66% of Americans say they want extended European-style vacation policies at work

Exactly.

I live in a big European city. You basically don't need a car - pretty much anything within the city is reachable in about 30min, and public transit is comfy.

Also, I have a public transit ticket that allows me to travel the entire country for a year, which only cost about 1000€.

Yes, salaries are lower, but I also don't have to save anything to get my kids through university, or keep emergency funds for health issues.

Also, I can't just get fired without cause. And if I do get laid off, I have 3 months of grace period, plus potentially years of unemployment money.

Also, the government even pays for certain courses so I can find employment again.

The social system in Europe is amazing.

Parents have to pay for university in Europe unless they are poor. And while there are no fees, the costs are typically between 30k and 100k per child.

edit: In Germany. I‘m German and I have studied there. I should know.

edit2: Someone said this comment could be interpreted as the cost per year which is not the case. This is the total cost.

Tuiton in France is $500-600 USD/year for any European citizen. And degrees are only 3 years in France.

How so? Isn't this quite dependent on country? As far as I understand here in Norway, there are no costs associated with University.

Higher education is free in many EU countries, you often only have to pay if you want to study abroad. The ones that are not free aren't anywhere near as expensive as you describe.

BS.

Depends on the country. All public universities (and these are the best ones) in Poland are free, for example.

Uhm, what?

If you live with your parents, and the university is free, where does that number come from?

And if you don't live with your parents, you live with others students, spending 600-1000 euro month for living, how do you reach that numbers?

Salaries are lower and taxes are significantly higher. Take your pick, but I’d rather take the American approach of a more dynamic job market. I wouldn’t want to deal with low GDP growth, public strikes (see France) and little ability to build wealth.

Places like the Netherlands and Switzerland generally pay around €2k a year for all students. The only place I know of anywhere near that price is the UK.

What? My parents send me the child allowance ("Kindergeld") they received for me for the 6 years I was at university, plus 100 EUR/month. I also had a regular job earning 450 EUR per month, so I had around 700-800 EUR of income per month with a 240 EUR rent. Tuition was 500 EUR per semester, so around 80 EUR/month. I was health insured for free via the insurance of my parents. I had around 300-400 EUR per month for food, electricity, and internet, which was more than enough for a single nerd. I financed vacations etc. via freelance work and savings from jobs I had when I was in school and my civil service. This was in Germany from 2008 to 2014.

Overall, I estimate that my university education cost my parents around 7000 EUR. And this wasn't even educational costs, but mostly living expenses.

There's no single policy that applies in all European countries. In a lot of countries there's no tuition fee (I live in one of them and went to university here), in some there's a token fee per year (a few hundred euros), and in some others students have to be fairly substantial tuition fees. Nothing close to the numbers you're quoting though. $10-20k per year is the highest I've ever heard of for public universities in Europe.

Bachelor + Masters is 10 semesters usually. 1000 * 12 * 5 = 60.000. Well in the range that I quoted. And depending on the city the actual costs can be more.

Anything but low GDP growth, the horror.

> edit: In Germany. I‘m German and I have studied there. I should know.

I am also there and I didn't pay any monies anywhere for university(unless you mean fancy private university?). All state universities are free and we only paid some misely amount every 6 months for the city-ticket(free access to all public transport in the city, cool stuff). Also, state pays each child ~125/month until they are 25.

I believe you are in some different parallel universe entirely O.o

As I said in my comment it has nothing to do with tuition fees.

Salaries are so much lower than our American counterparts you'll be working right up until our government mandated retirement age, which is increasing. Our economic growth across the EU is stagnant. These are not things to be celebrated.

I'm sure that the GP comment referred to total costs, not just tuition. Cost of living in a German city for 5-6 years can definitely add up to 30k-100k. Note that the costs of attendance typically cited by US schools similarly include cost of living, e.g. housing and meals (e.g. [0]).

[0] https://sfs.mit.edu/undergraduate-students/the-cost-of-atten...

By your logic then this is also "the cost of having a job."

Nobody discusses costs like this.

Here is a realistic estimate for Munich.

A room costs minimum 350 Euros or may easily cost 1000.

Food and going out costs at least 100 Euros or healthy food 200-300.

The subway ticket at that time cost 70 per month.

There are some additional costs such as health insurance etc.

