I'm sure that level of overhead has nothing to do with the reason Belgian incomes, standards of living, and business outcomes are worse.

▲

HatchedLake721 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Reminded me of https://youtu.be/ML3qYHWRIZk

	▲	ecshafer an hour ago \| parent [-]
		His little rant about "freedom" ended up aging poorly as most of the countries he lists as being more free have put serious limits on free speech since then. The most Soorkin screed he has written, might as well be John Galt's speech in Atlas Shrugged for how much its just the author inserting his political views.

▲

FireBeyond 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> standards of living

As measured by ... purchasing power.

Let's take a look, Safety Index - US 50.8, Belgium 50.6. Health care index - Belgium 75.9, US 67.8, Pollution Index - US 36.7, Belgium 49.2, Climate index - Belgium 86, US 78.5.

As it stands US standard of living is better really only in "you can buy a larger house" (shocking, giving the relative size), and "it'll be slightly cheaper".

Not by any other metric.

▲

ozgrakkurt 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It is a delusion that US is rich because of capitalism.

It is an insult to the people that founded the country and people that developed science/tech/finance etc. in it. And ofc the space, natural resources and isolation from wars.

Saying US is rich because capitalism is about as accurate as saying it is rich because it is christian

▲

matchbok3 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Do you think those natural resources would have been taken advantage of as well in some other system? Same with the geography and isolation.

You are talking about entirely different things. Makes no sense whatsoever. You could make your same argument about any economic system. The natural resources are inputs, not the outcome.

	▲	ozgrakkurt 23 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		> Do you think those natural resources would have been taken advantage of as well in some other system? What I mean is those factors can obviously effect a country's success. And can be argued that that do much more easier than arguing about religion or ideology. Similarly it is easier to argue that proper nutrition, sleep, drug usage etc. can effect an athlete's performance very positively. But you would find it much harder to argue on their religion, place they live, how wealthy were their family etc. As another example I think it is pretty easy to argue that the Jewish scientists going to US because of Hitler was a massive gain for US and a massive loss for Germany. And there are so many concrete factors like this that, all things considered, ideology seems irrelevant in comparison. You might say "this is all because US is capitalist in the first place". I want to point out how similar this kind of thinking is to the way some religious people think and how inconsequential it is in real world.

▲

KittenInABox 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

How do you want to measure standards of living here?