sarjalim

Copied my comment response from another post because I think it's relevant to nuance the debate and combat disinformation:

I personally don't think it should be allowed to actively provoke and incite hatred against an ethnic group. Sweden already has a law specifically against this (incitement against ethnic group), which lists religious belief as a group covered by the law. However, there has only been one case that went to the courts trying specifically a Quran burning, and the context was a bit different so it was dismissed. The Quran burning previous to the one in the article has been reported to the police, and imo it should go to trial so we can test the limits of the incitement law. That Quran was burned directly as a statement outside a mosque, during Eid, which is a context that could be illegal under that law.

To clarify, people should be able to burn whatever books and symbols they want and express whatever vile or justified opinions they have under freedom of speech in Sweden- but not in every context and forum everywhere, as direct provovation and incitement. This is actually the majority opinion of Swedes (source in Swedish).

But we'll see what happens. I discussed this with a lawyer I know, who agreed that it should be prosecuted and go to trial so we can see how it fares in court.

I'll admit I got annoyed that OP seemed to almost deliberately misunderstand or discount other perspectives or answers. It makes their pretty open question seem disingenuous. I assume people ask questions because they're interested in other people's perspectives on a topic, rather than just wanting to hear that they are right?

Possibly OP just failed to communicate why they feel as they feel with regards to the relative value of welfare systems, taxes, and salary (they clarified somewhat later in another thread), but it's frustrating to see other people's well thought-out answers being discounted or strawmanned without actually being refuted. That rings my troll warning bell, or imo is a sign of someone who can only see the world through one particular lens.

No problem. My impression (based on an extremely small sample size though) is that there are some trade-offs to working for American companies in Europe, like your American managers not understanding that there are strong labor laws here giving you the right to take cohesive vacation, sick leave and parental leave. Work hours (meetings booked in the late PM for us) and 24/7 availability expected and degraded work-life balance. Essentially that some of the American work culture bleeds over across the pond.

That probably varies a lot from company to company, manager to manager and job description as well though.

The US companies do seem reward talent and performance (or the appearance of talent and performance) with great pay. On the flip side they will also drop you in the blink of an eye of you have a period with mental or physical health problems, or aren't getting good KPI metrics for a while due to circumstances outside of your control (poor management, bad KPIs, being inbetween projects etc).

I guess what I'm getting at is that American jobs are more "big risk, big reward" (but they will discard you the moment you aren't as useful) and European companies don't really work like that.

But I do personally agree with you in general, that European companies both can afford and morally should pay better. However, I feel that that conversation is a different one than the European-American work culture and pay divide.

Yes, any day of the week. OP is either trolling (which I heavily lean toward at this point), has an incredibly narrow world view, or is an edgy 16-year-old who identifies as libertarian.

Yes, and I answered that I think there are more factors, but that tax burden is a big reason?

An American company which has 100 employees located in America and 2 employees located in Europe will have a smaller total tax burden as a company, than a European company with 102 employees located in Europe. Same number of employees, very different bottom line tax burden. The American-based company can thus afford to pay their few European employees more, to outcompete European companies on salary on the labor market.

I couldn't tell you why individual American companies in Europe pay more, but I'm guessing a big part of it is the difference in tax burden for companies based in Europe vs America. American companies have the majority of their employees in the US, and for these employees they pay much less into the system than Europe based countries so are able to pay more for a few European employees.

For example, payroll taxes/social fees (the fees and taxes your employer pays on your behalf) and corporate taxes are much higher in North Europe than in the US. Sales tax/VAT is higher in Europe and, while it's technically paid by customers, companies have to take the sales tax surcharge into account when setting the prices for their goods and services to be competitive on a global market. That means they can't afford astronomical salaries.

What you get for your taxes and employment benefits isn't always easily measurable in terms of "what do I gain economically right now". So let me list some of the benefits I think you enjoy, if in an indirect way or in the future:

Many weeks of paid vacation every year, job security, paid parental leave for months, free education for you and your children, free school lunches, free healthcare, subsidized unemployment insurance, subsidized medicine, subsidized public transport, subsidized access to swimming pools and training facilities, base of 401k savings, "unlimited" sick leave (you can not be fired for being sick and will usually get a good portion of your salary for a very long time on sick leave), free or heavily subsidized rehab and accessibility aids like wheelchairs and hearing aids and modifications to your home if you get ill or old, heavily subsidized personal assistance if you get disabled, etc etc.

A safety net not reliant on your employment.

Additionally I want to ideally have happy lawful people around me in my community and society and not homeless, hopeless, sick, uneducated, destitute and desperate people. So I want to build a sustainable society where these things are accessible to everyone and am willing to pay extra for it.

You're replying in an antagonistic tone to anyone trying to answer your questions in good faith. You don't see the value in paying for a welfare system or income redistribution for the betterment of society as a whole, but many people do. Most of us want to not live in a dystopian nightmare where there are haves and have-nots depending on luck or misfortune. Not saying that the US is quite there, but there is a lot less of a societal buffer between you and total destitution after an adverse event there.

This is the reason why US employers have to pay more, they have to offer more due to the bigger inherent risk to every employee on a life basis (at-will employment, you're responsible for your own 401k and health insurance and education and transportation and remaining healthy and capable enough to work your whole life). If you can't be sure of your future source of income, you have to charge your employer more. This is also why consultants are paid better in Europe than direct employees, because consultants take a bigger risk.

Beautiful!