Living in Switzerland ruined me for America and its lousy work culture
ukiahcommunityblog.wordpress.com
ukiahcommunityblog.wordpress.com
Switzerland is one of... three maybe (Luxemburg, Norway) countries with higher standard of living than the US. Not even Switzerland's neighbours (Italy, France, Germany) with people coming from the same populations can reproduce it.
All these great states are tiny (8M people) outliers. There are more people enjoying work-life balance in America than alive in Switzerland. You could carve out multiple Switzerlands of the US if you broke it up and tightened immigration (as the Swiss are doing right now).
To sum up, what matters to me, in what she described, were the consequences of the belief that one shouldn't be ashamed of having a life outside of work, and needing some time and peace of mind to actually enjoy it.
More money won't make me happier if I don't have holidays, week-ends, and some time during workdays to actually enjoy spending it, without being chronically on the verge of a burn-out. This is common sense in Europe, whereas it seems to be considered leftist heresy in the US.
Disclaimer: I am very leftish ( I was very right when I was young; if you will not work fuck off ) by circumstance : by design of what you and me do, there will be no jobs like there are now. And people cannot die in the streets so we need to change things. I spend all my waking ours trying to do that and loving it.
So now we have two pieces of anecdotal evidence, worth exactly twice as much as one (2*0)
There is a law of diminishing returns when it comes to money, past a certain point it's not worth the time you gave up to get it.
Put it another way, when you reach retirement age, would you rather be a millionaire with health problems or a modestly rich person in great health?
There is something seriously wrong here. Many, many pleasures in life are as pleasurable, or more pleasurable, than productively working. For many people, productively working is actually not pleasurable.
I'd probably work Saturdays if I got paid by the hour, but at the same time, if I did and it was a decent income I'd probably opt to work less - and I don't even have a family.
I think you've bought into little more than propaganda. Americans take off weekends. And how do you judge 330 million people when it comes to burn-out, given the vast differences among them all?
I have yet to see a software company in the US with the amount of time off as European companies despite the fact that most of the people I know in the US would trade salary for time off.
It's simply a race to the bottom; with no incentive for employers to reduce the number of working hours (because there are no laws for it, because white collar employees are exempt from overtime, because Americans stupidly believe that they can't achieve work improvements through collective bargaining), it is obvious that they will attempt to squeeze as much work out of employees up to, but not beyond, the point of futility.
So the millions of poor people having to work two or three shitty jobs just to make ends meet chose to do so and want to live like that? Bullshit. Go watch some documentaries about the subject.
It really depends.
I know several companies offering 6 weeks of paid leave, plus holidays, in my area.
On the other hand, that's certainly not the norm. There are many people working jobs which provide no paid holidays or vacation.
At my previous job it was expected that you'd work overtime and weekends if anything remotely important was going on (and not get flex time or anything like that to make up for it) for no extra pay. At my current job there is no such expectation at all and nobody does it. Critical events wait until Monday.
My perception is things are especially bad in startup culture/the valley, but that's not necessarily representative of the US.
I think the real difference between the US and European Country X is the lack of any universal minimum standards in the US. There is the federal minimum wage and the FMLA, and that's about it. There is no federal requirement for paid leave or maternity benefits. But there are plenty of jobs with paid leave and maternity benefits (other than FMLA unpaid leave). So in reality, the work/life balance in America differs dramatically by locale, industry, and company.
Yeah, so on average, the parent's point is correct: on average, the standard of living and work-life balance in the US are abysmal compared to those in most Northern European nations.
I think it's important that everyone keeps defending the liberties and rights that we (in Europe) have right now - and that the people in the US that just accept their shitty working environments because it's considered normal fight it, and demand what I think is getting basic human rights like caring for your newborn without losing your job or getting into financial trouble over it.
I would love to see how it affected Cadillac's sales.
You have to be kidding me. The average standard of living in the US is not the fourth best in the world. The US only got universal heathcare this century, it has a ludicrous work-life balance, the minimum wage in some states is very low (and sometimes includes tipping!), the infant mortality rate is lower than some third world countries, and maternity and paternity leave almost doesn't exist.
OECD better life index:
http://i.imgur.com/ekhWXeG.png
Maternity leave is common in America. You are free to choose your job based on the benefits you desire, including vacation time and maternity leave.
Switzerland and Germany to name two, are famous for not having fully socialized healthcare systems, instead they blend private and public. Poor Americans have had universal healthcare for a lot longer than just this century, via Medicaid. US healthcare has only become particularly expensive in the last 15 years as costs have soared, prior to that the US had a very affordable, mostly private healthcare system.
The infant mortality rate in some third world countries is far more likely to be fraudulent, including in places like Cuba where they force abortions to artificially prop up their infant mortality rates.
The minimum wage in the US is set federally, and all states must at least meet that line. It's also likely to jump by ~50% nationally in the next few years, as major cities move to $11-$15 minimum wages. Italy for example has no minimum wage, and Germany just finally got one. Only 1% of American labor earns minimum wage. The median income of the bottom 25% of workers in America earn as much as the median income in all of Italy.
Vacation time is also the lowest (2 weeks) compared to Europe which on average has 4 weeks of vacation time.
Where did you get your information about healthcare from? Very affordable healthcare in America? Seriously, what are you smoking?
For the top X percent maybe; the US also has a poverty rate of over 16% [1], over half a million homeless [2], food stamps programs to support the poor, etc.
> You are free to choose your job based on the benefits you desire, including vacation time and maternity leave.
Do tell that to the big employers like McD's & co (who are now replacing their employees with order computers after they asked/demanded a minimum wage), Wal-mart, Amazon, etc. There's far too many people who do not have the luxury of choice - and even if they did, they can't get the education they'd need to get hired anywhere unless they have rich parents or happened to be eligible for a grant from somewhere.
And as long as people that don't tip in restaurants and such get mistreated or scoffed upon, don't even start about minimum wages.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_in_the_United_States [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homelessness_in_the_United_Sta...
There are at least a dozen countries I'd rather live than in the US when it comes to well being. And that's not bad by the way, for a country of over 300 million, to rank top 5 or top 10 in an very broad and averaged parameter (like standard of living) is very hard to do. There's a ton of stuff the US gets wrong, but for a country of its size and age, it's a very successful experiment in politics that does extremely well, all things considered. But that doesn't mean it's among the top 10 in standard of living, which its not.
One of the key issues with a lot of these indices is that they have tons of factors that are based on nominal income. So the OECD better life index for example, has about 10 factors, one of them is how much you earn from a job, the other is wealth and household income, another is spending on housing and real estate prices.
