Income Inequality in the US vs Europe

[Lafayette]

The income inequality difference between the US and Europe is fairly well known. I, for one, am convinced that Ronald RayGun's reduction of upper-income taxation was the start of it all. And the consequences today are becoming painfully obvious. (Of course, Covid did not help economic matters.)

Economists call said matter "Income Disparity" and it looks like this today as regards only the US:

This above infographic says it all. Middle-income levels (of income) are declining whilst upper-incomes are skyrocketing comparatively.

How much is Europe more economically egalitarian than the US? By a lot:

And what does the disparity hold for the future if not corrected? Good question.

I hope it's not civil-disruption, but that is what gross income-disparity has caused in a great many countries. Will it happen in the US?

Only time will tell. But, frankly, I am glad I'm living in Europe ...

 

[longview]

The income inequality difference between the US and Europe is fairly well known. I, for one, am convinced that Ronald RayGun's reduction of upper-income taxation was the start of it all. And the consequences today are becoming painfully obvious. (Of course, Covid did not help economic matters.)

Economists call said matter "Income Disparity" and it looks like this today as regards only the US:

This above infographic says it all. Middle-income levels (of income) are declining whilst upper-incomes are skyrocketing comparatively.

How much is Europe more economically egalitarian than the US? By a lot:

And what does the disparity hold for the future if not corrected? Good question.

I hope it's not civil-disruption, but that is what gross income-disparity has caused in a great many countries. Will it happen in the US?

Only time will tell. But, frankly, I am glad I'm living in Europe ...

I think there are also some quality of life issues.
In the US quite a few people can own their own single family home.
I wonder what the average age is when people purchase their first home is in the US vs Europe?
I think there is a fairly high percentage in Europe, who do not ever think they can buy a home,
and those that do, think it will be when they are past 35.
At what age do you expect to buy your first property or piece of land?
In the US, that age has been creeping up, but I think is about 32 now.
I am not sure if we can say one way or the other is right, it is mostly what people have gotten used to.

 

[RetiredUSN]

The income inequality difference between the US and Europe is fairly well known. I, for one, am convinced that Ronald RayGun's reduction of upper-income taxation was the start of it all. And the consequences today are becoming painfully obvious. (Of course, Covid did not help economic matters.)

Economists call said matter "Income Disparity" and it looks like this today as regards only the US:

This above infographic says it all. Middle-income levels (of income) are declining whilst upper-incomes are skyrocketing comparatively.

How much is Europe more economically egalitarian than the US? By a lot:

And what does the disparity hold for the future if not corrected? Good question.

I hope it's not civil-disruption, but that is what gross income-disparity has caused in a great many countries. Will it happen in the US?

Only time will tell. But, frankly, I am glad I'm living in Europe ...

The suck is spread more evenly.

There ya go!

 

[Lafayette]

I think there are also some quality of life issues.
In the US quite a few people can own their own single family home.
I wonder what the average age is when people purchase their first home is in the US vs Europe?
I think there is a fairly high percentage in Europe, who do not ever think they can buy a home,
and those that do, think it will be when they are past 35.
At what age do you expect to buy your first property or piece of land?
In the US, that age has been creeping up, but I think is about 32 now.
I am not sure if we can say one way or the other is right, it is mostly what people have gotten used to.

All of the above are completely wrong. You have a misguided notion of what Europe is and how it works.

In terms of insurance, it is no different from the US. And timing of property purchases by the public is of no consequence whatsoever. It is the process associated with the acquisition that matters most .

And in Europe said process is verily no different from the US ...

 

[joluoto]

Also important to note there is huge differences between European countries.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

I think there are also some quality of life issues.
In the US quite a few people can own their own single family home.
I wonder what the average age is when people purchase their first home is in the US vs Europe?
I think there is a fairly high percentage in Europe, who do not ever think they can buy a home,

I'm speaking really generally here but a lot of people in higher income European countries don't really aspire to buy their own homes. Home ownership in Switzerland (41%) and Germany (51%) for example is low compared to the Eastern European states like Romania (96%) and Slovakia (91%)

In the last 40 years, homes in the UK have become horribly expensive, houses are an investment now rather than a place to live and average prices paid are out of the reach of many young people. There have been help-to-buy schemes to allow young to get a foot on the ladder so for the last 10 years in some places, a 19 yr old (for example) could buy a very expensive brand new house with a very small deposit.

