What's new

Why the U.S. Is Still Richer Than Every Other Large Country

F-22Raptor

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Jun 19, 2014
Messages
16,980
Reaction score
3
Country
United States
Location
United States
Each year, the United States produces more per person than most other advanced economies. In 2015 real GDP per capita was $56,000 in the United States. The real GDP per capita in that same year was only $47,000 in Germany, $41,000 in France and the United Kingdom, and just $36,000 in Italy, adjusting for purchasing power.

In short, the U.S. remains richer than its peers. But why?

I can think of 10 features that distinguish America from other industrial economies, which I outline in a recent essay for the National Bureau of Economic Research, from which this article is adapted.

An entrepreneurial culture. Individuals in the U.S. demonstrate a desire to start businesses and grow them, as well as a willingness to take risks. There is less penalty in U.S. culture for failing and starting again. Even students who have gone to college or a business school show this entrepreneurial desire, and it is self-reinforcing: Silicon Valley successes like Facebook inspire further entrepreneurship.

A financial system that supports entrepreneurship. The U.S. has a more developed system of equity finance than the countries of Europe, including angel investors willing to finance startups and a very active venture capital market that helps finance the growth of those firms. We also have a decentralized banking system, including more than 7,000 small banks, that provides loans to entrepreneurs.

World-class research universities. U.S. universities produce much of the basic research that drives high-tech entrepreneurship. Faculty members and doctoral graduates often spend time with nearby startups, and the culture of both the universities and the businesses encourage this overlap. Top research universities attract talented students from around the world, many of whom end up remaining in the United States.

Labor markets that generally link workers and jobs unimpeded by large trade unions, state-owned enterprises, or excessively restrictive labor regulations. Less than 7% of the private sector U.S. labor force is unionized, and there are virtually no state-owned enterprises. While the U.S. does regulate working conditions and hiring, the rules are much less onerous than in Europe. As a result, workers have a better chance of finding the right job, firms find it easier to innovate, and new firms find it easier to get started.

A growing population, including from immigration. America’s growing population means a younger and therefore more flexible and trainable workforce. Although there are restrictions on immigration to the United States, there are also special rules that provide access to the U.S. economy and a path for citizenship (green cards), based on individual talent and industrial sponsorship. A separate “green card lottery” provides a way for eager people to come to the United States. The country’s ability to attract immigrants has been an important reason for its prosperity.

A culture (and a tax system) that encourages hard work and long hours. The average employee in the United States works 1,800 hours per year, substantially more than the 1,500 hours worked in France and the 1,400 hours worked in Germany (though not as much as the 2,200+ in Hong Kong, Singapore, and South Korea). In general, working longer means producing more, which means higher real incomes.

A supply of energy that makes North America energy independent. Natural gas fracking in particular has provided U.S. businesses with plentiful and relatively inexpensive energy.

A favorable regulatory environment. Although U.S. regulations are far from perfect, they are less burdensome on businesses than the regulations imposed by European countries and the European Union.

A smaller size of government than in other industrial countries. According to the OECD, outlays of the U.S. government at the federal, state, and local levels totaled 38% of GDP, while the corresponding figure was 44% in Germany, 51% in Italy, and 57% in France. The higher level of government spending in other countries implies not only a higher share of income taken in taxes but also higher transfer payments that reduce incentives to work. It’s no surprise that Americans work a lot; they have extra incentive to do so.

A decentralized political system in which states compete. Competition among states encourages entrepreneurship and work, and states compete for businesses and for individual residents with their legal rules and tax regimes. Some states have no income taxes and have labor laws that limit unionization. States provide high-quality universities with low tuition for in-state students. They compete in their legal liability rules, too. The legal systems attract both new entrepreneurs and large corporations. The United States is perhaps unique among high-income nations in its degree of political decentralization.

Will America maintain these advantages? In his 1942 book, Socialism, Capitalism, and Democracy, Joseph Schumpeter warned that capitalism would decline and fail because the political and intellectual environment needed for capitalism to flourish would be undermined by the success of capitalism and by the critique of intellectuals. He argued that popularly elected social democratic parties would create a welfare state that would restrict entrepreneurship.

Although Schumpeter’s book was published more than 20 years after he had moved from Europe to the United States, his warning seems more appropriate to Europe today than to the United States. The welfare state has grown in the United States, but much less than it has grown in Europe. And the intellectual climate in the United States is much more supportive of capitalism.

If Schumpeter were with us today, he might point to the growth of the social democratic parties in Europe and the resulting expansion of the welfare state as reasons why the industrial countries of Europe have not enjoyed the same robust economic growth that has prevailed in the United States.

https://hbr.org/2017/04/why-the-u-s-is-still-richer-than-every-other-large-country
 
.
I think majority is "Borrowed" money / loan or debt. Or some sort of short or long term loan.
Life on credit card but at a country level

US-national-debt-GDP-graph.png


us-national-debt-graph.jpg


Every thing is fantastic otherwise the people etc just the problem is whole economy is based on taking borrowed money since 1979
 
Last edited:
.
they earn huge money through internet and softwere which is based mainly in us so all world population who uses them benefits u.s
 
.
Each year, the United States produces more per person than most other advanced economies. In 2015 real GDP per capita was $56,000 in the United States. The real GDP per capita in that same year was only $47,000 in Germany, $41,000 in France and the United Kingdom, and just $36,000 in Italy, adjusting for purchasing power.

