When it Comes to Household Income, Sweden and Germany Rank with Kentucky


Mrs Shosho

Germany tax rate is at 42%. US tax rate is 22%. Hakuna healthcare free hapo Germany.
Are you implying that those that do not work and therefore not taxable do not access health care in Germany or indeed even here? Wrong kabisa.
America needs to sort itself out. Don't want to get roped in ping pong so I am out.
Norway, Denmark???you can only dream on dude.


Village Elder
View attachment 261185

I wonder which country has the most motivated doctors in the world? I have a relative who works as a doctor in Germany. What she takes home minus taxes is what an American nurse earns..sad.
Motivated doctors but how miserable are the patients. Healthcare system ya US everyone has a hand out making it quite expensive. Even amazon tried a hand in it and were like f**k it. Ole wako if u get sick. Same thing with education.


Germany tax rate is at 42%. US tax rate is 22%. Hakuna healthcare free hapo Germany.
Tell ‘em. Imagine busting your ass at work so other people can get free things. That’s European socialism for you. But even after controlling for socialism, US median income is still much higher.

Then Dems think it’s okay to give non-US citizens or perm residents free healthcare. Someone who has come here from another country, no buy-in whatsoever and somehow WE the American people should fund their healthcare, food, housing etc. Not on my paycheck.


Village Sponsor
Are you implying that those that do not work and therefore not taxable do not access health care in Germany or indeed even here? Wrong kabisa.
America needs to sort itself out. Don't want to get roped in ping pong so I am out.
Norway, Denmark???you can only dream on dude.
No not that. There’s nothing like free healthcare. Someone has to pay for it. And they pay for it through taxation. So you can’t trll me you have free healthcare when you donate 40% of your wages to the government. Or pay double price at the gas pump-(UK) due to taxation. UK and Germany average gas price $ 5.25/ gallon today. US its $2.50/ gallon.


Purple you are v wrong about the medical health system across Europe. NHS is one of the best health providers in Europe. As for Germany hata sisemi kitu. Lived there for a time and they are tops.
Sorry but NHS is a joke. We have many ex-Britain doctors here who have narrated to me the horrors of that system. I’ve never heard of an American doctor leaving the USA to work in the UK.

Wasnt Boris Johnson just booed recently when he visited Whipps cross country hospital?

Mr Salem, a Labour activist, said: “There are not enough people on this ward, there are not enough doctors, there’s not enough nurses, it’s not well organized enough.” Gravely ill kids not being attended to for hours!



And most European countries. Michelle Karume would not have died because of lack of funds if she was out here. Quality and value of life is paramount.
Yes but she came here in 2016 in order to get enrolled in a clinical trial that was testing a novel cancer regimen. In MD Anderson Texas! The money she spent on accommodation and flight tickets might have been adequate for treatment in India or Kenya. That was a major miscalculation on her part for which she paid the ultimate price.

Furthermore, America has no obligation to give non-residents free treatment because that means an American goes without. She came to the US in 2016 (!) to give it one last shot. Clinical trials are usually reserved for people who have failed conventional treatment.


Village Elder
You wish! The APN who finally got the license . According to your posts and braggadocio, you come up as someone who's desperate for validation. Folks who got that MBChB in less than 6 yrs don't behave like you do. Wale wa kupitia nursing ndio hutafuta public address kama wewe
esp if you get after you hit 40.... ndio unaanza kufikiria kupata familia...


if you had any experience in the NHS and how it works instead of relying on right wing or left wing nonsense you would see how genius it is... which is why the UK healthcare system will never go the american way
Genius you say? It sure doesn’t sound like it.

“The NHS is collapsing. Patients routinely face treatment delays, overcrowded hospitals, and doctor shortages. Even its most ardent defenders admit that the NHS is in crisis.”

Why Does the Left Want Universal Health Care? Britain’s Is on Its Deathbed
  • Sally C. Pipes
July 10, 2018

The U.K.’s government-run healthcare system, the National Health Service, turns 70 this month. There’s not much to celebrate.

The NHS is collapsing. Patients routinely face treatment delays, overcrowded hospitals, and doctor shortages. Even its most ardent defenders admit that the NHS is in crisis.

Yet American progressives want to import this disastrous model. About one in three Democratic senators and more than half of Democratic representatives support single-payer health care.