Not bringing Brexit into this but a lot of people hoped that house prices would become more reasonable with the UK leaving but they recovered quickly - particularly London where a lot of overseas buyers grab the best / most promising properties because as investments, they offer really good returns. Further (without making this a Brexit thread) - we're still paying prices for the same goods as Americans buy where the multinational retailers simply take the "$" symbol and swap it for a "£." I can understand the tariff explanation for EU nations but there should have been some small reduction in prices in the UK.

Only time will tell. But, frankly, I am glad I'm living in Europe ...

Have to say, although income inequality may be worse in the USA, salaries for similar jobs in the US by comparison are higher, taxes for similar jobs in the US by comparison are lower and prices of goods (especially computer and electrical items) in the US by comparison are generally a lot lower.

This differemce isn't all accounted for by the cost of better safety nets such as universal healthcare and social services in European nations though.

 

[longview]

All of the above are completely wrong. You have a misguided notion of what Europe is and how it works.

In terms of insurance, it is no different from the US. And timing of property purchases by the public is of no consequence whatsoever. It is the process associated with the acquisition that matters most .

And in Europe said process is verily no different from the US ...

It does matter, when the average person is able to purchase their fist home, as mortgages are usually 30 years, so if you start when you are
30 years old, and want to retire at 65, you will have extra years of mortgage free time, before retirement.
I see owning a home as mostly a hedge against inflation, and the earlier you start the better.
I still think it is easier for a young person coming up to buy a home in the US than in most places in Europe.

 

[Lafayette]

This differemce isn't all accounted for by the cost of better safety nets such as universal healthcare and social services in European nations though.

I would not care in the least to get sick in the US. Which is why I go there rarely.

The US should adopt the same HC-protection system as have installed the EU. Then Uncle Sam should get out the whip for obesity and start cracking it. There is no excuse whatsoever in allowing obesity to inflict the nation.

And how many Yanks try to tame their obesity penchant?

From off the Internet:
*The State of Obesity 2020: Better Policies for a Healthier ...

Over 70 million adults in U.S. are obese (35 million men and 35 million women). 99 million are overweight (45 million women and 54 million men). NHANES 2016 statistics showed that about 39.6% of American adults were obese. Men had an age-adjusted rate of 37.9% and Women had an age-adjusted rate of 41.1%.

*Obesity in the US Fast Facts

Obesity affects 42.4% of American adults over 20.

The annual medical costs for obesity in the United States is $147 billion annually (in 2008 dollars), according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The groups with the highest rate of obesity are non-Hispanic blacks (49.6%), Hispanics (44.8%), and non-Hispanic whites (42.2%).

In 2019, no state had an obesity rate below 20%. In Alabama, Arkansas, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, and West Virginia, 35% or more of the adults are obese.

And the matter is not one of indifference. Many Yanks are concerned with what obesity may do to their health. From here:

How many Americans are concerned about their weight?

The survey found 74 percent are concerned about their weight and 65 percent are worried about getting heart disease due to extra pounds, yet less than half (43 percent) of Americans have tried to make dietary changes to lose weight and 40 percent of those who describe themselves as overweight or obese say they aren't ... (Jan 31, 2019)

 

[Infinite Chaos]

I would not care in the least to get sick in the US. Which is why I go there rarely.

Obesity is a symptom rather than the cause of income inequality. What I found to be a greater cause in the UK comes from this 2018 World Inequality report.

https://en.unesco.org/inclusivepolicylab/sites/default/files/publication/document/2018/7/wir2018-full-report-english.pdf

For the US:

The income-inequality trajectory observed in the United States is largely due to massive educational inequalities, combined with a tax system that grew less progressive despite a surge in top labor compensation since the 1980s, and in top capital incomes in the 2000s. Continental Europe meanwhile saw a lesser decline in its tax progressivity, while wage inequality was also moderated by educational and wage-setting policies that were relatively more favorable to low and middle-income groups. In both regions, income inequality between men and women has declined but remains particularly strong at the top of the distribution.

