| I can't believe a comment that essentially consists of irrelevant objections to the article is sitting at the top. Please don't upvote emotional rants masquerading as arguments. The bottom line - an American economist supporting Hugo Chávez The author's political views do not automatically make his arguments valid. Yes indeed Germans have up to 12 weeks in paid vacation. The question is who is paying for this? You can look at the taxes Germans pay and understand the German government is subsidizing it. First, while the German government might subsidize a lot of things, I doubt that it pays employers for the vacation time taken by employees (except in special cases like childbirth). Even if this were true, since the subsidies would come out of taxes, it would be economically the same as a person choosing to take a pay cut for working less hours. I agree here in US healthcare payment via insurance is not the best solution. From other side in Germany (I know Germany best) the government is subsidizing it. Guess who is paying this? I don't recall the author claiming anywhere that healthcare is magically paid for in Europe. His point was that per capita it costs half has much and provides better outcomes. "...the French could not afford their welfare state..." Again - who is paying the bills. Somebody has to pay the bills. I don't get this rhetorical technique of asking who is paying the bills. Not only is it a bad argument, it is poor rhetoric. Increased leisure time? So what is the point? May I point out that almost all art, science and human culture originally came out of leisure time. Carbon emissions - this was invented by Europeans academics to get more grants for research Carbon emissions are real. They are byproducts of combustion. It is their trading that was invented. Consuming less energy reduces real world emissions, and increases the tradable commodity. |