insured, Americans are relatively healthy and well-serviced by their healthcare system-to judge by disease survival rates. For diabetes, heart and circulatory disease and strokes, the incidence rates and the number of years lost to sickness are firmly in the middle of the European spectrum. And for the four major cancer killers (colorectal, lung, breast and prostate), all European nations have worse survival rates than the US.
Read the whole thing. And keep an eye out for Baldwin's forthcoming book on the subject, The Narcissism of Minor Differences: How America and Europe are Alike (Oxford).
Headline reference, for the uninitiated.
Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.
Healthcare mortality rates are always tricky. OTOH, the US tends
to engage in more and more accurate preventive screening, which
tends to catch dangerous cancers early but also catches benign
cancers or suspicious places that end up being nothing but cause
worry. That can increase survival rates without really increasing
real health. Of course, most national health care proponents like
to claim that we're doing too little preventive medicine, not that
we could save by not doing as much screening.
OTOH, when it comes to infant mortality rates, the US tends to try
and save babies born prematurely at an earlier age than in Europe,
where they're considered stillbirth. The US is more often able to
rescue the very premature, but they don't get counted as mortality
in European statistics. OTOH, the US has more premature births for
various somewhat mysterious reasons. (Health of the mother seems to
be one.)
There's an old statistical "paradox" about hospitals that have
better survival rate for any particular disease or severity of
disease, but worse overall survival rates. Why? Because all the
hardest cases are sent there to the best hospitals, so they have so
many of the tough cases that their overall numbers look
worse.
Any mortality comparison, whether it makes the US look good or bad,
should be taken very skeptically.
NPR did a segment this morning on Britain's gross income
inequality, and the widening gap between rich and poor.
"How can that be possibe, in egalitarian, heavily regulated
Britain?", I thought to myself.
Spend some real time around Europeans and you'll realize how similar we all are. If you magically were suddenly able to speak perfect French you could get dropped into a town in France and feel very culturally comfortable. I don't think the same could be said, of, say, Japan.
If you magically were suddenly able to speak perfect French
you could get dropped into a town in France and feel very
culturally comfortable.
This is begging for an anti-french joke, but I dare not speak
it.
Epi,
I dont know - when I lived in Switzerland, in may ways it seemed
like a US state with too many German speakers. But, I never could
adjust to meat dishes ALWAYS having sauces.
Epi,
I'm sure it's the little things that make us different rather than
large looming cultural differences that shock us. New Yorkers
remind me of the English with their assholery. French people remind
me Floridians or Californians with their polite interest in how
much everything sucks in a given locale.
"I don't think the same could be said, of, say, Japan."
I disagree. It is possible that before WW2 you might have a point
but Japan's contact with Westerners in general and Americans in
particualar since that time has made Japan, for all relavant
purposes, Western. I would be very comfortable in Japan if I spoke
and read the leanguage. BTW, if you are interested in a good
libertarian themed Japanese manga you may want to check this
out
http://www.onemanga.com/Akumetsu/1/00/
Damn, I really wish I could go back and edit my posts, I made 2 glaring spelling errors. Arrgghhh
Japan is still very culturally different from us, even if
they've changed through contact with us. We and the Europeans share
a common cultural heritage extending back 2000+ years from Rome,
and even further if you consider Greece.
As Naga said, we're so close that the tiny differences seem
huge.
"The Narcissism of Minor Differences"
That book title perfectly captures the H&R community.
"Japan is still very culturally different from us, even if
they've changed through contact with us. We and the Europeans share
a common cultural heritage extending back 2000+ years from Rome,
and even further if you consider Greece."
I'll remember that while Watching .HACK/SIGN on my Sony TV and
eating Sushi out of my Mr. Bento Box.
Is it because we don't hate the jooos,
libertymike?
Speak for yourself, big nose.
Warty, Naga's a spic, not a kike. Get your racism straight, you disgusting mick (just guessing).
DHS Thinks I'm a Terrorist,
Does libertarian themed Japanese manga have the same amount of
pantie shots as non-libertarian themed Japanese manga?
(Eagerly awaiting the arrival of my Mezzo Forte and
Pani Poni Dash DVDs...)
Epi,
I'm not sure what I am. Mostly Scottish/Irish with some amigo
thrown in from one of my grandmothers.
For the record, Episiarch. Connecticut=Massachusetts. You're a
masshole. Sorry buddy.
*takes off running*
Congratulations on finding more evidence to shore up your most cherished dogmas! God forbid that you would ever have to question one of them for even a minute. Cherry pick, cherry pick and keep the faith pure! Assholes.
Naga-
Thankfully, Jehovah blessed us with a sense of humor to paper over
our narcissistic minor differences.
Mister DNA,
To be honest I am a recent convert to the Manga religion. But you
might like this page.
http://www.onemanga.com/Akumetsu/1/23/
For the record, Episiarch. Connecticut=Massachusetts. You're
a masshole. Sorry buddy.
Except I'm in Seattle now, Naga, which I suppose makes me some sort
of west coast asshole.