The lesson about education counts for all countries, I think the UK in particular jumped onto the Degree pathway for broadening education but that has always come in for fair criticism while technical and vocational education has always been the poor cousin here. I am a believer in education but across all the spectrum while fundung all equally rather than putting most emphasis on degree education. Germany and a couple of other European countries have done this really well for years. The chart below demonstrates this Higher Education focus against other developed nations.

That was 2014 - here, a 2020 study showed that technical and vocational skills funds and spending for training in Germany is still way higher in numbers and against higher education than the UK.

Technical vs academic funding: Germany funds technical education 37% higher than academic | FE News

| Technical vs academic funding: Germany funds technical education 37% higher than academic

www.fenews.co.uk

 

[PeteEU]

The lesson about education counts for all countries, I think the UK in particular jumped onto the Degree pathway for broadening education but that has always come in for fair criticism while technical and vocational education has always been the poor cousin here. I am a believer in education but across all the spectrum while fundung all equally rather than putting most emphasis on degree education. Germany and a couple of other European countries have done this really well for years. The chart below demonstrates this Higher Education focus against other developed nations.

That was 2014 - here, a 2020 study showed that technical and vocational skills funds and spending for training in Germany is still way higher in numbers and against higher education than the UK.

Technical vs academic funding: Germany funds technical education 37% higher than academic | FE News

| Technical vs academic funding: Germany funds technical education 37% higher than academic

www.fenews.co.uk

I think context matters on that graph. Which educational system are public run, private or both. There is no doubt that Denmark spends a lot on education, but it is pretty much all in the public sphere and the cost of an education is the same regardless of what school you go too. So that cost is spread across the whole population.

Where as the US and UK to a degree, have insanely varying costs associated, meaning that % of GDP is concentrated on few people who either have money or are massively in debt afterwards.

And then there is as you said type of education... vocational Vs book/university education and that too varies wildly from country to country.

In Denmark becoming a carpenter is equivalent to having a university degree. I suspect that ain't the fact in many other countries.

However I would say that easy access education will lower income inequality. The countries at the top of income inequality all have almost no financial barriers to gaining an university degree or similar.

Interesting discussion.

 

[Lafayette]

POST-SECONDARY TUITION IS TOO DAMN EXPENSIVE!

I think there are also some quality of life issues.
In the US quite a few people can own their own single family home.
I wonder what the average age is when people purchase their first home is in the US vs Europe?

You're avoiding the "pertinent subject" that only the numbers show. All the rest is personal opinion (to which you are fully entitled) and as regards yours above, I don't think it is too important.

What is far more important, I suggest, is the question nobody wants to answer and I keep putting it UP in this forum. It goes like this:

Why should any country refuse to make Post-secondary Education, which is highly necessary nowadays for anyone to find a reasonably good job, so expensive in America? Whyzzat? Because Uncle Sam has "never-had the-balls" to change that sad fact. So, we keep pumping money into the DoD, that does subsidize some kids' educational programs. (When, of course, ANY EDUCATION is fundamentally a right-of-existence equally as important as "freedom"! Thus, it should not cost an arm-and-a-leg.)

And if one does not care to accept that notion, then read this factual-article: How student debt became a $1.6 trillion crisis of which an abstract here:

Some 44 million Americans collectively hold over $1.6 trillion in student debt. And these numbers are growing.

At the same time, advancements in technology, especially automation, are making it harder to earn a living wage without some type of advanced degree. Today, college graduates earn 80% more than those with just a high school diploma, on average.

College is more expensive — and important — than ever before. And that dichotomy puts students in a difficult situation: do they risk going into debt they can’t pay back or miss out on the benefits of a college degree?

Experts have long labeled this dynamic a “crisis.” But then, another kind of crisis hit: the coronavirus pandemic. And then, an economic crisis followed.

In February [of 2020], the United States officially entered an economic recession and between mid-march and June, over 42.6 million Americans filed for unemployment.

During the 2008 recession, many opted to go back to school and gain new skills. However, since then, the cost of a four-year college degree increased by 25% and student debt increased by 107% and many are less sure if college will be the solution to riding out a recession this time around.