Tuition at that time was 500 per semester for me.

Spending a semester abroad as is common is usually far more expensive.

And by law your parents have to pay. You are not required to even work.

On average parents are required to finance housing and food with 930 per month.

Source: https://www.verbraucherzentrale.de/wissen/geld-versicherunge...

If you are a parent you need to save this money and pay it. Some students sue their parents for that every year in Germany (most know they have an obligation). Google it. For the family this is a real cost.

Then what exactly is your point? That people require money to live? My parents spent exactly $0 on my education, as every student gets a grant of around €3000/m, and you can get a low interest student loan for the rest.

Some sources:

35.000-45.000 for the Bachelor alone.

https://www.verbraucherzentrale.de/wissen/geld-versicherunge... (Verbraucherzentrale, semi-public consumer protection agency)

10.000 per year:

https://m.faz.net/aktuell/finanzen/meine-finanzen/frag-den-m... (one of the top quality newspapers in Germany)

36.000 und 75.000 per child:

https://www.sparkasse.de/pk/ratgeber/bildung/studium/studien... (Sparkasse, pretty much the largest credit union)

Up to 133.000 (1851 per month):

https://www.studis-online.de/studienkosten/

But sure, believe what you want.

Your comparison is completely wrong. Not getting into specifics of rental prices, or student eating/socialising habits,

> Tuition at that time was 500 per semester for me

This is the number people talk about when they're talking about tuition costs for Americans. Everyone needs shelter and to eat, whether they're a student or an engineer at a FAANG.

It's $5-10k fo r community college depending on in or out of state. It's $10-$20k per year for a university for most, and if you look at a "top" university, it's significantly more.

University of Boulder which is a top-50-USA-university is just shy of $40k per year for tuition. Stanford is $55k, and UPenn (Which was the most expensive I could find) is $61k per year.

> And by law your parents have to pay. You are not required to even work.

That may be true in theory. In practice, many parents are in an income range which makes the child not eligible for educational support (Bafög), but which also does not allow supporting the child with 1000 EUR/month. The thought of telling my parents "you are required by law to send me more money, do it!" never occurred to me. They had a house to pay off. Both my mother and father worked more hours per week then I did for university (around 4-5 hours per day, at most, and only during the semester - I did nothing for university for around 4 months during the semester vacations). When my father was the same age as I when I started university, he had already worked for 7 years and paid rent and food money to his parents. So I think paying at least the rent, tuition, and food myself was the least I could do.

The comment I replied to did not mention tuition costs. The claim was that incomes can be low because there is not cost for letting students study. And the costs are absolutely there.

The fact that some of the best US universities have outrageous tuition is neither new nor surprising nor does it invalidate my claim. I drew no comparison to the US, you are drawing that comparison.

We not only have a better life expectancy (6years for men?), we also have a better 'good health' expectancy.

Economic growth is stagnant because energy production and energy import are stagnant. This has little to do with policy. It's 2011 all over again, when we heard all sort of 'southern Europeans are lazy/corrupt' and other shit. I even bought it like a good child. No. Southern Europeans economies used to depend a lot on north sea and Sahara oil and gas, and the reserves (and production) started declining in 2008 and 2010 respectively. Only oil producers, Russian clients and 'nuclear-based' economies managed to avoid crisis.

What is funny now that everybody speak about how Germany economy is in crisis. Well yeah. Same causes, same consequences.

I really don't see how it seems no one gets it. I understand politics wanting to grandstand and explain how growth is caused their policies, but I mean, the data is available. And we have panda. Look at oil import data from Italy then look at growth, from 2010 to 2012,its obvious one of the two is driving the other. Check the other 'PIGS', it's the same.

Well. I‘m just telling you what is required by law. In some sense the fact that you feel like they could not easily pay the costs just supports what I was saying. Namely that it is a cost not be neglected by saying „oh it‘s free here“.

What are your personal challenges in dealing with low GDP growth? I myself have found no need to deal with low GDP growth when it is happening.

Now what I wouldn't like to deal with is with lack of paid holidays, having to deal with masses of insurance paperwork and co-payments in case I need healthcare assistance, or deal with running out of sick days over the course of a year if I'm unlucky.