DHS,
Thanks for the link; I'm more of an anime nerd than a manga geek,
but that site has some manga versions of shows I like.
Seattle? Well, manwhores and their manginas are in high demand these days. Best of luck to you.
"Thanks for the link; I'm more of an anime nerd than a manga
geek, but that site has some manga versions of shows I like."
No problem, I am just now getting into both myself. I started out
by falling in love with the music for the .hack series and bought
several of the books and one of the DVD's. It reminds me of a cross
between Wagner's Der Ring des Nibelungen and Alice in Wonderland.
Brilliant, absolutely brilliant - especially the character
development. I also like the Ranma 1/2 series.
Episiarch is right: We and the Europeans are quite similar. Much
more so than either wants to admit.
As for Japan, my brief visit there impressed me more with the
similarities than the differences, but I agree, they aren't just an
eastern branch of Westernism.
Episiarch, have you tried Wild Ginger yet? I really liked that
place when I was there.
I disagree. It is possible that before WW2 you might have a
point but Japan's contact with Westerners in general and Americans
in particualar since that time has made Japan, for all relavant
purposes, Western. I would be very comfortable in Japan if I spoke
and read the leanguage.
My opinion, cultural differences would be noticed in a lot of
places outside the U.S. depending on what one looks for. My mother,
being European, I notice the differences. The way I look at it,
it's like what Vincent Vega said in Pulp Fiction...it's
the little differences.
Japan, on the other hand would be more pronounced. Yes, the
Japanese love many things western, but there are still some
significant cultural differences in their approach to many
things.
I always say a good early warning sign of cultural differences:
Watch another country's porn.
ProL's right; Wild Ginger's spring rolls are the awesome. People are usually surprised at how many really good restaurants are in this city.
People are usually surprised at how many really good
restaurants are in this city.
One of the best restaurant cities in the country. A little pricey,
but still very good, and very progressive.
Paul,
Pricey indeed. I'm worried about some of my favs unless this
freaking recession clears up soon. Blackbird Bistro in West Seattle
closed, and so did Typhoon downtown. They had a great happy
hour!
I call bullshit, selective selection of facts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_equality
The Gini Coefficient is the most commonly used measure of
inequality at the national level, and as you can see as determined
by that radical leftist agency the CIA the U.S. is twice that of
Sweden, France, etc.
And I'm almost cringing to see if this guy Baldwin included 2nd
world nations from Europe. I'm going to check it right now, please
let the guy have at least enough intellectual cred to not have
included fucking Serbia and such...Fingers crossed...
Props where its due, he seems to exclude these nations.
But some he includes, well, I don't know any fellow liberal who
thinks Spain or Greece are fucking models for the U.S.
In fact, the Greeks are certainly a model only for cavemen. I mean,
what have the fucking Greeks ever done for civilization?
"The Gini Coefficient is the most commonly used measure of
inequality at the national level, and as you can see as determined
by that radical leftist agency the CIA the U.S. is twice that of
Sweden, France, etc."
I can tell that you're description of the CIA as "radical leftist"
is sarcastic - but, may I ask, how do you define "leftist"? Garet
Garrett (1878-1954), would indeed have described it as leftist,
after all, from his perspective, meddling in the affairs of another
country was something a leftist like Woodrow Wilson might do. So,
how do you define "leftist"? The CIA does use the power of
government to achieve a desired social goal does it not? How is
this not "leftist"?
Nice reading comprehension, MNG. The article clearly states that there is larger income disparity in the US, but less wealth disparity. It makes sense that a society with stagnant class structure would have more wealth concentration than a more dynamic society with its cycles of building and losing wealth.
Episiarch,
I think I see a pattern here. Tell me, are you eating at these
places, or just drinking?
You should try Wild Ginger. It's been years since I've been there,
but I really liked it. Also, the last time I was there, some CBS
news (local) chick was hitting on me (I was previously accounted
for, though this was pre-Mrs. Libertate)--maybe she's still
there.
The Gini coefficient is a far from perfect measure of equality. The US has a much more diverse set of regions than most of europe. We have areas like New York vs. places like Nebraska. The gini coefficient of europe as a whole is larger than any of the constituent members for this reason (though its still smaller than that of the overall US) This is a statistical artifact, not a meaningful realization.
"meddling in the affairs of another country was something a
leftist like Woodrow Wilson might do"
Yeah, he must have been a leftist because conservatives have never
advocated meddling in the affairs of another country, only Wilson
who is the epitome of liberalism.
"This is a statistical artifact, not a meaningful
realization."
I'd say it's a meaningful realization (observation really); that
there is a great deal of variation between the poorer parts and
richer parts of Europe, just as such variation within the US is an
important observation. Given what its supposed to be measuring
there's little surprise or dismay that throwing the wealthier
nations (of the EU) in with the poorer nations of the EU would
create a score higher than any individual nation of the EU...
"Yeah, he must have been a leftist because conservatives have
never advocated meddling in the affairs of another country, only
Wilson who is the epitome of liberalism."
