this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2023
30 points (73.4% liked)
Programming
21948 readers
633 users here now
Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!
Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.
Hope you enjoy the instance!
Rules
Rules
- Follow the programming.dev instance rules
- Keep content related to programming in some way
- If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos
Wormhole
Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
You're right that healthy, young working adults without children have very little to gain from socialized systems. I'm going to assume that OP, like me, is an early Gen Z who fits this description, and is about to enter the job market or has just entered it. For our generation, this statement
does not check out mathematically. The taxes we pay today don't get locked away in a box to be spent when we are sick or elderly and need them. They are spent on the sick and elderly we have right now. This means that at the age that we start needing benefits more than we contribute to them, it's not going to be us, but our children's and grandchildren's generation who are footing the bill. But the birth rates across Europe are below replacement level and none of our countries have come up with a system that either raises birth rates above replacement level or successfully introduces foreigners who will be net tax contributors for all their lives. That means that despite paying high taxes and receiving miserable salaries (compared to American salaries) today, we won't even be able to enjoy benefits from the state in the future because there won't be enough tax contributors by the time we need these benefits.
It absolutely feels like getting robbed.
I guess it's a difference in values, which affects your perspective. You can see it as robbing, or as contributing to society.
I'm trying to word it as neutral as possible, but it's really hard in the values area. I think both sets of values are valid. I may not agree with yours, but that's the thing with moral values - if you don't share the same values, you will never see eye to eye or agree. Hard to be objective in such a situation.
Tl,dr: you value different things, which is not evil or bad, but completely valid. It's just that I personally with my values don't agree and see it negatively.
I don't think that you, me and OP have different values on this issue, actually? We all agree that the state is supposed to provide us with a structure to live in that we couldn't have on our own, and as payment for this safety net, we contribute taxes. My and OP's argument is that with the current projection of the economy and population growth, the state cannot provide the current generation of tax payers with the structures and support that we will eventually need, and therefore many of us would rather pay lower taxes and lose the benefits, because we won't be getting them anyway. We know what's coming and we don't want to be the ones "holding the bag" when the system collapses.
I'm trying to explain OP's point to the Americans in this thread who don't understand that European social security systems are currently under severe strain and are on the road to collapse, and how OP feels to have to sacrifice so much of his potential income to support a failing system. The 80s stereotypes of reliable, high-quality social security no longer hold true in Europe in 2023.
I think its hard for some americans to understand that welfare in Europe is not an utopia. I personally believe the estate needs to provide help and support to citizens including healthcare and basic education at a minimum. Ideally some basic help for people that are unable to work and whatever is needed for people to not be on the street.
My biggest issue is as it is right now I can see how much money I have been putting over the years and how much extra money I still need to put on top privately to have a quality of life for things such as pension, salary insurance, etc. So while almost half my salary goes out as taxes I still need to contribute on my own to private companies. On top of that I can see people that can take advantage of the system and between the high taxes and all the help you can get (house help, unemployment, lids, etc.) theres people not working that get almost as much as an engineer working full time. I think something is off.
But this has nothing to do with the post of why american companies choose to pay more than european ones.
I brought up the social system because you can see that everyone in this thread arguing against you is saying that your "excellent welfare system" is the reason why your income is lower than the corresponding American programmer's. The massive taxation is obviously a big factor to your reduced income, but let's look away from that for a bit and just focus on the American companies.
American companies in America pay more because the costs of doing business in America are much lower and there is a greater availability of loans and funding.
American companies in Europe pay more because they have the advantages listed above that local European companies don't have and they have the resources to invest in a global expansion.
That's it. That's the answer.