But what it fails to mention is that in Germany, university is free. In the Netherlands, I pay about $2k per year and I get an equal stipend from the government for free (as long as I finish, if I don't it becomes a 1% interest rate loan). In France it's a few hundred bucks per year. Similar stories for all of scandinavia etc etc, only the UK is an outlier in this regard. And if you look at the rankings, probably half of Dutch universities are in the top 100 worldwide, the average US student pays orders of magnitude more and doesn't go to even remotely a world class educational institution.
In other words, would I prefer to be an average American and rack up $30k in debt and go to an unknown local university? Or go to a world class uni in the Netherlands for free? The answer is clear.
Which is why purely droning on about income levels is ignorant. Just to make this clear, would you be willing to reduce your income by 50%, if your expenses would drop by 90%? Obviously. Yet you only look at income, and don't look at expenses. I mentioned education but it's really broad. I live in a lovely apartment by the park with my gf for a few hundred bucks in Amsterdam. My net healthcare payments are a few hundred bucks a year for full coverage. Do I really care I could make a few grand more somewhere else? Nope.
You mentioned maternity leave, one of the issues within work life balance that was covered in this thread before... according to your OECD index the US doesn't even make the top 25 in work life balance, they're in place 29. Out of a possible 36, by the way. It's poor. So you have all these financial indicators that say 'we make this much money and it's the most', yet very little about 'things like healthcare is twice as expensive, education makes you a debt slave instead of being free or near free in many other OECD countries', and then to make all that money to pay for much more expensive stuff, you sacrifice work life balance and come in at an appalling figure.
Time devoted to leisure and free time? Oh place 32 out of 36. Must be amazing. You also work some of the longest hours of all the countries in the study. The only reason the final score isn't as bad is because gender equality was better than average. (which was quite suspect given the Netherlands, quite often respected for being a frontrunner country when it comes to equality in many forms, including gender, came in last by a wide margin. Why? Because Dutch mothers tend to work part-time out of choice, considering they're better educated than men and have financial independence without having to work overtime. And the positive effects of that shows. Yet it's regarded as the worst country of all of them.)
In short, I'm not terribly impressed with the OECD index, but I think that's clear to anyone who sees Poland's bottom and top 10% rank better than say the bottom and top of France or Japan, with all due respect to Poland.
Again, for a country of 300 million I can't think of a more successful country or region than the US, an absolutely great feat for a country and one of the reasons I do admire the US, but it doesn't mean that compared to smaller countries it ranks in the top 10, often not even the top 20 depending on the metric. That's not to bash the US as it's not a fair comparison, but if you do want to make the comparison and list countries of 1 billion and 1 million in the same list, then you'll naturally end up with a lot of the small countries that are outliers at the top.
While salary in Italy, France and Germany may not be as high as in Switzerland, they all have longer maternity leave, bigger number of vacation, better public transportation and better benefits than in the USA
I guess we should all travel to get perspective on our local environments and see what's possible with different organizations and beliefs.
In some countries you might even get worker's rights like workers councils, unions on the board, ... If you work for example for Volkswagen, every factory in the world will have strong unions, only the US factory won't.
Nowadays though people can get fired if they join a union, which is why shit companies like McD's and Wal-mart get to continue to exploit their employees. I mean "associates".
It's not about whether it's possible to reproduce Switzerland's standard of living in America. It's about asking some difficult questions about the fundamental aspects of American work culture and how they can be changed for the better.
For example, why isn't there mandatory paid maternity and paternity leave in America? Why does the culture essentially force people to choose between careers and family?
It's funny because you show inappropriate content on TV and everyone goes "think of the children!" and loses their minds, but no one bats an eye when mommy and daddy has to work 60+ hours a week each and has no time to spend with their kid.
Are business interests too strong? Is everyone afraid to be labelled "socialist" and thereby disqualified if suggesting something worker-friendly?
I really do love switzerland, but a proper comparison would be to say, Marin County or Boulder or La Jolla.
I think our pockets of "switzerland" stand up pretty well in comparison.
There's also crap, though; all three are only awesome if you're toward the top of the earning spectrum. And even then the vacation allocations (and the guilt tripping related to using vacation) are pathetic, pretty universally in the US (with a few notable exceptions, but even those rarely give you a MONTH OFF every year and expect you to TAKE IT).
Until we have free health care and more standard vacation time and less expected overtime, there will be no Switzerland in the US.
Only privileged rich people living in enclaves have their own Switzerland experience. For all intents and purposes I'm one of those at this point, for what it's worth. I can take my extended vacations now (between contracts), and a few people I know will take an unpaid month away from work every few years. If I work overtime, it's for a high hourly rate for every hour I spend (depending on project type and client, between $150-$250/hour).
But the majority of people, even here in Boulder, still have a max 2 weeks of vacation a year, unpaid mandatory overtime, and pretty pathetic salaries to boot (considering the cost of living). Hardly paradise. Certainly not Switzerland, for them.
Most of the US has a low cost of living compared to eg Switzerland. In most of eg Texas - most of the US actually - you can live well on $50,000 to $60,000 per year.
You're aware I'm guessing of the economic metrics of the top 50% in the US? It seems obvious to me that in fact you do not have to be mega rich to live well. The top 80 million Americans in the labor force would likely qualify as having at least as good of a life as the median Swiss standard of living.
While many problems of the US are of its own creation due to either ideology or wealth dominating politics (healthcare & education spring to mind), it is quite unfair to compare what the Swiss government provides with the US.
The idea that Switzerland is propped up by tax evasion simply isn't true. The UK thought it was true and actually wrote proceeds from better Swiss cooperation over banking records into their budget .... then discovered there was a huge shortfall, because there was much less evasion done that way than they had imagined.
Much of the money being "protected from corrupt government" was obtained through corrupt activity.
It's unfortunate that most of their Jewish customers were killed by the Nazis. They also accepted deposits from the Nazis, but I can understand their attitude of not taking sides. In the end you want a neutral party like that, no matter what side you're on.
The roots of their respective prosperity and poverty come from the long-term effects of their respective ideologies. The US choses to let corporations evade taxes, and the US choses to project military might to pursue private corporate aims.
Just because a behaviour and culture is endemic and has occurred for generations now, that doesn't make it written in stone.
Other countries start from ruins and rubble periodically. Switzerland grows its prosperity incrementally, without catastrophes.
Twice the Germans started the process of putting together a Swiss invasion and gave up early because they realized they would have lost.