I suppose with enough wealth I wouldn't need to worry about the problems above, but I believe very few Americans have succeeded in that regard under their system. So, I prefer to stick to the generally European approach of protecting the basic rights and wellbeing of all our citizens, and will strike to defend it if necessary.

Ah, but then your first comment is highly misleading, because when you talk number, readers assume cost per year.

You are basically saying that living in Europe in a university city cost anything between 6000 and 20000 euros each year.

Maybe a bit high, but I think I can agree.

But living is a cost all around the world, and universities in Europe add a very low overhead on top of it, while universities in US can easily triple your cost of living, so I still don't see your point

Good for you. I paid around 70 per month and it only covered the subway network between my apartment and the university. Or whole network for 85. That‘s not exactly cheap.

I think this is what John Steinbeck meant by a working class that sees itself as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.

Which country? I should have clarified that I‘m talking about Germany which is certainly part of Europe. And for sure nobody here gets 3000 per month.

In Germany students receive no grant (other than the regular Kindergeld for children) unless their parents together earn less than 40k before taxes.

Really? I never thought that could possibly be interpreted as cost per year. I can clarify that.

My point is that the statement that salaries can be low because university has no cost is wrong. The cost is significant even without tuition and therefore salaries absolutely matter.

And without even a shred of doubt, a US tech salary of supposedly around 150k compared to perhaps 80k in Germany more than balances the extra costs for university over a time of 20 years that the kids grow up.

That would be England and Wales. The countries of the UK have different education systems.

Sorry, that was a typo. I meant to write €300/m. Just looked up the numbers, and the exact amount is €360/m as a subsidy, and up to another €700/m in a low-interest loan (0.59%). This is in Sweden.

While all the sentences you wrote are technically correct, your point is wrong.

> you'll be working right up until our government mandated retirement age

As will an american, unless they're going to go without healthcare? Unless you're doing some _wild_ saving, paying for health insurance as you age is going to necessitate working. Health insurance for a couple (assuming you can get it and it covers anything that you might have wrong) is about the same cost as my mortage here in the UK.

It's also not a government mandated retirement age, it's the age that the government will provide financial support to you. It's feasible for someone on a median income in the UK (where I live) to retire before they hit 66, as long as they prepare. Someone making a median income in the US is unlikely to be able to.

> which is increasing

Again, technically true but also misleading. It's not just steadily increasing, there's only so far it can go. The equivalent age in the US is already 70, fwiw.

> Our economic growth across the EU is stagnant

The horror. Personally, I'll take stagnant economic growth over statistics that get pumped by tech firms that are richer than entire countries in europe - Microsoft and Apple are individually worth more than Italy.

> These are not things to be celebrated.

US cost of living is skyrocketing (they're behind us at the moment, but their COL was already higher so the comparison is tough). Inequality levels in the US are still wildly higher than anywhere in europe (even the UK), the US has massive social problems that don't exist on the same scale here, etc.

These are not things to be celebrated either.

In Sweden you get a student loan and a grant to pay for housing, food, transport etc from CSN. [1] The grant is about 1/3 of the total sum.

I studied at university and my parents paid nothing. Even as an adult student could I go back and get the grant part. In Sweden the state pays for you to study.

[1] https://www.csn.se/languages/english/student-grants-and-loan...

>Salaries are so much lower than our American counterparts

But then again, you don't blow half your salary in health care, don't risk having to claim for bankruptcy every time you get in an ambulance, you have access to the highest quality of education for basically free, and many others. You are also in an incredibly privileged job. In the real world, the US has a higher poverty rate than Germany does.

>you'll be working right up until our government mandated retirement age

So will most americans. And many of them will keep working past that age, because their pensions does not afford them basic living conditions. Just because you work in an extremely privileged sector where some of us can retire at 40 and do cocaine all day long doesn't mean the rest of the world can. Have some empathy.

>Our economic growth across the EU is stagnant.

growth growth growth must growth growth good growth necessary. This is the behaviour of cancer, not of an organised society.

>These are not things to be celebrated.

If you are unable to see anywhere past 5 meters in front of you and half an hour in time, indeed. For anyone with an inkling of reason an empathy, Germany is, objectively, a better place to live in in average than the US. And this is coming from a neighbour that can find plenty of reasons to shit on Germany.