In short, the U.S. remains richer than its peers. But why?

I can think of 10 features that distinguish America from other industrial economies, which I outline in a recent essay for the National Bureau of Economic Research, from which this article is adapted.

An entrepreneurial culture. Individuals in the U.S. demonstrate a desire to start businesses and grow them, as well as a willingness to take risks. There is less penalty in U.S. culture for failing and starting again. Even students who have gone to college or a business school show this entrepreneurial desire, and it is self-reinforcing: Silicon Valley successes like Facebook inspire further entrepreneurship.

A financial system that supports entrepreneurship. The U.S. has a more developed system of equity finance than the countries of Europe, including angel investors willing to finance startups and a very active venture capital market that helps finance the growth of those firms. We also have a decentralized banking system, including more than 7,000 small banks, that provides loans to entrepreneurs.

World-class research universities. U.S. universities produce much of the basic research that drives high-tech entrepreneurship. Faculty members and doctoral graduates often spend time with nearby startups, and the culture of both the universities and the businesses encourage this overlap. Top research universities attract talented students from around the world, many of whom end up remaining in the United States.

Labor markets that generally link workers and jobs unimpeded by large trade unions, state-owned enterprises, or excessively restrictive labor regulations. Less than 7% of the private sector U.S. labor force is unionized, and there are virtually no state-owned enterprises. While the U.S. does regulate working conditions and hiring, the rules are much less onerous than in Europe. As a result, workers have a better chance of finding the right job, firms find it easier to innovate, and new firms find it easier to get started.

A growing population, including from immigration. America’s growing population means a younger and therefore more flexible and trainable workforce. Although there are restrictions on immigration to the United States, there are also special rules that provide access to the U.S. economy and a path for citizenship (green cards), based on individual talent and industrial sponsorship. A separate “green card lottery” provides a way for eager people to come to the United States. The country’s ability to attract immigrants has been an important reason for its prosperity.

A culture (and a tax system) that encourages hard work and long hours. The average employee in the United States works 1,800 hours per year, substantially more than the 1,500 hours worked in France and the 1,400 hours worked in Germany (though not as much as the 2,200+ in Hong Kong, Singapore, and South Korea). In general, working longer means producing more, which means higher real incomes.

A supply of energy that makes North America energy independent. Natural gas fracking in particular has provided U.S. businesses with plentiful and relatively inexpensive energy.

A favorable regulatory environment. Although U.S. regulations are far from perfect, they are less burdensome on businesses than the regulations imposed by European countries and the European Union.

A smaller size of government than in other industrial countries. According to the OECD, outlays of the U.S. government at the federal, state, and local levels totaled 38% of GDP, while the corresponding figure was 44% in Germany, 51% in Italy, and 57% in France. The higher level of government spending in other countries implies not only a higher share of income taken in taxes but also higher transfer payments that reduce incentives to work. It’s no surprise that Americans work a lot; they have extra incentive to do so.

A decentralized political system in which states compete. Competition among states encourages entrepreneurship and work, and states compete for businesses and for individual residents with their legal rules and tax regimes. Some states have no income taxes and have labor laws that limit unionization. States provide high-quality universities with low tuition for in-state students. They compete in their legal liability rules, too. The legal systems attract both new entrepreneurs and large corporations. The United States is perhaps unique among high-income nations in its degree of political decentralization.

Will America maintain these advantages? In his 1942 book, Socialism, Capitalism, and Democracy, Joseph Schumpeter warned that capitalism would decline and fail because the political and intellectual environment needed for capitalism to flourish would be undermined by the success of capitalism and by the critique of intellectuals. He argued that popularly elected social democratic parties would create a welfare state that would restrict entrepreneurship.

Although Schumpeter’s book was published more than 20 years after he had moved from Europe to the United States, his warning seems more appropriate to Europe today than to the United States. The welfare state has grown in the United States, but much less than it has grown in Europe. And the intellectual climate in the United States is much more supportive of capitalism.

If Schumpeter were with us today, he might point to the growth of the social democratic parties in Europe and the resulting expansion of the welfare state as reasons why the industrial countries of Europe have not enjoyed the same robust economic growth that has prevailed in the United States.

https://hbr.org/2017/04/why-the-u-s-is-still-richer-than-every-other-large-country


The US as a whole is richer than any other country. However, wealth and income inequality are serious problems in America. Much more so than anytime since the Great Depression.

What we should be comparing are living standards between the average person in each country, wages, poverty, and inequality-adjusted human development. That's what really matters.

We lag behind other countries in some of these categories, despite our robust economy, due to income inequality.

real-gdp-per-capita-median-weekly-earnings-1980-2013.png


real-gdp-per-worker-versus-real-median-wage-1979q1-to-2016q2-rev.png


Also, it should be noted that Norway, Ireland, and Switzerland have a higher GDP per capita (PPP) too:

GDP per capita, PPP (current international $)  Data.png
 
.
The article didn't even try to hide its bias for right-wing economics lol.