Nope, he was a Conservative. War is the health of the state.
http://mises.org/story/2751#4
But you still haven't told us how you define "leftist".
Woodrow Wilson was not only a Leftist, he was also a progressive
- and a racist.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Wilson-quote-in-birth-of-a-nation.jpg
MNG, I believe that the Stimulus Bill has funds directed towards the study and development of better tasting anal lubes.
Nice reading comprehension, MNG. The article clearly states
that there is larger income disparity in the US, but less wealth
disparity. It makes sense that a society with stagnant class
structure would have more wealth concentration than a more dynamic
society with its cycles of building and losing wealth.
When I was a management consultant I worked under an American
partner who was black, and a Norwegian project manager. They'd
often debate differences between the U.S. and Europe and the
partner always insisted he could never have achieved what he did if
he had grown up in the more ossified class structure of Europe.
Given what its supposed to be measuring there's little
surprise or dismay that throwing the wealthier nations (of the EU)
in with the poorer nations of the EU would create a score higher
than any individual nation of the EU...
Considering the the United States are a union of
sovereign states, whats the difference?
New York is to Mississippi as Germany is to Greece
Or something.
As an American living in Ireland I'm here to tell you
that:
a) I prefer American income inequality to European class immobility
and
b) cultural differences are a big deal, even between Anglophone
countries. People can adapt, but feeling at home? Nuh uh.
"How can that be possibe, in egalitarian, heavily regulated Britain?", I thought to myself.
Silly man, don't you know that Britain was perfect before that
awful Thatcher woman took over. :)
It's odd how often you hear that, especially while searching for
ways in which New LIEbour has attempted to change anything and
return to the good old ways of union dominance and doctrinaire
socialism. I often wonder if the Brits didn't elect Toady Bliar
because they thought he might be more like Mrs Thatcher than any of
the moronic Tories were (in much the same way as Yanks voted for
Clinton because he was more like Reagan that Bush was).
Oh, and Morris, care to actually provide some evidence,
cherrypicked or not, to knock the shoring out from under our "most
cherished dogmas" when you post?
Otherwise it pretty much just looks like you can't stand the fact
that some people don't accept your most cherished
dogmas.
Connecticut=Massachusetts
that is so wrong. why do you think we have both Connecticunts and
Massholes. the tiny differences are HUGE.
"Considering the the United States are a union of sovereign
states, whats the difference?"
The difference would be, as Domo himself noted, that the European
en masse gini, while being higher than any single Euro nation, is
still better than the US en masse one.
Don't get me wrong, because I quible with the point about
inequality doesn't mean I am a Europhile. Far from it. I hate
people that think Europe is better than we are. I call bullshit.
Historically it certainly isn't true (we've had problems, but
nothing like Nazism, Communism, etc). And even now we are better
than them on many measures (look at their kowtowing to Muslim
extermists in their midsts, and their willingnness to squelch free
speech for "good causes"). We also do all the fighting for them, so
they can afford to have more charitable safety nets.
As a member of the European middle class who was once a member of the American middle class, I can also tell the median earner is way better off in material terms in the US than in Europe. We're a two-income family with no clothes dryer because we can't afford the f@cking space, let alone the electricity. That's just the beginning of the primitive lifestyle even reasonably well-off people "enjoy" in this progressive continent of enlightened economic policy.
Why is income equality a desirable goal, again?
Because MNG is going to cut of limbs by hatchet, axe, and saw since
he's into that shit.
"Why is income equality a desirable goal, again?"
Because some people feel bad when others have a lot more than they
do. They feel better when everyone has an approximately equal
amount, even if it's less overall.
Really, when it comes to those who harp on inequality though, how
do they justify leaving all those in third-world countries out of
the equation? I don't know why arbitrary political boundaries
should be an obstacle to universal healthcare- if someone in
Mississippi deserves free healthcare, then why doesn't someone in
Namibia deserve it too? I have yet to see a democrat propose that
bill though.
"'Why is income equality a desirable goal, again?'
Because some people feel bad when others have a lot more than they
do. They feel better when everyone has an approximately equal
amount, even if it's less overall."
How about because some people feel bad when others have a lot less
than they do, but rather than working to resolve that personally
they instead create an enforcement system to extract wealth from
others so that the others solve the "problem" and they won't have
to deal with the issue themselves.
Since we are talking about cultural differences, could be that I'm am statical anomaly since I'm from west Texas, but I have far more values in common with my Chinese wife (child raising, family, earning and spending of money, and work ethic), than I do with the European engineers that I work with. My ancestors let that continent for a reason, I will respect that decision.
Quote
'NPR did a segment this morning on Britain's gross income
inequality, and the widening gap between rich and poor.
"How can that be possibe, in egalitarian, heavily regulated
Britain?", I thought to myself.'
I think you'll find Britain is very similar to the US in terms of
regulation, tax levels and aside from health and education public
spending as well. Why is there this obession with assuming all of
europe is socialist and lumping the UK in with the continent when
its pretty much just a smaller version of the USA?
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245