If you're judging by average income. The wealth distribution is so off in the US that you'll find several dozens of countries where people in the low middle class are much better off.
Switzerland 2,335,059 immigrants, 28.9% of population
United States 45,785,090 immigrants, 14.3% of population
Actually, more than the working conditions, the Americans didn't want to go back because of the guns.
Sure, but the standard on living on most of the things she mentions is better than the US in lots of others European countries, even if they're not as high as Switzerland...
>All these great states are tiny (8M people) outliers. There are more people enjoying work-life balance in America than alive in Switzerland
That's beside the point, since that "work-life balance" is enjoyed by the overwhelming majority in Switzerland -- whereas that's not true for ANY city of comparable size in the US.
But I do think the article is right in pointing out a lack of options in the U.S. if you want to live a lifestyle that doesn't center around work. I love writing software but 40 hours a week + 5 hours of commute + 6 hours of software practice + recovery time seems to me to not leave enough time for enjoying the parts of life that don't involve compiling.
> But I do think the article is right in pointing out a lack of options in the U.S. if you want to live a lifestyle that doesn't center around work.
This is the "option" of being both a very small and very rich state, which is simply not feasible.
To put this into perspective, Norway is just over half the population of New York City. If New York City had half a million dollars of oil reserves per citizen (as you point out) and started to mint its own currency, and established immigration and trade barriers[0], yes, we would see a massive quality-of-life improvement compared to the status quo.
But that's simply not an option, because (a) we can't produce massive oil riches out of thin air, and (b) NYC is not a sovereign state.
[0] Norway is not part of the EU, but even if it were, EU member states are able to restrict trade and immigration within themselves to a far greater degree than a city or even state in the US can.
Not so much disagreeing as pointing out that condensing something as complex as living standards into a league table is a somewhat absurd reduction.
In Switzerland or anywhere else in Europe (excluding the east) you enjoy all the benefits mentioned in the article no matter what income or job you happen to have.
It would be more meaningful to boil it down to a different ratio. Even per-capita would represent the differences better.
How is this even remotely relevant to the discussion?
Thats a little bit disingenuous comparing absolute numbers of countries with very different sizes.
I do agree that they're outliers though - seems very difficult to duplicate.
[1] https://ukiahcommunityblog.wordpress.com/2015/07/23/living-i...
(I'm mentioning the original link--so this comment makes sense--in case the HN moderators later change the link to the real article on Vox.)
Or maybe not THE only, but it is a fine excuse.
But, honestly, the only way that this occurs (unless born rich) is if one is smart, ambitious, hard-working, cunning, and lucky. If one is poor and doesn't have those attributes, they'll have a very hard time here. For instance, intelligence will not get one very far, alone. I grew up gifted and talented. All of my siblings were also gifted and talented. But, of my family and classmates, only 20% made it out of poverty. In that way, the U.S. is quite horrible.
Which unfortunately has been cut / downsized thanks to the economic crisis and probably capitalist goals, so the generation after me has less opportunities and can't, for example, do a master's after they do a bachelor's without working alongside it or taking out a big loan.
That's the secret. The Swiss are brave enough to tax the wealth. They are not afraid to do so. They also are extremely respectful of their electorate: They do referendums often and for any reason (building a bridge or allowing foreigners to work in their country). There is a sort of just distribution of social responsibility which unfortunately lacks elsewhere.
If you look for the city with highest living standard in the world though, it's not in Switzerland but right next to it, the beautiful Vienna :-)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxation_in_Switzerland#Federa...
http://www.lawyersswitzerland.com/dividend-tax-in-switzerlan...
ps. Is there any change you're tax-evading? :-) j/k probably to get taxed at 35% you need to be pass a specific amount or something (not sure though).
On the other hand, their tax system seems to work wonders and gives you the impression that there is a strong justice estate.
Wealth tax is usually less than 1%.
But it is always a level society.
I thought that public transportations in Paris sucked, that was before I had to ride BART. Same goes for homelessness, crimes etc... I love SF, there is a ton of amazing places to hang out at etc.. but damn, I do miss Paris.
Only then I realized that the way people live in Switzerland is not something you can take for granted and in the end made me move back.
I always hear people complain about the Swiss mindset and how they should be more like silicon valley. But what these people don't realize is the reason Switzerland is the way it is is because of the mindset.
This leads to Americans never really discovering, en masse, what life in foreign countries can be like. They're just tourist destinations.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Switzerland#Banking
It's cute that she even provides numbers and leaves this out. This is the only number you need to know. Everything else is the direct result of this.
You know who else does awesome? A closed community of multi-millionaires in the USA. Except you're not a part of that elite. Somehow, you got to be part of the European elite (anyone who lives in Switzerland) and feel like the rest of the world can magically live like that. No, that lifestyle is at the expense of the rest of the world.
Oh bullshit, all of the points enumerated in the article save for average salary (which clearly isn't the article's focus) are equally applicable throughout western and northern europe, except maybe in the UK.
> In 2003, the financial sector comprised an estimated 11.6% of Switzerland's GDP and employed approximately 196,000 people (136,000 of whom work in the banking sector); this represents about 5.6% of the total Swiss workforce.
So while it's clear that the banking sector is big, it's not the only thing propping up the Swiss economy.
There are other prosperous countries in Europe (e.g. Norway) that don't have a disproportionally large banking sector, and some which do but recently failed (Cyprus, Iceland).
Pray tell the details.
In other words, not all money held in Switzerland is ill-gotten - they don't care either way.
They were peasants.
Then, over the course of about 200 years, some of these gentry got their heads chopped off or were stripped of their papal lands or were rounded up and put in front of a firing squad and thrown down a well.
But there were still plenty of gentry left, and so a deal was struck: we (the peasants) get old age pensions and some trifling property ownership and a handful of other "benefits" and protections, and you get to retain the landed class privileges you've constructed and ... we promise not to chop your heads off.
Ok, deal.
The european social model is not the result of sophisticated empathy and communalism. It's a deal made fair and square - you stop treating us like cattle, and we won't revolt and murder you and your children.
But there's a converse to all of this ...
What if a population was not systematically enslaved and disenfranchised for, oh, say, 2000 years ? What if there is not an intricate system of landed class and privilege and you build the social and welfare state first ?
The deal still gets made, it just gets made in reverse.
You want cradle to grave welfare and benefits ? Fine. These folks over here will give it to you (the money has to come from somewhere, after all) but they will absolutely assert a system of privilege and class benefits. You won't like it. It's "unamerican". Those consequences will be unintended, but there's no way to leave that equation out of balance.