Yeah, right-wing economics allowed the US to have the highest real GDP per capita among the largest countries. But what's the downside? High household debt due to over-consumption, stagnant real median wage growth for the middle and lower income, expensive but mediocre healthcare system. After adjusting for the downsides of extreme capitalism, does the average American lead a higher quality of life than other developed countries?
 
.
The US as a whole is richer than any other country. However, wealth and income inequality are serious problems in America. Much more so than anytime since the Great Depression.

What we should be comparing are living standards between the average person in each country, wages, poverty, and inequality-adjusted human development. That's what really matters.

We lag behind other countries in some of these categories, despite our robust economy, due to income inequality.

real-gdp-per-capita-median-weekly-earnings-1980-2013.png


real-gdp-per-worker-versus-real-median-wage-1979q1-to-2016q2-rev.png


Also, it should be noted that Norway, Ireland, and Switzerland have a higher GDP per capita (PPP) too:

View attachment 391993
Its all due to Petro Dollar an unlimited demand for Dollar created by US which provides USA an unlimited capability to borrow for that matter USA crushed every country which tried to move out of Petro Dollar trap ,,, be it Iraq, Libya, Syria and Iran ...

Now dont start chatting conspiracy theories ... I have my logics and basis ,,, if you disagree kindly provide your logic along with backing ...
 
.
Each year, the United States produces more per person than most other advanced economies. In 2015 real GDP per capita was $56,000 in the United States. The real GDP per capita in that same year was only $47,000 in Germany, $41,000 in France and the United Kingdom, and just $36,000 in Italy, adjusting for purchasing power.
Was it now? Sure that's not a figment of CIA factbook?

Let's look at nominal GDP per capita
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)_per_capita

Worldbank 2015 > US: $56,116 = rank 8 (stated as 7 but there is 1 double before the US i.e. US is country 8 in list)
UN 2015 > US: $56,054 = rank 11 (stated as 8 but there are 3 doubles before the US i.e. US is country 11 in list)
IMF 2016 > US: $57,436 = rank 8 (stated as 7 but there is 1 double before the US i.e. US is country 8 in list)

These rank numbers for the other countries are (in the same order):
Germany > 19, 24, 19
France > 23, 31, 24
UK > 14, 19, 21
Italy > 29, 35, 27

These amounts for the other countries are (in the same order):
Germany > $41,179; $41,686; $41,902
France > $36,353; $36,304; $38,128
UK > $43,930; $44,162; $40,096
Italy > $29,993; $30,462; $30,507

The gross domestic product per capita at nominal values is the value of all final goods and services produced within a nation in a given year, converted at market exchange rates to current U.S. dollars, divided by the average (or mid-year) population for the same year.
The figures presented here do not take into account differences in the cost of living in different countries, and the results may vary greatly from one year to another based on fluctuations in the exchange rates of the country's currency. Such fluctuations may change a country's ranking from one year to the next, even though they often make little or no difference to the standard of living of its population.

Therefore, these figures should be used with caution.

Comparisons of national income are also frequently made on the basis of purchasing power parity (PPP), to adjust for differences in the cost of living in different countries. (See List of countries by GDP (PPP) per capita.) PPP largely removes the exchange rate problem but not others; it does not reflect the value of economic output in international trade, and it also requires more estimation than GDP per capita. On the whole, PPP per capita figures are more narrowly spread than nominal GDP per capita figures.


Let's look at GDP (PPP) per capita
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita

World Bank (2011–2015)> US: $56,116 2015 = rank 12 (stated as 10 but there are 2 doubles before the US i.e. US is country 12 in list)
IMF 2016 > US: $57,436 = rank 8 (stated as 7 but there is 1 double before the US i.e. US is country 8 in list)

Germany: $47,377; $41,902
France: $36,353; $30,507
UK: $43,930; $40,096
Italy: $36,030; $35,781

GDP does not account for the distribution of income among the residents of a country, because GDP is merely an aggregate measure.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gross_domestic_product#Limitations_and_criticisms

PLEASE KEEP IN MIND THAT Americans account for a whopping 32% of the world's super rich.
http://money.cnn.com/gallery/luxury/2014/06/01/top-countries-billionaires/index.html
That could kinda bump yur average...

Likewise: The world’s largest corporations raised more money than most countries in the world combined collected in taxation. The ten biggest corporations, including Walmart, Apple and Shell, have combined revenue of more than 180 countries. Walmart ranks as the 10th largest with a revenue of over $482 billion, which is larger than the taxes of Spain, Australia and the Netherlands combined.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/b...le-walmart-shell-global-justice-a7245991.html
http://www.globaljustice.org.uk/sit...sources/corporations_vs_governments_final.pdf
https://blogs.worldbank.org/publicsphere/world-s-top-100-economies-31-countries-69-corporations

It could well be that more large corporations are in the US than there are in UK, Germany and France.
http://www.businessinsider.com/25-c...countries-2011-6?international=true&r=US&IR=T

http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/03/15...untries-multinational-corporate-wealth-power/
 
Last edited:
. .

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom