Just look at the numbers people.
America isn't perfect, and Europe isn't a failure, but Europeans are not obviously better off in the long-run from big tax and welfare policies.
fee.org
View attachment 359636
View attachment 359638
Looking at one factor to determine something like that is foolish. Read this it might give you a better baseline for comparison.
Comparing the economic performance of the European Union and the USA does not lead one to conclude that America has the more dynamic economy, or that it has performed better in the past or will do so in future. The most important feature of the comparison is neither the growth nor the unemployment record of the US and the EU. It is, rather, that US growth, unlike that in the EU, is funded by a dangerously high mountain of foreign debt.
Why is foreign debt singled out? Because having a lot of domestic debt is someone better? Or because it gave the answer the Federalist wanted?
Read the article the federalist didn't single out anything. I choose to highlight that paragraph. Also it's ironic that you object to highlight debt as an inaccurate measure for measuring prosperity. I remember a time when "debt" was considered a bad thing for conservatives.
My understand of the issue is that all First World nations have similar debt issues. It seems to a fundamental flaw of our current Nation State model.
It's a problem for all nations. the point is the US as a whole carries a higher debt per GDP than the EU countries on average skewing GDP numbers as cited by the OP. Not to mention the fact that for most nations a significant percentage of that debt was a direct result of US consumers defaulting on their mortgages in the 2008 banking crises causing banks across the globe needing to be bailed out by their respective governments.
As I said in the original reply comparing economic systems between Europe and the US by simply citing GDP is foolish. Debt alone won't manage it either but it's probably a better indicator.
Talking about formal Debt and ignoring unfunded entitlements, is even more foolish.
Since the unfunded part of entitlements turn up in the formal debt I don't see why? Debt is debt right, does it make any difference where it comes from? When the GOP gives out massive tax cuts primarily for rich people is that not an "unfunded entitlement?"
It makes absolutely no difference when comparing. EU countries have much higher tax rates just so they can pay for their entitlement programs.
I don't believe the unfunded part does turn up as formal debt.
Oh, so you are suggesting that when the government can't fund something the money required turns up nowhere on a balance sheet? Interesting theory, have a way to substantiate it?
Correct. Because politicians are corrupt assholes who like to mislead voters, especially if the bill won't come due to long after they are gone.
Federal spending has grown at an alarming rate in recent years. In just a few years, however, even this high level of spending will be dwarfed when the heavy cost of paying for the baby-boom generation's retirement entitlements begins to hit the federal budget's bottom line.
www.heritage.org
Amending the federal budget process to include this principle of planning for future obligations would: Time for the Federal Budget Process to Include Unfunded Entitlement Obligations
Any unfunded government program has a CURRENT effect on the budget, this is represented in the CURRENT budget deficit. FUTURE obligations serve absolutely no purpose on that CURRENT budget. It really isn't a hard concept.
We were not discussing the current yearly budget but DEBT. Unfunded entitlements are not formal DEBT, but they will have to be paid eventually, thus making them a factor that should be considered when discussing long term debt and the problem(s) it is.
I see a lot of liberals, who want to paint America as being worse, who really try to avoid discussing this when comparing the US to Europe.
I have not been able to find any hard data comparisons, but the resistance to discussing the reality of the situation, leads me to believe that Europe is even more fucked than we are.
For what that is worth.
If you are discussing debt is the
current budget deficit not how you would do it? Otherwise, you are working from a hypothetical aren't you since governments reevaluate their commitments yearly?
I'm European my wife's American and I've had many a conversation with conservatives here. As I pointed out I pay a tax rate that would make an American pale. I do this so I can pay for my entitlement programs that would make an American green with envy. Cheap education, cheap healthcare, paid sick leave, paid parental leave, a system for temporary unemployment meaning people aren't losing their jobs when they have to be quarantined, etc. etc. So how do you compare economic strength? I think a reasonable way to do so is by comparing how much economic growth needs to be funded by running a deficit.
What you seem to be suggesting is that somehow Europe isn't calculating their deficit correctly
today because in the
future the cost of the programs will grow. While in reality just to give an example my country like all other countries in Europe have increased their retirement age to keep the programs viable. That's how it works in actuality.