After all, a deals a deal.
The landed gentry lost much of its status and importance during 19th and 20th centuries, or joined (if they invested wisely) the class what the left likes to call "capitalists". This was caused by what is called "industrialization". Old aristocracy managed to continue to exist in some form in some countries (the UK is great example of that) and the class divisions didn't disappear, but turned into something slightly different.
And the implied threat socialist / communist revolution was part of the deal, but it isn't that simple. Far more important was parliamentary democracy. Of the much praised Nordic countries (the ones Bernie Sanders seeks inspiration from), only in Finland the left actually tried a violent revolution. It failed, and they were mostly kicked out and kept out of politics until after WWII. Compared to Sweden, where the factory owners and unions started to negotiate decades earlier, the deals after that were always worse.
All that great free stuff you want ? You will pay for it. Probably in ways you didn't imagine.
Go look at the economic flows (not the details, just the gross flows of resources) between master and servant in pre-revolutionary france ... now compare those resource flows to those proposed in a utopian "minimum basic income" society.
Those resource flows are the same.
EDIT: to be clear, I am not knee-jerk-opposed to MBI schemes - I find them somewhat intriguing. I'm just wary of them because they introduce a dynamic that ends up being very similar to other dynamics that have, in the past, been quite bad.
Those days, money is more or less a direct measure of power. Inequality of power and social immobility are marks of servitude. In this regard the US doesn't fare well (and has been getting worse): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_eq...
Class struggle that led to welfare and benefits wasn't against the gentry but against the bourgeoisie (factory owners). The same bourgeoisie who had chopped the gentry's heads before.
The cheap land and lack of landed gentry created a culture that values entrepreneurship. Even today America LOVES rags to riches stories.
You can also see that the black community today is considerably more liberal than the general population.
I stand by my analysis since American slaves were (at the time) a small minority of the country that existed in a fraction of the geography and lasted for less than 90 years after 1776.
No portion of americans were "systematically enslaved and disenfranchised for ... 2000 years" and no majority (or even large plurality) of americans were ever enslaved at all.
If your analysis is correct, shouldn't there be a large difference in the social welfare systems between those them and the Nordic countries with serfdom-like systems; the Danish stavnsbånd, from 1733 to 1788, and the Icelandic vistarband, from 1490 until 1894?, or between the Nordic countries and, say, The Netherlands?
Sweden, Norway and Finland all had monarchies, a landed gentry, and a peasant class. If you'd like to make a subtle (and perhaps useful) distinction between "peasant" and "serf" then I suppose that's worth talking about, but my generalizations about Europe include the nordic countries.
"The peasant proprietors, who, under the name of the "Lantmanna" party, formed a compact majority in the Second Chamber, pursued a consistent policy of class interests in the matter of the taxes and burdens that had, as they urged, so long oppressed the Swedish peasantry;"[1]
"Outside the political sphere, however, the peasants were considered at the bottom of the social order—just above vagabonds. The upper classes looked down on them as excessively prone to drunkenness and laziness, as clannish and untrustworthy, and especially as lacking honor and a sense of national spirit."[2]
"The difference from serfs elsewhere was that the farmer did not directly own the life and property of the homesteader (Husmann), but in most cases, he practically did."
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweden_during_the_late_19th_ce...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Finland#Peasants
11% is a minority. It is not a small minority. Slaves were also a majority in Mississippi and South Carolina. http://thomaslegion.net/statesandslaverypercentagesintheunit... .
Your start date of 1776 is irrelevant. Colonial America also had a slave class, starting in the 1600s, which the US inherited.
And where did they get it in the first place? When it comes to money it is effectively turtles all the damn way down.
As outcomes become less equal, a smaller and smaller proportion of individuals foot that bill. We should expect that as that intensifies, some of those folks are going to look around and start asking where their hereditary and class privileges are.
In 1945, the share of the total income of the richest 1% was 11.07%, while in 2014 it was 17.85%. For the richest 10%, 32.64% in 1945 and 47.19% in 2014. A big chunk of the US segregated K12 schools and disenfranchised a race of people that politicians now use as a caricature in order to de-fund welfare programs. Women were kicked out of paying jobs after substantially contributing to the war effort because men came back and expected women to be homemakers.
The belief that post-WW2 America was some kind of glorious classless meritocracy is a myth. It just took a few decades of the natural self-reinforcing loops of capital to highlight the inequality that was already there.
For start "lunch hour" is mandatory and in reality it means you spend extra hour at work. I would rather spend a hour with my kid than eating with my boss.
Second the taxation leaves various compulsory "contributions": social, pension, wealth, tv, petrol etc. It is not 5% but more likely 50% of average salary.
And third, I have totally different experience with american companies. All american corporations I worked for had strong life-work balance, holidays etc.
Her boss invited her to lunch for one time, just to demonstrate that lunch is supposed to be (in Switzerland) something else than eating a sandwich at your desk. If you read 4 sentences further, there is:
"When I was on maternity leave, my husband came home for lunch to help me care for our daughter."
So you are free to spend the lunch hour however, also visiting your home and children. Lunch with boss is not mandatory.
In practice as I'm in a white collar job with flexible hours, this doesn't matter so much. I count as work when I check my email while commuting. If I take a lunch at my desk because something needs to be fixed, I count it as work. Simple as that.
Sure, if my job is very close to my house. Otherwise it's an hour spent neither working nor at home.
I'd guess that is indeed quite common in Switzerland. So having a 1 hour lunch break in the middle of the day makes sense for them, but would not make sense in the US, where much longer commutes are the norm.
This is mostly to protect the employees and depending on the sector, people are pretty flexible about that. Lot of people I know just eat a sandwich at the desk and leave earlier in the evening.
After compulsory taxes and insurances, a swiss household has on average 70.9% of their income left for spending. [1]
[0] https://www.admin.ch/opc/de/classified-compilation/19640049/...
[1] http://www.bfs.admin.ch/bfs/portal/en/index/themen/20/02/bla...
Why? Lunch hour is your own time - I doubt any European places actually require that you spend it with your boss. Hell I walk home, cook a (fast) meal and chill for a bit.
Also, my old roommate from college works at CERN now as a researcher. He tells me that he can't afford to go out and eat since it's so expensive. Is this true?
>There's one thing I'm interested in since this is on HN... How easy is it to start a venture over there?
On paper, it's easy. You go to a bank, deposit either 20K or 50K depending on your corporation type, and they give you a letter. You take the letter to a notary, and the bank gets a doc from him. They put your money in your new company's account. Whole process may cost you 2.5K in notary fees and a few hundred more in government fees.