> public strikes (see France)

You mean the ones that are getting ignored and violently repressed with police behavior that Iran considers overly violent ? Don't worry, we're getting to the American approach of a job market: work, or die.

> little ability to build wealth.

France is the third country in the world with the most millionaires.

Even in my poor East German home village I know plenty of people with entirely normal jobs who retired early (mid-50's to 60). But TBH what's the point of early retirement if you are still physically and mentally fit, like your job and enjoy working with people you have known for decades?

> And degrees are only 3 years in France.

Uh, no, France follows the European-wide bachelor's master's doctorate system when it comes to granting european credits. Which means that, yes, you can follow the normal cycle of 3 years (license/bachelor's), 5 years (masters), 7 years (doctorage), and these will basically count if you're looking to study abroad.

Some of my coworkers have 2 years of studies (IUT/BTS). Some have 4 (M1). Some of the PhDs in my company have 9 years, other 11, others are both working and researching at the same time. There's no mandatory 3 years.

It seems like Europe is optimized lower-percentile outcomes, whereas the US is optimized for things going smoothly.

In the US if things go as planned, you have a house, two cars, health insurance, and you can pay for college for your kids. If they don't go well you can be in real trouble depending on what exactly went wrong.

In Europe if they don't go as planned, you still have access to housing and healthcare, and your kids can still get a degree. If things go as planned, you are paying for the people who weren't so lucky.

> As will an american, unless they're going to go without healthcare? Unless you're doing some _wild_ saving, paying for health insurance as you age is going to necessitate working.

In the US, most highly-skilled senior engineers will be multi-millionaires in their 40s which means that they can immediately retire and pay out of pocket for private health insurance covering the entire family without even making a dent on their principal. Even if that wasn't an option, one can get health insurance via one's spouse or work a few hours part-time for an employer that provides it.

I retired in my 40s and spent the last 10 years living in both the US and multiple European countries (with a lot of time spent in Germany as I have family there). While I've so far enjoyed living in Europe, the worsening downward slope in quality of life is more obvious here than in the US. Unrestrained immigration is a big problem that's going to get a lot worse in the next decades and is already rapidly eroding the much praised European social safety nets.

Ultimately, US offers optionality which means that one isn't chained like a slave to a grossly inefficient disintegrating socialist state for the rest of one's life.

European citizen, or EU citizen?

> I wouldn’t want to deal with low GDP growth, public strikes (see France) and little ability to build wealth.

Have you ever been personally affected by something as abstract as "low GDP growth"? Or public strikes except maybe a bit of inconvenience? And what do you need "wealth" for except to reduce financial risks that are much lower in a civilized country to begin with?

Beginning 2013, there is the semester tickets for students, which is twenty euros per month.

Before that, 70 euros? Where were you living, Freising?

Two external rings were around 50 euros at the time, and many students rent inside the (old) 4 inner rings, or the first external one if you study in Garching

> Most capable senior engineers...

What about the less capable though? Do we just forget they exist?

> Here is a realistic estimate for Munich

Munich is the most expensive Germany city, just saying...

> One has optionality and isn't chained like a slave to a grossly inefficient socialist state for the rest of one's life.

I don't think this conversation is worth continuing if you consider the US a bastion of freedom and the entirety of europe being entrapped to socialism.

> In the US, most highly-skilled senior engineers will be multi-millionaires in their 40s

I don't think workers' rights movements and government policies that promote said rights are really centered around uplifting highly-skilled senior engineers. Certainly if you have in-demand talent, migrate to whatever country pays the most for it. You have that luxury

> Also, I can't just get fired without cause. And if I do get laid off, I have 3 months of grace period, plus potentially years of unemployment money.

Which causes companies to be very slow in hiring people, because if business turns they have less flexibility. European countries have some of the highest (youth) unemployment rates in the OECD:

* https://data.oecd.org/unemp/youth-unemployment-rate.htm

* https://www.oecd.org/employment/unemployment-rates-oecd-upda...

in austria the tuition fee for foreigners was (or is if they haven't changed it) dependent on how much an austrian student would pay for tuition in that foreign country.

You don't need to do _wild_ savings to retire at an age where you can enjoy your health in the US, as a tech worker.

Cost of living is skyrocketing where in the US and to what degree higher than its EU equivalent? The EU has borne the brunt of inflation so I'm having a hard time seeing where EU citizens are paying less to live than Americans.

