Sure, these nations might have lower median "wealth" figures, but they also typically have lower costs of living (maybe not Sweden, but Germany does). These countries also have much better safety nets than the US. And if the German savings rate is high, that means they can weather a crisis better than the average American. Americans may make more money, but when they blow it all on an enormous car payment for a giant SUV and a mortgage for the biggest house they could possibly get given their salary, and don't save anything, that leaves them in a precarious position when they have a temporary loss of income.
That's true but there are only a handful of countries doing worse: https://data.oecd.org/inequality/income-inequality.htm
Swedes and Germans aren't going to have to pay a $13k deductible if they have an unexpected surgery, for example.
- don't need to keep beating the dead horse about American healthcare
- cars. In most European countries a car is not absolutely vital. A lot of America is "drive til you qualify", and car issues can easily be above a grand. You need a car to go even to the closest store many times, so quarantine would not really get rid of your need for a car.
you're talking about cities, in rural places, europe is not different than the US.
We live just ouside a mid-sized UK town (and cities down to small/mid sized towns covers a really high % of the population). Between public transport and good cycle/pedestrian routes, a car is not a major living requirement for many.
This is pretty common everywhere across the developed world. The majority of OECD nations have a lower median wealth figure than the US, including Sweden and Germany (their median wealth figures are particularly shockingly low, given the affluence those nations should have vs their national output and given the high German savings rate).
The OECD labor force participation rate is such that about 28% of persons 15-64 do not work. Of the 72% group, a solid 1/3 are typically working jobs where they struggle to make ends meet month to month. The only way a lot of people will have a spare $1,000 in cash for random emergency expense, is if you directly transfer cash to them, and even in that case they will inevitably need to spend it sooner than later.