Of course, there's some more things a company needs than mere existence. If you're looking for capital, it isn't SV. But they do have government programs to help startups and that sort of networking thing. There's contests. What I mostly see though is high-tech university type stuff rather than "guys hacking in a garage".
There's also a number of designated venture parks where you can find cheap office space and infrastructure. A friend of mine rents one in Luzern, and my wife went to see some in the one in Zurich. They're reasonably large buildings, but not entire towns like in SF.
>Also, my old roommate from college works at CERN now as a researcher. He tells me that he can't afford to go out and eat since it's so expensive. Is this true?
It is ridiculously expensive to eat out in this country, and your friend is probably not exaggerating. A pizza can easily cost 25 CHF. You can't do a meal at a middling restaurant for less than 100CHF. And the food is not great for the price. I've been to Michelin star places that cost less money than an ordinary meal at a Swiss restaurant.
On a typical weekend the supermarkets on the german side of the border are filled with swiss people buying all sort of everyday stuff like food.
Gas is typically somewhat cheaper which is why equally many people cross the other way. ;)
It is indeed expensive but salaries can change wildly depending on your position.
I think I could afford to go out and eat out but I decided not to. This way I save money to bootstrap my own thing afterwards and I can find some free time to teach myself the skills I will need to do so.
The procedure to start a venture depends on the canton, expect to put in at least 10k to start, plus whatever the notarial fees will be. I do not think I will be incorporating here.
So... you are going to keep me away from other stuff, but I'm not paid for it?
Also, you might not be hungry. If you live on a low carb high fat diet, you can easily go 12 hours or more without feeling the need to eat something.
And some companies will even go to the length of banning sites like youtube. "Try to kill an hour... but we'll remove anything that could distract you... Have fun twiddling your thumbs!"
Reading the comments here makes me realise how firmly embedded the "time not spent working is time wasted" attitude is.
Time spent not working is NOT time wasted. Time spent away from what I love, while not being paid IS.
[0] - Because if every billionaire in the world moved to the U.S. it would barely move the needle on wealth per capita unlike Singapore, Switzerland, and Luxembourg.
The financial industry is large but not outsized, relative to GDP. For instance it is a smaller component of the economy than in Ireland.
One downside of living here though is that the housing density is fairly high, or at least it is in Zürich. Most people live in flats and getting a bigger place with a garden for the average person is not very feasible.
It stole productive capital and put it toward destruction. The debt cost then goes on perpetually in the form of interest (currently at $430 billion per year), making it even worse over time. Instead of investing into factory production, business expansion, R&D, science, healthcare, infrastructure, long-term economic growth in general, you accumulate a trillion dollars in long-term veteran care costs, and perhaps destroy hundreds of billions worth of equipment, and run up the price of oil, gasoline and commodities in general by devaluing the dollar and destabilizing the middle east - for absolutely zero real benefit.
Switzerland 84,748
United States 53,042
So even if the US passed new employment laws and embraced work-life balance, we would still have only 63% of Switzerland's money to spend on each person. I'm not saying that the US couldn't improve its working conditions, but its unavoidable that a wealthier nation will have resources to treat its working class well.[1] http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=switzerland+vs+united+s...
Switzerland 58,731
United States 54,596
If you then factor in the demographics....It's too complex to summarize it with just one number per country.
It's actually 5 different parties (with only 7 seats in the federal council).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_Federal_Council#Members_...
https://wikileaks.org/wiki/Switzerland:_A_parasite_feeding_o...
The richer guy simply dominates the poorer guy. This logic applies on any scale - person, city, country, continent, social class... People like Jesus were against this system (and personally, I'd abolish this system in a heartbeat if I could).
Of course, you can have a very generous social security system and a great transport infrastructure when you've been financed by crime for decades.
It's probably not the only reason of course, and we surely have many smart things to learn from this country.
Some outliers (Norway, Switzerland) have weird economies, but others such as Finland don't.
In regards of programming jobs, sometimes it's like living 40 years ago.
Racism is annoying, but normal here. And you must be proud of being Swiss.
Switzerland is tiny. Finding (and keeping) friends here can be hard, because if you even dare to fart, the whole village knows about it within seconds.
And you shouldn't use your brain too much, so you can keep up with the others. But I'm pretty sure that doesn't only apply to Switzerland, so you may safely ignore this one.
So's SF.
In regards of programming jobs, sometimes it's like living 40 years ago.
You program with punch cards? 40 years ago was 1975.
Racism is annoying, but normal here. And you must be proud of being Swiss.
You say that like it's a bad thing, but it's a big reason I like Switzerland. Life's too short to be ashamed of who you are.
Switzerland is tiny. Finding (and keeping) friends here can be hard, because if you even dare to fart, the whole village knows about it within seconds.
Same with any small town in the world. You say that like you're afraid of being drug out into the street and shot.
And you shouldn't use your brain too much, so you can keep up with the others. But I'm pretty sure that doesn't only apply to Switzerland, so you may safely ignore this one.
I don't think you'll have any problem with that one.
The language is a challenge as well, though most people speak English
Smaller houses (and places in general)
A very demanding society, basically https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/11pcs1/while_i_l...
I still really like Switzerland.
Behaviors can be quite different ;)
Bit too pretty in some towns.
Too much democracy.
$20 for a chicken expensive. $50-70 for a mid-week not-so-fancy dinner for two w/o wine expensive. Basically, you go grocery shopping and you'll pay about 40-60% more than you'd pay for the same across the border in France.
English is not commonly spoken at all, not in the French part at least. In fact, if you ask if they speak English, you'd get a surprised Non. Just as if you asked if they spoke Mongolian. In retail there'll be always someone who speaks English though, but he'll be there because people like you exist between customers and not because he is a natural occurence.
Residence permits are a bitch if you are not a EU citizen. It's twice the pain if you are trying to run your own company there as you'd be expected to hire locals in droves, who (as you have just read) tend to cost an arm and a leg and come with very high expectations.
Otherwise it's a superb country. High quality food, excellent roads, tons of places to visit and very close to everything in Europe (3 hours by TGV train to Paris).
In the US it is easier to have a six figures salary, but still drive over to a cheaper part of town to buy lunch for under $8, or buy cheap stuff from Walmart, ShopRite etc.
Whereas if you live in Norway, you have to drive to Sweden in order to buy cheaper groceries.
If you live in a country with high salaries and high prices, it just means there are nominally high prices, not necessarily "expensive".
Some parts and some markets of Switzerland are "expensive" for example Zürich housing. The same is true for SF.
