[whydoyoucare]

I'd like to as in what ways is Europe great? From my narrow point of view, most if not all successful startups were founded outside Europe, most countries in Western Europe tend to be monolithic cultures where outsiders are made to feel like outsiders, and many European nations are socialist utopias (which means they take away a HUGE chunk of salary as tax).

(And I am asking this in a friendly tone, as a genuinely curious question, and not a combative one. These nuances get lost, so putting them down in words). Thanks.

[ponector]

It is great for living, for raising kids. For life.

Taxes in Europe are huge, but comparable with taxes in California. Just sum all federal, state, local taxes on the salary, property taxes, sales taxes, health insurance fee, college tuition fee. Don't forget to add 25% tips to that. Count also small vacation, maternity leave and sick leave.

And then compare for example with France.

And not to mention you wouldn't find anywhere in EU thousands of homeless junkies shitting on the streets.

[julienb_sea]

I'm sorry, I don't think you have sufficient perspective on what middle class life is like in France to make this comment with any justification. French taxation is incredibly complex and heavy on the middle class. It is financially unfeasible for most middle class households to pass down their homes to their children due to the estate tax kicking on assets over 100,000 eur. There are many unhoused people spread across rural city centers and the outer banlieues of Paris. College is vastly more restricted in France and unavailable to the majority of the population. Social mobility is significantly constrained. Life grinds to a halt with some regularity due to general strikes. I am immensely grateful to have American citizenship and not have to raise my family in France.

[throwaway2037]

    It is financially unfeasible for most middle class households to pass down their homes to their children due to the estate tax kicking on assets over 100,000 eur.

That seems OK to me. Why should children who are lucky to be born into a stable middle class family have a large financial advantage over other children? To be clear, passing down an entire home tax free in a highly developed nation is a huge financial advantage. Literally: 1,000+ EURs per month, for life would be saved. Why do so many people on HN think this should be normal to allow? In my eyes, this is the path to Old World aristocracy. The purpose of inheritance taxes is to reduce this advantage.

I can guess what the reply/replies will be: "Oh, but housing is more expensive now. There is no choice but to use inheritance to give my children a head start." It would be better to ask why housing has gotten so out of control, not using inheritance to side step the issue.

[jterrys]

You know, it's interesting. 100,000 eur really isn't a lot of money. I wager decent houses probably go double or triple that. Still, an entire life savings would most likely go into paying for that. Decades of labor in a country with small salaries and large taxes. 100k is nothing. Comparatively, to the rich that dominate the socio-economic and political landscape, it's probably a fun weekend vacation somewhere. I think that's what you dread: The rich that can afford to live lavishly. But you're harking over the barely haves, the not rich.

It's interesting.

A country with dwindling birthrates far below replacement levels perplexed by the fact that its people are refusing to father the next generation when they can't even provide a home for them. (It wouldn't even be tax free, by the way. Because the original proprietors bought and paid taxes on the house. What you're suggesting is double taxation :))

But it's okay. France has solved that problem: Make it illegal to take statistics on ethnic origins, let the poors of the world come flood your land, let them work for lower wages, and then act surprised when their culture is fundamentally incompatible with yours. Your streets are now unfamiliar. Unsafe. Dirty. They don't share your values of cleanliness and respect. Your freedom of expression. Don't worry. Their children won't be able to inherit their homes either. That's fine with them though: because they'll send their money back to their homelands where they can build villas with it, (or comfortably live in a ghetto squalor in Paris because it's still better than the conditions back home.)

[vasco]

> Why should children who are lucky to be born into a stable middle class family have a large financial advantage over other children

The reason why we have inheritances is people in power convinced each other that regular people will work harder throughout all their lives if they know they can give their children a better life. Meaning the economy is way better with some inheritance present than without inheritance.

Love is a powerful thing and while most people would agree with you that in theory they'd like all children to have the same opportunities, once their babies are born they will fight forever to give them the best conditions they can.

I agree with inheritance taxes, probably not 100%, but wanted to explain the perspective of people that want full untaxed inheritances.

[ExoticPearTree]

> That seems OK to me. Why should children who are lucky to be born into a stable middle class family have a large financial advantage over other children?

Are you for real? Because it is not my or my children's fault other children don't have anything to inherit. This is how life works. You do whatever you can to get ahead of other through any means necessary to have a better future. You should not exepect the same outcome for people from different walks of life.

And just because not everyone can afford a house it is not my problem either.

> In my eyes, this is the path to Old World aristocracy. The purpose of inheritance taxes is to reduce this advantage.

So the world would be better if everyone was poor, right? The purpose of inheritance taxes is for the government to steal from your hard earned assets. Just because you're jealous of someone who inherits a big house or whatever will not make the world a better place.