'Nuff said ... ?

 

[longview]

POST-SECONDARY TUITION IS TOO DAMN EXPENSIVE!



You're avoiding the "pertinent subject" that only the numbers show. All the rest is personal opinion (to which you are fully entitled) and as regards yours above, I don't think it is too important.

What is far more important, I suggest, is the question nobody wants to answer and I keep putting it UP in this forum. It goes like this:

Why should any country refuse to make Post-secondary Education, which is highly necessary nowadays for anyone to find a reasonably good job, so expensive in America? Whyzzat? Because Uncle Sam has "never-had the-balls" to change that sad fact. So, we keep pumping money into the DoD, that does subsidize some kids' educational programs. (When, of course, ANY EDUCATION is fundamentally a right-of-existence equally as important as "freedom"! Thus, it should not cost an arm-and-a-leg.)

And if one does not care to accept that notion, then read this factual-article: How student debt became a $1.6 trillion crisis of which an abstract here:


'Nuff said ... ?

I think you do not understand what is driving up the cost of Higher Education in the US.
It is the availability of easy student loans, and peoples misunderstanding of the difference between the University experience, and an higher education degree.
(I worked at a University for a decade, and served and chaired an advisory board, for a state technical school.)
People would like to have a degree, but think a degree requires the University experience, it does not!
I just looked up the tuition and fees for a BS degree in my area, for a student who would live at home.
It looks like it would be about $34,000, spread out over 4 years.
If the parents started when the child started high school, it would work out to about $400 a month for 8 years.
The University experience would be more than twice that number.
I am by no means discounting the networking and life experience gained by going away to college and living in a dorm,
but it depends on what your goal is, a University degree, or making friends.
P.S. This is not a theory, I paid for the Bachelors degree for both of my children this way,
and them not having any student debt, and a degree, allowed them to advance in life much quicker.

 

[german hick]

I think you do not understand what is driving up the cost of Higher Education in the US.
It is the availability of easy student loans, and peoples misunderstanding of the difference between the University experience, and an higher education degree.
(I worked at a University for a decade, and served and chaired an advisory board, for a state technical school.)
People would like to have a degree, but think a degree requires the University experience, it does not!
I just looked up the tuition and fees for a BS degree in my area, for a student who would live at home.
It looks like it would be about $34,000, spread out over 4 years.
If the parents started when the child started high school, it would work out to about $400 a month for 8 years.
The University experience would be more than twice that number.
I am by no means discounting the networking and life experience gained by going away to college and living in a dorm,
but it depends on what your goal is, a University degree, or making friends.
P.S. This is not a theory, I paid for the Bachelors degree for both of my children this way,
and them not having any student debt, and a degree, allowed them to advance in life much quicker.

for me the assumption that any degree shall cost anything at all is still quite foreign. I don´t know all European countries, but here you pay nothing or next to nothing no matter wich type of school or univerity. If you have a poor backround you can even get your cost of living sponsored by the government - and that´s the way how it shall be if you want a competetive educated society

 

[longview]

for me the assumption that any degree shall cost anything at all is still quite foreign. I don´t know all European countries, but here you pay nothing or next to nothing no matter wich type of school or univerity. If you have a poor backround you can even get your cost of living sponsored by the government - and that´s the way how it shall be if you want a competetive educated society

Except that you have to qualify with actual tests to get in to the programs.
Governments actually make money from paying for higher education, a person with a degree usually earns more,
and also pays more taxes. This system worked for decades in the US, but got broken when lessor degrees demanded funding equal to the
science and engineering degrees. ( In the 1970's and Early 1980's in Texas, State University Tuition was $176 a semester,
for as many classes as you could take. A few weeks of a summer job, would pay your annual tuition.)
When they attempted to fund all degree programs equally, it spread the funds too thin, and the schools
asked to raise tuition to fill in the shortcomings.
Soon the universities found that their product (degrees) were in such high demand, and student loans were so easy,
that they could raise tuition quickly, and people would go into debt to pay it.
To be fair, even at today's cost, a good degree in a valid field, is a good investment.
I am not sure I can say the same thing about the University experience, but some would disagree with me.