> The horror. Personally, I'll take stagnant economic growth over statistics that get pumped by tech firms that are richer than entire countries in europe - Microsoft and Apple are individually worth more than Italy.

Ok. Economic growth is not a vanity metric for pumped up tech firms to move the needle on. Economic growth has direct effects on comparative quality of life. Trying to make some other, vaguely conspiratorial, equivalence is ignorant at the least.

Or the capable engineers who can't/don't want to up and move to thousands of miles away from their lives.

In Austria AFAIK one can get fired without cause, but if I'm reading this correctly, there doesn't seem to be a massive difference in unemployment against the EU baseline. (Am I reading this right?)

Dunno, I've met several senior engineers whom I would consider highly skilled and while they were well off, it didn't look like they are multi-millionaires. Also, given the trend of firing senior engineers and hiring only juniors lately, I wouldn't count on that trend continuing.

>engineers

Alright, very small proportion of the population

>senior engineers

even smaller

>highly-skilled senior engineers

I cannot even begin to tell you how small of a proportion it is. By the way, you forgot a factor:

>highly-skilled senior engineers that happen to live in the right area (read: SF or NYC) and that are in the right domain

cool cool cool, so a few thousand people per generation can retire comfortably at 40. I'm sure the other 300 million of americans are happy to hear about that. Anything as long as you got yours, right ?

In which country?

I've noticed the opposite trend. Right now, it's hard to find a position as a junior, whereas seniors are still in demand.

That part is true, in Austria and afaik in Switzerland and Denmark too, you don't need a reason to fire someone.

You just give them their notice period whenever you feel like it and you're done with them, no need to PIP them or look for reasons to let them go.

> Which causes companies to be very slow in hiring people, because if business turns they have less flexibility.

This is not entirely true. They are more considerate in hiring which means layoffs, including mass layoffs, happen more rarely as they have consequences.

But they can fire people (and they do) when things go bad. This is one of most common reasons for firing people. What they cannot do is to fire me today and tomorrow hire someone else to exactly the same things that I was doing unless I was doing something wrong and they justify it.

In Ireland at least, there's a probationary period of up to six months where you can be fired at will.

https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/employment/employment-...

> Economic growth is stagnant because energy production and energy import are stagnant. This has little to do with policy.

I can't think of an area of the economy anywhere that is more policy based than energy.

Ah, yes; because the only people we should consider in these discussions are Silicon Valley tech workers, who consider making $150k a year to be "on the low side".

Do you ever give a thought to the vast majority of Americans who make less than you? Or even to the vast majority of tech workers who make less than you?

> Take your pick

I guess this is what it really boils down to. Here in Europe we don't have to establish college funds, go bankrupt because of a heart disease, become homeless due to being out of work or get our kids shot in a primary school. We prefer to take a less materialistic approach to life and priorities at the cost of not being so fixated on "wealth".

Americans are just built differently

>Really? I never thought that could possibly be interpreted as cost per year. I can clarify that

Well, 30k-100k is about right for the annual cost of undergrad in the US and school costs are much more commonly discussed as per year than in total around here.

>My point is that the statement that salaries can be low because university has no cost is wrong. The cost is significant even without tuition and therefore salaries absolutely matter.

That seems a bit misleading as well. Almost all of that cost is unrelated to university attendance. People incur costs for food and rent regardless of whether they're university students.

There's a couple things to address in your comment but I will only address the most egregious as it will take a couple paragraphs:

Comparing economic growth to cancer is extremely incorrect. Cancer grows unchecked causing pain and then death due to a failure of the body's regulatory system. Economic growth happens broadly because your population is growing and you are keeping up production per unit of labor and/or because you develop technology/business improvement that increases production per unit of labor. The latter causes abundance and better life for everyone (even when an outsized portion of the benefit is captured by the creator of the benefit) and the former keeps the standard of living possible for everyone and are very good things. If you want to talk cancer in economic terms that would be market power abuse, not growth. Market power abuse comes in the form of monopoly/oligopoly and the pricing power that situation allows and almost always slows growth (as the monopolist/oligopolist raises prices and decrease production to maximize profits).

