Re:The Poorest 20% of Americans Are Richer on Average Than M...
by adventured on Monday August 26, 2019 @03:17PM
(#20802812)
> Should they count this as "income"?
You certainly could include that in the total government benefits category (including it into income is questionable and probably unnecessary), which is regularly done for example when tabulating individual conditions & resources that segments have access to. That picture gives you a combination of income, entitlements, welfare, etc.
The US jumps off the page in this case however, as the US spends 10x or more per capita on healthcare versus Argentina.
For example it would not make sense in the unusual US system, to ignore that the bottom ~25% get free healthcare (which is an extremely expensive social transfer). You would want to consider their healthcare picture when looking at their total condition. If you don't look at the comprehensive, then you would miss that the US welfare state has vastly expanded and improved over the last 20, 30, 50 years. That is, ignoring these details is only effective if you are dealing with an entirely stagnant system (not likely).
I don't think anybody would argue that eg Russia pensions should be ignored when looking at any comprehensive view of their condition as a people. It's a fundamental part of their system, their social contract, and their well-being nationally.
You certainly could include that in the total government benefits category (including it into income is questionable and probably unnecessary), which is regularly done for example when tabulating individual conditions & resources that segments have access to. That picture gives you a combination of income, entitlements, welfare, etc.
The US jumps off the page in this case however, as the US spends 10x or more per capita on healthcare versus Argentina.
For example it would not make sense in the unusual US system, to ignore that the bottom ~25% get free healthcare (which is an extremely expensive social transfer). You would want to consider their healthcare picture when looking at their total condition. If you don't look at the comprehensive, then you would miss that the US welfare state has vastly expanded and improved over the last 20, 30, 50 years. That is, ignoring these details is only effective if you are dealing with an entirely stagnant system (not likely).
I don't think anybody would argue that eg Russia pensions should be ignored when looking at any comprehensive view of their condition as a people. It's a fundamental part of their system, their social contract, and their well-being nationally.