 

[Lafayette]

I think you do not understand what is driving up the cost of Higher Education in the US.
It is the availability of easy student loans, and peoples misunderstanding of the difference between the University experience, and an higher education degree.
(I worked at a University for a decade, and served and chaired an advisory board, for a state technical school.)
People would like to have a degree, but think a degree requires the University experience, it does not!
I just looked up the tuition and fees for a BS degree in my area, for a student who would live at home.
It looks like it would be about $34,000, spread out over 4 years.
If the parents started when the child started high school, it would work out to about $400 a month for 8 years.
The University experience would be more than twice that number.
I am by no means discounting the networking and life experience gained by going away to college and living in a dorm,
but it depends on what your goal is, a University degree, or making friends.
P.S. This is not a theory, I paid for the Bachelors degree for both of my children this way,
and them not having any student debt, and a degree, allowed them to advance in life much quicker.

And you do not understand that in Europe I pay $1500 (in Euros) for a year's schooling at university for my kids and you pay (on average) around $25K in the US. (Which is almost 20 times more!)

Eat your heart out with that factoid ...

 

[longview]

And you do not understand that in Europe I pay $1500 (in Euros) for a year's schooling at university for my kids and you pay (on average) around $25K in the US. (Which is almost 20 times more!)

Eat your heart out with that factoid ...

What percentage of students exiting from secondary school, qualify for the low subsidized tuition?
Are the lower scoring students sent to the trade schools, or do they also have a choice of attending a University at low costs?

 

[Ishm]

Costing poorer segments of society out of higher education perpetuates the social divide and is a huge loss to any country as naturally talented children never get an education to grow those talents and contribute more strongly to society.

 

[longview]

Costing poorer segments of society out of higher education perpetuates the social divide and is a huge loss to any country as naturally talented children never get an education to grow those talents and contribute more strongly to society.

It can go both ways, if the testing system means that late bloomers are never given the opportunity to go to University at all,
then what does the cost matter if they cannot get in?
On the other side of the coin, the track system used in Europe, would place people on tracks best suited for them,
be it University or a trade school. In the US, it my understanding that a good Plumber or Electrician can make as much as an Engineer.

 

[PeteEU]

It can go both ways, if the testing system means that late bloomers are never given the opportunity to go to University at all,
then what does the cost matter if they cannot get in?
On the other side of the coin, the track system used in Europe, would place people on tracks best suited for them,
be it University or a trade school. In the US, it my understanding that a good Plumber or Electrician can make as much as an Engineer.

It varies from country to country. But take my own country of Denmark who is one of the best when it comes to income inequality and that comes down to our education system.

When you go to highschool you can choose what kind of highschool you want. There is the traditional kind where everything from languages to physics are taught. Then there is a business high school that takes away biology and physics and does book keeping and business related stuff. And then there is the technical high school where you don't do much on languages or biolog, but focus more on trade things like plumbing, physics, computers and so on. Basically for those that are not book smart.

Choosing what kind of high school you want is the first step on what you do at university level. So the technical high school people usually go and become engineers or plumbers and so on. Business high school students usually go to business school or work in a store or office as a grunt. Normal high school usually go for a more broad spectrum...from psychology to doctors to engineering to becoming a priest or journalist.

Yes a person who goes to business high school can change his mind and become a doctor. They just have take additional courses before being accepted at the university.

Now there is nothing financial involved in getting into university. Only your grades and the amount of places a university has. For example one of the hardest to get into studies is psychology because a university have limited it to say 30 per year. Hence it is only those with top grades that get in. On the flip side, you have 2000 places for a BA in business and not many takers so it is relatively easy to get in.

So a person, who's father is in jail and mother is a drug addict can come in and study to be a doctor if they have the grades to do so. Medical school is free but requires of course certain things in high school and at a certain grade to get in.

 

[Lafayette]

A COLOSSAL WASTE OF MONEY AND LIVES BY THE REPLICANTS

Costing poorer segments of society out of higher education perpetuates the social divide and is a huge loss to any country as naturally talented children never get an education to grow those talents and contribute more strongly to society.