If you want Switzerland in the U.S. there is only one option: break the U.S. up into distinct, smaller countries that are able to foster a common culture that can be relied upon to solve the prisoners dilemma inherent in all social welfare schemes.
A side benefit for our friends abroad: maybe we'll stop bombing the shit out of the rest of the world.
Leaving aside the preposterous rewriting of U.S. history in your comment (the US was never like modern Switzerland, even when it was significantly more homogenous), your goal is not possible with the current size and cultural diversity of the US.
If you want social safety nets, you need a homogeneous culture that stresses (irrationally) not taking advantage of them, thereby making them sustainable.
I know this is not a happy thought for you. It was not for me, as well, for quite some time.
Given systems that are equally difficult to circumvent, the type of taxes that would be most beneficial are those that don’t punish earning income and saving and investing money. Things like sales taxes, consumption taxes, and transaction taxes discourage consumption and also discourage financial system manipulation by the super-wealthy.
But I think the Swiss succeed despite this because they have a much more compassionate view towards their fellow citizens and are willing to pay higher taxes if it’s used for things that genuinely make people lives better rather than line the pockets of big business and cronies. Also, US workers have a terrible work ethic and an adversarial relationship with their employers. If you feel you should get more out an employer than you give them, you’re not really understanding how the system works. If you provide high productivity and there is mutual interest in the company succeeding, then taking time off or working a normal work schedule is not anything an employer would need to argue about. A company has to make money in order to hire people. They aren’t a public service. If you’re not productive, then you are probably going to have to work longer hours so that the company can succeed enough to keep your job.
And in general, Americans are greedy. It’s what brought people here as a young country and it’s in our DNA. What works in Switzerland probably can’t really work here. But what actually could work is to use economic incentives to try to encourage a healthier economy. Instead, we waste our time thinking that taxing the rich more is the solution to everything. Sure, they should pay more than lower income people do, but it’s a multi-layered problem.
From what I've heard, that is predominately only true so long as their fellow citizens are sufficiently "like them".
This is not quite true. They do impose a 35% tax on all dividends and interest of bank accounts (if the amount is over 200 Swiss Francs) but you get that back when filing your tax return. However you will have to pay income tax on dividends and interest. The goal is to ensure people don't commit tax evasion by not declaring some of their wealth. [1]
[1]: https://www.admin.ch/opc/de/classified-compilation/19650189/... (in German)
I think her point is more that the benefits she's talking about are average for the Swiss, they're to be expected wherever you work by default and they're not just for tech industry workers.
In the US, they're something so unusual that you feel lucky for having them, even if you work in the tech industry.
1) You have work-life balance, but it is forced on you. Especially women. If you go out around noon, you will see loads of school kids walking home to get their lunch. Full time childcare is CHF30K at my local nursery. School is free, but lunch will cost you extra. And the nursery has holidays, btw. So if you're working you need to either find someone to take the kid, or you have to spend your holiday when the nursery is on holiday. When it comes to school, the kids will probably have more holiday than you, so I don't know wtf people do. Relatives seem to play a big part, especially grandparents.
2) Stuff is expensive here. Everyday stuff just costs a silly amount compared to across the border in Germany or France. Local builders cost a fortune to hire, again compared to across the border. And they're not even local, just foreign guys getting arbed by the local cartel.
3) Sure, you get 80% of salary, for two years, up to a max insured salary of CHF10500, not bad. But you pay for that, too. Or your employer does, so you are paying too. It's about 20%, according to my accountant. And when you do go on unemployment, there's a guy who treats you with much suspicion handling your case. And they still have the same circus of sending you on mandatory courses of zero benefit that they have in other countries.
4) Tax is reasonable. I should say you don't get to keep 95% of the salary. There's a good 10% or so that's a sort of forced saving that goes into a pension pot. It's your money though. And wealth tax isn't crazy, just a fraction of a percent most places, progressive so most people won't feel it.
5) Vacation is very different between the US and Europe. I've never been in need of more due to being self-employed most of my life. But if I were to move to the US as an employee, that would be one of my big marks against.
6) Sure public transport is good. But if you live outside of the big towns it's useful to drive. And there's plenty of parking, too. Road taxes are sensible, and car insurance is cheap.
7) I went with my wife to a birthing course for first-timers. The other couples we met told me it was standard for paternity leave to be 2 days. And 14 weeks is on the low side in Europe, especially compared to Scandinavia. I can't imagine what it's like in the US if she thinks Switzerland is good for parental leave. On the plus side, the birth experience is amazing. You can get a single room (or just upgrade if you got cheap insurance, costs a couple grand) and the father can stay there as well, for a week. Well, that's when we got bored. Until then it was basically like a hotel where they bring you 3 meals a day and clean the baby for you.
- Other things to note: The job market feels rigid. There's almost no unemployment, but as a foreigner with a foreign degree and a foreign accent, it feels like employers are not keen to take a chance on you. The education system seems to be a sort of silo, where every degree course has certain jobs they send people into. In Angloland any degree will suffice for most jobs, which is liberating. As an employer, it's hard to get people to change jobs. I chatted with the CTO of a startup the other day, and he found far fewer good developers here than Scandinavia, and many people didn't want to take the chance. Going around the Zurich startup scene, you get the feeling the startup guys are a whole other world, separate in ethos and outlook from the rest of society.
- There's a social awkwardness quite unlike any other society I've lived in or known people from. Hard to describe, but people behave in strange ways here. There's a lady across the street who comes to stare at us from her window when we park the car. Instead of asking someone in person to move an impractically parked car you get a note saying police will be called (she could see us the whole time). It's generally harder to strike up a conversation with people here (the USA is the best for this btw).
- People don't seem to be afraid of treating foreigners differently to everyone else. The other day my wife's car stopped working at a light and a bus driver got out and told her this doesn't happen in Switzerland. Also hard not to feel targeted when doing one home renovation causes two lawsuits from guys who are clearly just chancing.
No paid maternal leave beyond the employer's discretion with the only exceptions of New Jersey, Rhode Island and California.
I can't find any source ATM but I think the median salary is around $75k.
I'm not judging here, that's not to say Boulderites are slackers or East Coasters only care about work, just saying that I think the comparisons made in this article don't apply to the whole country.
As for getting a job here, I know a handful of people from 'third-world' countries here although the term doesn't mean as much these days (India, China, and Brazil) and they all have MDs or PHDs.
The only other way is as a refugee, but I wouldn't wish that on anyone.