In the context of a functioning regulatory system growth is extremely good. Right now governments fail at regulating by regulating both too much (try getting a new drug through the FDA for example) or too little (why hasn't microsoft, google, amazon, facebook, etc. all been broken up by antitrust regulation???). It is correct to lay blame on the regulator and incorrect to lay blame on growth.

Just for some additional context here, look at average housing prices for a single-family home, not even something nice, I mean like 1000sqft 2/2 in a neighborhood without a drive-by shooting once per week. Calculate the mortgage payment on that with the current 7-8% rate. Calculate how much you bring home net on $150k after taxes. Now you’re on your way to seeing why that’s basically “low income” (technically $104k/yr for a single person living alone): https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/low-income-media...

Wait until you find out about Prop 13 and how that new 80 year old $1.5m house you bought costs 10x in taxes what everyone else on the block pays because they got there in the 70s and 80s.

> The comment I replied to did not mention tuition costs.

It absolutely did:

> Tuition was 500 EUR per semester, so around 80 EUR/month.

Possibly it was edited in after you wrote your comment, but it's there clear as day.

And this is in fact a good thing because the state benefits from higher tax revenue as a result of a skilled workforce.

The American obsession with making children pay their own way for everything is counterproductive at a social level and frankly revealing (and sickening) in terms of what it says about us as a people. God forbid someone (a literal child!) “gets something for nothing”.

This is really the core problem with America: a significant chunk of the population is literally mean and cruel and antisocial, in the sense that they oppose the idea of helping others as a concept in itself. People will search for reasons to justify their inherent belief that it should not be done. In fact in many cases they will actively promote cruel and counterproductive policies because it makes them feel better!

And as a result there's really not a single social system in america that is not rotted to the core even if it exists. Social Security is an insane mess to be on. Programs like food stamps are thrown to the states who underfund them in the best of cases, and in many times actually sabotage or deliberately shrink them, even when it results in receiving less money for the programs. That's the goal!

  Talent in Australia etc is just as awesome and doesn't burn itself out while being productive.  Having sane and "fair" working conditions goes a long way.

I was having a conversation with a senior director about 5 years ago about why not opening an office in Sydney. Plus points being high levels of professionalism and reasonable TC (stock comp being unheard off at the time). His retort was well if stock is not there people won't be incentivized. For folks talking about meaning and impact I was shocked how he couldn't fathom the idea that may be people just wanna do an honest day's work for an honest day's pay! Oh well

I think European Citizen, it's been a while since I checked but they specifically mentioned Swiss citizens in the documents that I read.

Munich. And TUM is at Garching. And I paid 70. I know what I paid. It was 70 every month, year after year.

Is there any surprise in an American having such a narrow view where they only consider their own circumstances?

I don't think you showed any part of the statement being untrue.

Kinda seems like you're just arguing that being very slow to hire has big advantages.

I'm European.

You are mixing live costs with tution costs. That way even jobs are costing you money. So it stays: BS

Electricity is 50% of the energy France use. That is policy-based, maybe. hydro is maxed out, we can't install more renewable because producers in Asia are at capacity. The only part we really control is nuclear power. So 30% of French energy depends on policy.

Area more depending on policy: construction, food production, Healthcare, education, military.

I believe you paid 70 euros. I just wanted to highlight that, beginning 2013, that's not a problem anymore thanks to the semesterticket.

I'm not sure how anything you said refutes what I said.

Can you clarify?

Sorry for being unclear: my point was about the "if business turns they have less flexibility" part (apart from, as you noticed, being of the opinion that overhiring is not a good business practice).

Even software engineers are not guaranteed a cushy retirement. Everyone assumes the stock market averages a return of 7-9% per year, but there have been periods of a decade or more where the return was 0 or negative, not just in other countries stock markets, but the US as well. If the stock market, for whatever reason, stays flat for the next even 10 years, which has happened before, it will severely limit even SWE retirement savings by the time they reach 55 1/2 years old. Part of the issue is there are so many limitations to retirement savings. How much you can contribute. Whether you can contribute (if you are not provided a 401k from your employer, you can’t put away anywhere near $20k/year for retirement). Then there’s social security. “Everyone” says that won’t exist in 30 years, so why am I paying into it? Why am I forced to pay into it? I should be able to opt out if I’m maxing out my 401k every year. It’s a broken system to be sure.