Given the necessity in this day-and-age of a suitable post-secondary degree disregarding the necessity of the lower classes for financial-assistance to obtain the degree is tantamount to Blatant Negligence by any standing government. (Including the present one!)

Of course, we cannot say that about the massive DoD-budget, can we? After all there is the threat of this-or-that all around the world every minute of the day! For instance, just why in hell are we pulling out of Afghanistan?

Because it was a effing-mistake to get in there in the first-place. Yet another brilliant Replicant PotUS (Bush) who decided that war would be great for the economy (and particularly Replicant-businesses) - and to hell with the deaths necessary. Who really cares, anyway? Well, for one, the mothers of those kids who died or came home brutally wounded.

From Wikipedia here:

As of July 27, 2018, there have been 2,372 U.S. military deaths and 4 Department of Defense civilian deaths in the War in Afghanistan. 1,856 of these deaths have been the result of hostile action. 20,320 American service-members have also been wounded in action during the war.

Yet another waste of time, money and American lives for no purpose whatsoever by the Replicant Party who have nothing better to do than employ our children in a futile effort that accomplishes only death and destruction. When will Uncle Sam ever learn? When voters stop voting for Replicant candidates who think wars are Great For BigBusiness ...

 

[Lafayette]

Higher education (to my mind) has two composites, both equally of significant importance (and therefore requiring government funding).

There is a significant difference between education for university-degree and apprenticeship to learn a trade. Both are important and require significant national-government-spending. (Because states in America do not always have the important funding necessary - and particularly for the trade-apprentices.)

Once again, we are back to "Who's responsible for education, the state or the nation?" I figure it is the nation because the states have demonstrated perfectly well that most (not all) do not take that funding as a "primary necessity". So, the kids have to look elsewhere - meaning an opportunity-to-learn but without government funding to do so.

Education is basically a government responsibility - and we should make that a national issue. Howzat? Buy providing the funding necessary to support its availability to all who wish to pursue the necessary education that is key to either finding a job or performing one ...

When, in fact, it is becoming more and more crucial to the ability to find not-just-a-job but a well-paying one ...

 

[PeteEU]

Higher education (to my mind) has two composites, both equally of significant importance (and therefore requiring government funding).

There is a significant difference between education for university-degree and apprenticeship to learn a trade. Both are important and require significant national-government-spending. (Because states in America do not always have the important funding necessary - and particularly for the trade-apprentices.)

Once again, we are back to "Who's responsible for education, the state or the nation?" I figure it is the nation because the states have demonstrated perfectly well that most (not all) do not take that funding as a "primary necessity". So, the kids have to look elsewhere - meaning an opportunity-to-learn but without government funding to do so.

Education is basically a government responsibility - and we should make that a national issue. Howzat? Buy providing the funding necessary to support its availability to all who wish to pursue the necessary education that is key to either finding a job or performing one ...

When, in fact, it is becoming more and more crucial to the ability to find not-just-a-job but a well-paying one ...

Higher education, as defined either a university degree or a trade skill (bricklayer, car mechanic) is key to combat income inequality.

The "rich" or "nobility", has for centuries used money and access to keep large portions of the population as serfs or worse. This is still going on to a degree in certain countries of the industrialized world and it does not benefit society as a whole.

I know I keep going back to my own country of Denmark, but that is because over a couple of decades we went from the "old" world to the modern world in education.

After the war, if you were born to a family who´s father was a bricklayer, then the chances of you becoming anything more was near zero. Class was everything. No way could you become a lawyer, if your parents were working class. So jobs often went generational... your father was a lawyer, then you would be a lawyer or doctor, since your family would have the funds to pay for it.

Then those damn socialists.. well actually mostly conservatives, changed the game by making higher education access dependent on grades and not wealth. That changed everything. Suddenly my fathers generation (born in 1930s) could aspire to something more, aka the American dream. He was the first generation where he was offered an opportunity that was impossible for the generation before. He went from a bricklayer to become an engineer, went from working in Copenhagen as a young bricklayer, with a father working at the shipyards... to working as a young engineer in Los Angeles in the mid 1960s, and later in the middle east.