Why? The British experiment with socialized medicine has been a monumental failure. It would be foolish to repeat that mistake here.

Single-payer is fundamentally flawed. It relieves consumers of any obligation to pay for their care, at least directly. If the price of care is zero, then every patient can demand an infinite amount. The supply of care, meanwhile, is limited. And the amount of money the government can spend on health care is finite.

In a functional market, patients would demand care and providers would furnish it at mutually agreeable prices. If prices were too high, patients would demand less care, and marginal providers would exit the market. If prices were too low, patients would demand more care, and new providers would enter the market to supply it.

These basic market-clearing principles cannot operate in a single-payer system. Governments must forcibly cap demand at whatever level they’re willing to supply—that is, to pay for it.

The NHS experienced these problems from the start. In its first year, the service went well over its budget. Prime Minister Clement Attlee even begged citizensnot to overuse health services. Staff shortages, caused in part by low pay, have plagued the system for decades. The NHS started recruiting doctors en massefrom India, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka in the 1960s to address the issue.

Nevertheless, shortages persist. One in 11 NHS posts is currently vacant. Four in five NHS staff worry that these vacancies jeopardize patient safety. The NHS has among the lowest amount of doctors, nurses, and hospital beds than any country in the Western world on a per-capita basis, according to a report from the King’s Fund.

Simply put, the NHS is unequipped to care for its citizens.

A simple influenza outbreak last winter plunged the system into chaos. The NHS canceled 50,000 non-emergency surgeries to make room for an influx of people with the flu. Still, nearly one in five patients had to wait more than four hours in the emergency room.

Such nightmares have grown routine. The British Medical Association recently reported that the NHS now faces a year-round crisis, with waiting times and hospital bed shortages at record levels. An NHS Improvement survey of data from the first three months of 2018 found that 2,600 patients had waited more than a year for elective treatment—a nearly 75% increase from the previous year. It’s no wonder that about 10% of Britons hold private insurance coverage. They simply can’t count on the NHS to deliver quality care in a timely fashion.

The NHS’s supporters claim that the system just needs more money. That was the rallying cry for thousands of Britons who took to the streets this past February and again in late June.

But the British government doesn’t have unlimited resources. More funding for the NHS would require raising taxes. And Britain’s tax burden is already the highest it’s been in 20 years, according to the Adam Smith Institute.

Further, funding for the NHS is already at record levels. It’s projected to grow an average of 1.2% percent per year through 2020-21, to an annual tab of nearly $170 billion. Overall, government spending on health care has surged from about $340 per person in 1950 to $2,985 per person today.

Despite the crisis in the U.K., some Americans continue to be entranced by single-payer. The Democratic Party’s newest superstar, New York congressional candidate Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, made her support for universal government health care a cornerstone of her campaign. Rep. Keith Ellison, the Democratic National Committee’s second-in-command, recently led a three-day strategy session in Minnesota on how to push for single-payer.

American health care has its problems. But the NHS offers 70 years of evidence that single-payer will not solve them.

Shocking to say the least. These figures dispel a lot of leftist myths!

Were Norway a US state, it would rank between Delaware and California, which are among the US's more urbanized and wealthy states. Sweden and Germany, on the other hand, place closely to Kentucky, which is sixth from the bottom for US states in terms of median income.


It has nearly reached the point of dogma with many leftists that European countries enjoy higher standards of living thanks to more government regulation and more social benefits. What the data really suggests, however, is that even after social benefits are incorporated into the income data, the median American still has a higher income than most European countries.

Since I published that analysis last October, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) based in Paris has updated the numbers. Here is the ranking straight fom the latest "Society at a Glance" report from the OECD:

View attachment 261173

The comparisons were based on a measure of income known as "annual median equivalized disposable household income." The measure attempts to take into account the realities of taxes and social benefits, and thus provide a more practical estimate for differences in household income among countries. The data is also adjusted for purchasing power parity, which means it's taking differences in purchasing power in different countries into account. Moreover, median income is more helpful when there may be large income inequalities at work. Use of a median measure instead of an average reduces the effect of a small number of extremely rich people skewing up the numbers.

In the updated measure, we can see that the United States is in fourth place behind Luxembourg, Norway, and Switzerland. The US comes in at $29,100, while Luxembourg's median income level is at 36,400.

The US's median income is 79% the size of Luxembourg's while Sweden's median income (to name one often-touted example) is 83% the size of the US's.

