Britons richer than US

[Lanya]

[....]
The average UK person will this year have a greater income than their US counterpart for the first time since the 19th Century, figures suggest...

Mr Cooper said: "The UK has been catching up steadily with living standards in the US since 2001, so it is a well-established trend rather than simply the result of currency fluctuations."
[............]
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7174372.stm

[BT]

However, because goods and services are cheaper in the US, Americans will have stronger purchasing power, it added.

[Jwmcc]

And yet, while I was over there visiting last week the PM warned of a "shaky" year coming up due to the credit crisis..

[BT]

Hey Jw.

You do the football hooligan thing while you were there?

[Jwmcc]

Football thing, yes I was in London for two days checking out the sites then up to Manchester for a United match. Our seats were right next to the visiting team's supporters but there was no hooligan mischief.
Jw

[_JS]

However, because goods and services are cheaper in the US, Americans will have stronger purchasing power, it added.

Purchasing Power is a meaningless statistic if income equality is not considered (Pareto or another such stat). And before you consider that the ramblings of a socialist, consider the fact that Equatorial Guinea has the second highest PPP ranking in the world (behind Luxembourg) and I'm guessing y'all aren't standing in line with all of your belongings to move there.

What is not mentioned in the article is that the UK is less unequal (I wouldn't say that it has more equality) than the United States when it comes to income disparity.

[BT]

Should i be concerned with your salary?

Why?

[_JS]

Should i be concerned with your salary?

Why?

No. We need to be concerned with salaries across classes. Why? Because equality is an extremely important goal. Or do you wish to live in Equatorial Guinea? Why not?

[BT]

Because equality is an extremely important goal.

why?

And as your salary is your business, wouldn't my living arrangements be mine?

[_JS]

Because equality is an extremely important goal.

why?

And as your salary is your business, wouldn't my living arrangements be mine?

Ummm...OK.

My point, if we can go back to that, is that the statement on purchasing power (which was made in the article and not by you) is actually quite irrelevant. The reason it makes a difference is because that purchasing power must be attainable by the people for it to have any meaning. I think you agree, or you wouldn't have made the statement that you did as a reply to Lanya.

The contrary would be to have the purchasing power lie in the hands of the elite few and a mass of impoverished workers. Hence my point, to clarify that misleading statement in the article. Yes purchasing power is higher here in the United States, but it is also higher in Equatorial Guinea. Now, does that mean the working class Brit, working class American, or working class Eq. Guinean is better off? Well, we cannot tell from a statistic like PPP.

Make sense?

[BT]

Seems to me if you can buy with 45 minutes labor what it takes a brit to buy with one hours labor then you are better off.

Don't see what income equality has to do with it.

And really don't see where the working stiff has a legitimate claim on the earnings of the wealthy elite, no more than i have a claim on your salary.

[_JS]

Seems to me if you can buy with 45 minutes labor what it takes a brit to buy with one hours labor then you are better off.

Don't see what income equality has to do with it.

And really don't see where the working stiff has a legitimate claim on the earnings of the wealthy elite, no more than i have a claim on your salary.

That's the issue though BT, can you buy with 45 minutes labor what it takes a Brit an hour of labor to purchase? PPP doesn't tell you that. If it did, then that same item could be purchased by an Equatorial Guinean with just 30 minutes of labor.

By the way, there are different approaches to measuring PPP relative to the goods in that country. You can measure it with an identical good in all countries, or a similar local good relative to each country.

The problem, BT, is that a few mega-wealthy can make the per capita based measure present a faulty picture as to who can really purchase what. That is, of course, what we see in Equatorial Guinea...whose purchasing power is higher than the US or the UK. By your standards of supporting the elite, they are simply more productive than Americans or Brits. A simple check at productivity schedules indicates that is not true.

And really don't see where the working stiff has a legitimate claim on the earnings of the wealthy elite, no more than i have a claim on your salary.

That is a different issue altogether, but if you'd rather argue that I have no problem doing so.

[BT]

That's the issue though BT, can you buy with 45 minutes labor what it takes a Brit an hour of labor to purchase?

Depending in the amount of difference between cost of goods vs cost of goods there, i would say yes.

If a coke costs .75 her and a 1.50 there, i would say i can work less time to get that coke and a smile.

That is a different issue altogether, but if you'd rather argue that I have no problem doing so.

I don't think i have a claim to your salary, why do you think i do?

[_JS]

Depending in the amount of difference between cost of goods vs cost of goods there, i would say yes.

If a coke costs .75 her and a 1.50 there, i would say i can work less time to get that coke and a smile.

What if it is a country where people generally dislike coke? Then clearly the price would be higher as demand is low. The comparison would be favorable to the US, but not paint a true picture. 

I don't think i have a claim to your salary, why do you think i do?

As a society there should be a basic level of living provided for everyone. The wealthier the individual, the more easily they can pay into the total collection to pay for this basic level of living standards for all of society.

[BT]

The wealthier the individual, the more easily they can pay into the total collection to pay for this basic level of living standards for all of society.

What does ease have to do with it? If it is an societal obligation shouldn't all share the burden equally?