Another place that has seen dramatic changes is Spain. Under Franco, women were not allowed (without permission) into higher education. Their role in society was to breed kids. After democracy came, the amount of women in higher education exploded to such a degree that traditional male dominated professions like lawyers and doctors are now dominated by women. Again access was key.

So when you put access conditions, like financial barriers, then you prevent people in going for what they desire in education. Yes there are scholarships and loans.. but it is a bureaucratic nightmare that costs access.

And lets not forget, the more educated you are, the higher taxes you pay and that is good for government. This is also the primary argument for having "free" higher education.

But saying that... there are other factors as well to income inequality for sure, even in education. For example, as I have mentioned... if a country does not accept being a fully registered and educated plumber as the same level as a person who went to University to study business.. then you again have a class system in place.

 

[Allan]

@Lafayette and @PeteEU - fascinating information on European education. I see a lot worth emulating in the European approach to education.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

Where as the US and UK to a degree, have insanely varying costs associated, meaning that % of GDP is concentrated on few people who either have money or are massively in debt afterwards.

There's good and bad in the UK - probably more bad but let me explain. Firstly, a poor graduate could end up with massive debt but it's repaid at very low rate AND it isn't due to be repaid unless the graduate earns over pre-specified thresholds. Of course the downside and I've heard some tutors saying this - "don't worry, just stay below the salary threshold and you never have to repay" - but that puts into the student's mind that they shouldn't aim to progress.
Then - fees to become an engineer come from University education aren't always repayable (see above) whereas fees to become a plumber or carpenter are free if you are under 19 but they are up to £6000 a year if you start your course after you are 19 years old and they have to be paid before you start. There's no delaying those fees for trade skills.

However if you are from a poor background - you can apply for a loan to study at local colleges to learn a trade or skill which becomes repayable on the same terms as the degree loan.

Basically in the UK, if you are going to become a plumber or carpenter - make your decision early in life (before you are 19) or you end up repaying the fees to learn these skills later in life. If you want to take a degree to be an artist or engineer or lawyer - you're going to need a Higher Education loan and you repay those fees whether you are 18 or 55 when you start and are the same whether you are from a poor background or a wealthy background.

In Denmark becoming a carpenter is equivalent to having a university degree. I suspect that ain't the fact in many other countries.

It's not seen the same way here, the trade skills like carpentry / plumbing / hairdressing are always seen as second choice. They are seen as pathways for the kids who didn't do well in the exams at 16.

It's stupid but roofers / plumbers / etc etc are not seen as good career pathways even though very often these people earn a better living and will always be able to find work compared to someone who takes an Arts or Humanities degree for example.

I am by no means discounting the networking and life experience gained by going away to college and living in a dorm,
but it depends on what your goal is, a University degree, or making friends.

For a lot of kids, a degree is very often a way of delaying life decisions. Even though trade skills are really important, a lot of kids end up on a conveyor belt to a degree without really thinking through whether they are going to earn a living from that degree or end up in later life going back and relearning a trade (and paying again for it)

and that´s the way how it shall be if you want a competetive educated society

Depends on the culture really. I see German culture in this regard as largely influenced by (I won't go into the influence of William Morris) the Deutscher Werkbund approach to crafts skills, quality and industry. Really simplistically, German industry went for quality and mass production and embraced those skills and the people who would need them.

Our Arts and Crafts movement largely died - especially when people with financial and political influence learned about William Morris's political views. Cutting the story short and being simple about it - we went the other way, our students tend to want the most reward for the least effort. One thing I did find when I taught was that the introduction of fees made a lot of students more serious about their education, they didn't always value free education because wider society didn't reflect that either.

When you go to highschool you can choose what kind of highschool you want.

What age is this that you choose?

Our high schools try and do everything - from sciences to practical and business lessons until you are 16. This is why some kids who are not academic come out of the education system without any qualifications and are told "OK, you failed everything at school, why not go and become a bricklayer or plumber?"

With that background, you see why the trades are not highly valued by society here until it's too late.

 

[german hick]

in Germany we have kind of a hybrid thingy. I first had an apprenticeship in farming, than mede "Fachabitur" in the building sector and then studied civil engeneering on a "Fachhochschule" (a college for people already have been in job) - that has been a success story for many kids from working class or young people who are late bloomers.