Switzerland does give a small benefit to Americans and Canadians - we get our C permit after just five years. But that's all as far as the benefits go. The system is quiet rule based.
I'm Australian, lived there most of my life. I've also lived in London (3 years), Cologne (9 months), Zurich (almost 1 year) and now New York (coming up on 5 years).
There's a lot of good things about Switzerland but there's one part of this post I think is misleading: taxes.
The poster mentions the low rate of federal tax on the average wage. This is only part of the story. I forget all the specifics but you had to pay:
- federal tax
- cantonal tax
- tax for what part of the canton you lived in (I forget what this one is called)
- 3-6 mandatory insurances covering health, retirement, unemployment and so on
Now I still think it works out rather well but don't be under any illusions it ends at 5% federal. It does not.
In a way it's good because the other way to do this is just to tax you at a higher rate and decide what to do with the money after the tax. The Swiss system is definitely more transparent. You also have choice. You can choose health insurance with a higher deductible to have lower costs. Swiss law mandates the minimum coverage required.
Switzerland is also very expensive for day to day expenses. I seem to recall seeing steak in Migros for 60+ CHF/kg. This was 10 years ago however.
I do remember reading about a supermarket chain in Germany that opened a store just across the border from Basel (about an hour from Zurich) and it had the highest turnover of any of their stores because all the Swiss went there to shop. There were limits on imports of various products like meat into Switzerland.
It's true that the public transportation in Switzerland is simply amazing. If you live in a city there's really no reason to own a car. I can't speak for more rural lifestyles.
Culturally however I think the German side of Switzerland (I have no experience with the French or Italian sides) was difficult for expats. Honestly I found Swiss Germans to be _incredibly_ rude and insular.
Now bear in mind I've lived in Germany (Cologne). Cologne I consider to be one of the friendliest places I've ever been. Like I'd be at the train station and someone would arrive and ask "Wie spaet ist es?" (what time is it?). I'd reply and they'd know immediately I was a foreigner (Auslander) and strike up a conversation. This happened _routinely_.
So whatever experiences you may have about German culture from Germany (and even Germany is a very different place in the Northwest vs the more conservative South vs the old East vs Berlin), Swiss Germans are something else.
Housing is interesting. They have (or had at least when I was there) low interest rates (~3.5%) but owning a house then deemed you with the income that house would get if you rented it out but that was offset by the interest you paid. So no one paid off their mortgages.
Also, Switzerland punitively taxes capital gains on real estate. The idea I think is to not create a speculative market in real estate as they consider that bad. So there weren't the huge swings in property values you might see in the US or Australia. That's probably good.
Still there are criticisms. Like the richest areas have the lowest taxes. This could apply in Zurich (the Gold Coast I think it was called along the east bank of Lake Zurich) or some even stayed out of the canton and, say, lived in Zug, choosing to commute each day (it's about 30-45 minutes to central Zurich).
The details may have changed but when I was there when you got a work permit (a B residence permit) it was basically a work visa. After 3 years it automatically converted to a C permit, which was essentially a residence permit, and you could stay as long as you kept renewing it.
This is in stark contrast to the US system with H1B lotteries and the gruelling torture that is the green card process.
One other thing worth noting was that unless you married someone Swiss it's almost impossible to get Swiss citizenship. I seem to recall reading about families that have lived there for 3 generations since the 1920s and were still residents.
You'll note that after being there 10 years the poster still said they had a residence permit. That won't change.
I'm a little surprised they got residence permits at all actually. One consequence of the tighter integration into Europe (it's much easier to get a work permit as an EU citizen now than it was 15 years ago) is that it became more difficult for non-EU citizens to get one. I'd be curious to know what her husband does/did.
As for the US, I live in New York and as others have said to me New York isn't the US. Not really. I like it here and I'm probably going to stay. As much as I like Switzerland (and everywhere you go really is a postcard) I'm not sure I could live there permanently.
I'd be wary of saying the Swiss way of doing things is better because, to me, the Swiss system probably isn't sustainable in the general case.
Switzerland prospered as a center of banking and of being ostensibly neutral (eg being spared the horrors of WW2). It's a bit like Monaco. I hear Monaco is amazing but Monaco is a haven for the wealthy that essentially cherrypicks its residents. Switzerland isn't quite that but it's similar.
In Geneva for example you have many workers who live in France and commute every day (there's a special work permit for this).
> The poster mentions the low rate of federal tax on the average wage. This is only part of the story.
In my experience, when considering EVERYTHING (e.g. remaining net monthly salary) the overall tax rate in the US (California) and Switzerland ended up being similar and around 30%. However, in the surrounding countries from the Eurozone, tax rates for similar income brackets tend to be significantly higher.
To be honest, I did like living in Switzerland, but my feeling is that a lot of the benefits they enjoy arise from arbitrage situations with neighboring countries. Taking your example from shopping at Marktkauf [1] (right across the German border in Basel), people living in Switzerland massively go there for multiple reasons:
1) prices are generally much cheaper, and on top of it
2) being from outside the EU you can get the 18% tax rate back, so essentially you can shop tax free and bring it over the border for no fees up to 300 chf/day.
Similarly, there's a tonne of P.O. box services in the same town allowing you to buy stuff from EU Amazon sites at lower prices and ship it to the P.O. box address in Germany, pick it up and take it over the border.In general, probably Switzerland has opened up in the last few years, but it still feels like a very traditional (even old-fashioned) country deeply rooted in its own ways of doing things, in spite of a very large foreign population, e.g. around 23% of its population (from [2] and [3]) are foreign residents, who live there but have NO right to vote.
[1]: https://www.google.com/maps/place/Marktkauf/@47.5901807,7.59...
[2]: http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.TOTL
[3]: http://www.bfs.admin.ch/bfs/portal/en/index/themen/01/07/bla...
Too bad OP doesn't realize that this applies outside of America too.
From 1944 to 1963 the top rate was not less than 91% From 1932 to 1981 the top rate was not less than 63%
What I am saying is that you can't compare two countries with such dissimilar profiles without examining and making sense of a lot of data. And you certainly can't conclude that one has a great work culture and the other does not.
Just a few data points...