[RugnirViking]

> This is how life works. You do whatever you can to get ahead of other

Except its not how life works. Because we decided to make a law against it. You're trying to argue that the law is bad by... saying that it's not a natural law of the universe (no law is, murder is neutral on a cosmic scale)

> So the world would be better if everyone was poor, right

if you're arguing in this sort of bad faith its pointless discussing anything. Social mobility is demonstrably different across different nations, and policies do exist that actually affected social mobility. Social mobility correlates strongly with GDP. If you want a wealthy society, make it so hardworking people born into poor families can outcompete wealthy failsons

[ExoticPearTree]

> If you want a wealthy society, make it so hardworking people born into poor families can outcompete wealthy failsons

This is a very wrong assumption. You cannot have the same outcome even if you start from the same position - everyone poor or everyone rich.

[peyton]

Well the taxes pay to enforce property rights. It sort of becomes your problem if others don’t have a place to live and you won’t pay men with guns to keep them from taking your place to live.

[ExoticPearTree]

I don't think we are on the brink of societal collapse :)

And it is just like now, I use a gun to shoot people that try to enter my house. What you're saying is that I should have people with guns in the house for the times that I'm not at home.

How is this different than today when your house gets robbed during the day?

[ragall]

  It is financially unfeasible for most middle class households to pass down their homes to their children due to the estate tax kicking on assets over 100,000 eur.

Inheritance tax for children caps at 20%. That's hardly "unfeasible".

  Social mobility is significantly constrained

Social mobility is worse in the US that in the EU, e.g. see https://www.strategie.gouv.fr/english-articles/social-mobili...

[mablopoule]

> College is vastly more restricted in France and unavailable to the majority of the population.

French citizen here, I'm really surprised by what your saying as it doesn't match at all what I've seen about french higher education.

> French taxation is incredibly complex and heavy on the middle class

Yes and no. French taxation can be complex, but it's also mostly pre-filled and automatized. For most people, it's simply a matter of checking if the tax form is correct (and I've never had an incorrect one so far, as my employer automatically transmit my paycheck info to the government)

> Life grinds to a halt with some regularity due to general strikes

There are often disturbance due to strike, but "Life grinds to a halt" is also widely hyperbolic. The last real impactful strike I remember was the late 2019 month-long strike on parisian public transport, which was annoying (and was quickly followed by Covid lockdown)

But I also agree on many points you bring, there tend to be far less upward social mobility than in the USA (I'm always surprised by how fast people seem to be promoted in the USA), and generally more disposable income and opportunities. On the other hand, instead of having everyone thinking themselves as "temporary embarrassed millionaires", it's more accepted that even lower socio-economic classes should have decent working and living conditions, along with a better safety net.

On the plus side, apparently very few place in the USA are actually walk-able, even the malls seems to need a long drive instead of being part of living in a city. There also aren't any food desert, with unprocessed food cheap, tasty[1] and widely available. Also, while there certainly are a fair share of drugs and homelessness, it's quite also quite safe[2].

[1] I know how smug that will sound, but all the echo I have is that fruits and vegetable in the USA taste very bland, and are far less nutrient-rich than they used to be a few generations ago. A friend who visited the USA was shocked about it, and half-seriously though he had Covid when he tried them, and he wasn't the only one.

[2] There are however pick-pocketing targeting tourists, especially asian, but a "hot" neighborhood in France is waaaay safer than a hot neighborhood in the USA.

[sharadov]

If you work in tech - earning's wise you'll still come out far ahead of Europe. Ask the Europeans working in SV.

[unixhero]

300k eur per year

Government taxes 50% of that

[refurb]

No. Just look at taxes as a percentage of GDP and you can see EU taxes are 50%+ higher than even CA.

Then add on top the lower wages.

[throwaway2037]

Do you include that housing prices, health care, and university fees are all much lower in continental Europe?

[refurb]

What do those have to do with the claim about tax rate?

And regardless, if you're middle income or higher, you're paying way more in taxes in Europe than those things cost in the US.

[hef19898]

Plus, there is more to a society and economy than SV style start-ups.

[eru]

Switzerland and Estonia have somewhat lower taxes than eg UK, France and Germany.

[misantroop]

Startups operating in Americas are founded in US. Rest of the world is different. For example, Lazada is huge in SEA and was created by Rocket Internet (DE). Delivery Hero (again, DE) is massive in SEA as well, the US ones like DoorDash have absolutely no presence. Uber isn't a thing anymore either. In fact I see far more European and Asian companies operating globally nowadays, US startups are quite isolationist.