These comparisons are only at the national level, of course, and one of the largest problems with comparing the US to other countries, is that the US is much larger than every European country. This is true even of Russia, which has less than half as many people as the US.

Many countries — especially the smaller ones, including all the Scandinavian countries — are composed of only a handful of metropolitan areas, often with fewer than ten million people. The US, by contrast is very large, and very diverse in terms of geography and demographics. The US has more than 320 million people. Consequently, any statistic for the "United States" ends up burying within it the often-sizable differences from state to state and from metro area to metro area.

To incorporate individual sttes into the analyis, I have looked at how the Census Bureau's median income for each state stacks up against the US median income overall. I've then adjusted the OECD measure to be proportional to that.1

While it is a rather crude means of adjusting the data, can see that the result is plausible. A wide variety of other measures of state-level wealth routinely put Massachusetts — for example — above national levels, while measures of Arkansas put it below national levels.

The next step, then, is to compare these values to the OECD's values for each country. Obviously, any country with a disposable income measure above that of the US overall will find itself with an income level above most US states. At the same time, a country with a disposable income measure below that of the US overall is likely to find itself ranked below many US states.

When we graph them all together we find:

View attachment 261174

German has massive social programs , it's erroneous to compare it to Kentucky, or any other jurisdictions that is capitalist.


Village Sponsor
Enyewe it looks like your radicalisation is complete if you can compare the shit holes that are Alabama or Missisipi with Scandinavian countries.
There's is a reason why all these northern European countries score high on all important OECD indices and quality of life.

You've now become a true Murican. Next I expect is to see your justification of gun ownership and how Americans have more freedom than Canadians or Australians.


Múndú Mwenda Andú
The German healthcare system dates to the 1880s, making it the oldest in Europe, while today its doctors, specialists and facilities make it of one the very best healthcare systems in the world. Today it operates under a dual public-private system.

The healthcare system in Germany is funded by statutory contributions ensuring free healthcare for all.
Say hi to Dirk Rossmann my Mentor
The average american thinks they are a millionaire-in-waiting (99% percent are not and will never be) that's why they strongly oppose social welfare programs. The future-millionaire delusions are all nice until airheads like @Purple lose their adult-diaper-changing jobs and somehow fall sick!

American healthcare is the most expensive and exploitative in the world; if you fall sick and you don't have insurance, you are FUCKED! Even simple procedures cost a fortune; a hospital visit can wipe away your savings and throw you into neck-deep debt -- the kind of debt that will take you years to pay. While most of the programs being touted by leftists like Bernie Sanders are impractical at best, and nutty at worst, an effective social welfare programs is a necessity for any sensible society.

Anyone debating about socialism vs capitalism in 2019 is an absolute moron! Pension, 401k or whatever you call it, is a socialist idea, but societies that care about people's well-being can't do without it. Social welfare programs are there cover the 'holes' left by capitalism. When businesses fire thousands of factory workers and move their manufacturing to Asia in order to remain competitive and profitable, that's 'capitalism'. When the state sets up programs to sustain and reintegrate the jobless factory workers into other industries, that's 'socialism'. The two work in tandem.
Last edited:
Your argument is flawed. In Denmark, an engineer earns like 5000 to 8000 euro. 40% tax.. Healthcare, education is free. At the end of the day, it makes sense. Above average pay, high taxes, free social services.
Unlike US, I know engineers who earn 10000 euros but they have to pay housing, health-care, education, at a 22% tax rate. High pay, low taxes but expensive social services.


Village Elder
If you're content and happy with your life, you don't need to spend any amount of time comparing yourself with anyone.
A deep feeling of inadequacy, inferiority complex,lack of self worth, loneliness/emptiness, immaturity and a redundant sexlife are the main reasons why otherwise normal people end up with personality issues like jealousy and the need to be above others.
Such people identify politically with the so called Right wing.

The saddest thing is that there is nothing good enough for such people and they spend their whole lives unhappy even when they have everything.
Baltimore is in Maryland state whereas Detroit is in Michigan. Look them up! Their median incomes are well above those in Sweden and Germany.

Those lying Democrats! We, Republicans say no to socialism aka poverty. No to equal output for unequal effort.

Everyone for himself, God for us all.
Uchoyo Kama hizi ndo zinafanya mnunue septic tanks