Population
US 320,000,000
CH 8,000,000
Employment among 15 to 65 year old population:
US 67%
CH 80%
Tourism (arrivals):
US 60,000,000
CH 8,600,000 (yes, more people visit than live there)
Employment
US 123 million
CH 4.2 million
Number of businesses
US 18,200,000
CH 160,000
Number of billionaires
US 615
CH 29
Foreign aid (given to other countries)
US 30,154,000,000 (it's actually double this number if grants and loans included)
CH 2,295,000,000
GDP
US 18,125,000,000,000
CH 688,000,000,000
Tax revenue:
US 3,001,721,000
CH 217,900,000
Deficit/Surplus
US -648,805,000
CH 3,400,000
National Debt
US 18,540,448,667,000 (58,437 per capita; 106% of GDP)
CH 1,610,897,000,000 (154,063 per capita; 229% of GDP)
It's interesting to see that the debt to gdp ratio is CH is astronomically high. Three times that of the US with a GDP that is 26 TIMES smaller. While the budget is balanced right now it seems that a huge amount of debt has been piled-up, perhaps to support the standard of living? This is conjecture on my part, I don't know.Clearly in the US we can do a lot better. And we do this by voting the right people into office. We are at a point where fiscal responsibility isn't an interesting concept but rather a requirement for survival. What we have been doing is not sustainable in the long term, not even close. So, tax and spend needs to go out the window. And no, we can't fix it by taxing the rich.
The differences are huge and, while it might feels good to write a blog post trashing the US, the reality is that nobody --blog post writers and people posting comments on HN-- ever seems to want to take a few hours to throw numbers up on a spreadsheet, build some economic models and try to understand the underlying data. That's where the truth lies. Not in how we feel. That's all bullshit. Everybody feels great just before a tsunami. Yet, the earthquake that triggers it has been building-up underground for years, for decades or centuries. What matters are the numbers. Most everything else is complete nonsense.
I'd like someone to explain the impact of a per-capita debt of over $150K and 229% of GDP on the People's Republic of Switzerland. A house of cards looks great until the reality that is happens to be a house of cards has to be confronted.
Don't argue with me with feelings or ideology. Put numbers up on a spreadsheet and figure it first.
In the end, we are all bailing water in one way or the other. And a lot of what's going on points very solidly at China, in more ways than one.
The explanation is simply that you're using the wrong data. Kind of embarrassing for someone who is complaining about how nobody else understands the importance of numbers and spreadsheets.
The number you've marked as "national debt" is actually "external debt", which is a totally irrelevant statistic. It's the amount of debt owed to entities in different countries by business, invididuals and the the government. It's particularly meaningless because it's only looking at debts rather than both debts and credits. Switzerland is in fact a net international creditor.
The number you should be using is the government debt. Unfortunately it's going to be pretty bad for your incredibly insulting "People's Republic of Switzerland" narrative. That'd be 34% of GDP for CH, 102% for USA.
The greater point here isn't the accuracy of numbers I quickly pulled out of a few websites. I simply wanted to point out that saying "I lived in <insert country> for <years> and <this other country> is lousy" is nonsense without engaging a serious study of the numbers.
I wasn't about to spend a whole day writing a research paper because, well, I am not the one making the claim that Switzerland's shit don't stink.
Is the US perfect? Nope. We are as fucked as can be. And, at the same time, we still remain the land of opportunity and the place from where vast amounts of innovation continue to come from. A simply comparison of the tech startup ecosystem alone shows there are huge differences that need to be evaluated and accounted for.
In other words, if the utopia of Switzerland is so remarkably better than the crap we have here in the US, why is it that Silicon Valley hasn't migrated to Switzerland or that most of the major science and tech companies aren't founded and based out of Switzerland?
To me Switzerland is an aberration. Either it is a house of cards or it is the luckiest 8 million people on the planet. Time will tell.
Oh man, I've been asking for this at almost every company. "Hey, can I work 4 days a week for 80% of the salary?" "WHAT? NO! Think of all the synergy collaboration meeting time you'll miss you won't be able to communicate without being present all of the time what if someone needs to talk to you during the week you must have the same schedule to maximise the convergence serendipity" "Oh well... what about work hours?" "We have a flexible system. We have people coming in as early as 7 and ones arriving as late as 12, both are fine as long as you do 8 hours"
I didn't have the heart to tell them.
And then she claims her $30,000 salary, at seven days a week, turns out to be the equivalent of minimum wage? On which planet? At $7.25 an hour, times 56 hours (7 days at 8 hours per day) times 52 weeks (though she got 10 days off) equals $21,112.
This article is of ill repute.
You've been a democracy since 1292(?). Good luck and hopefully you'll be independent and free for another 800 years.
I pushed myself too hard, but this can occur when you are expected to work till you drop dead from exhaustion. This is what my first supervisor expected of me, because she thought I was a low life piece of shit. I had hardly any experience in insurance, especially claims which a lot of people in the building considered to be the sharp end of the business. Administration on a new claim was estimated on average to take around 90 minutes, it took me a day and a half. I was furnished with written procedure notes (about 40 pages worth), a laptop with no mouse and told to get on with it. I didn't consider this to be unfair, because this is the attitude I have experienced in most of my jobs. I had been in my new role for two days when I was given this task. All the thanks I got was a casual remark from my supervisor "Well, that's our Christmas bonus gone isn't it."
I was often shouted at in the office. Being an open plan space this behaviour was witnessed by about 80 other people. If my queries were not understood at first, the response I would get is "WHAT?!". When the day ended and the office was mostly empty, my supervisor's behaviour became very hostile.
The experience was incredibly stressful. My ulnar nerve issue worsened, so now it feels like I have a knife stuck in my little finger. Also I became so nervous about making a mistake (because my mistakes were over emphasised) that I worked at a rate about 4 times slower than my colleagues. Trust in my proof reading ability was lost, so I would check every single lexicon in a letter of correspondence and rereading my work nearly a dozen times. Some people would recognise this as OCD. I was considered incapable of performing my role, a bit offensive I might add.
I have a suspicion that I was treated like this partially because I am genetically male. My hope is to get a new job in the company's call center, and occasionally I would dress as a woman (or most of the time). I would like to see how I am treated by my ex supervisor/torturer while wearing a skirt, and how someone who is quite religious reacts to someone slowly coming out as transgender. I recently referred to her as a "fucking bitch" in a conversation with one of my other work colleagues. I regret that a lot, because (s)he isn't a real woman, and I'm more of a woman than she'll ever be.
Deleted comment
The divergent views on work life balance happened later, perhaps during the USA's rapid industrialization and sold to the people under the idea of 'land of oppertunity'.
Near the end of the Institutes, Calvin describes and defends the doctrine of predestination.... The principle, in Calvin's words, is that "All are not created on equal terms, but some are preordained to eternal life, others to eternal damnation; and, accordingly, as each has been created for one or other of these ends, we say that he has been predestinated to life or to death."
Wasn't there one in the South during the antebellum era?