elindbe3

Its actually quite amazing, given those numbers, that things actually work in Norway. From what you're describing, somehow 1/2 of the working age population is able to support the other half of the working and a sizeable non working population.

No, there are fixed and variable rate mortgages.

Someone who can only lend at negative real interest rates and/or projects negative market growth.

A poorly executed conspiracy is still a conspiracy.

So they can just ignore the advice in the article if it doesn't apply to them. What's your point? People should only write articles from the perspective of extreme poverty?

So that college students can freely break the rules? I like that idea.

Actually if you look at wealth inequality, the Gini coefficient is higher for the Netherlands and Sweden than for the US. Denmark is pretty close as well. The benefits these countries have is the better life for people at the bottom and less income inequality.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_wealth_...

Its the exact same in the US. Definitely a false dichotomy between $100 steak and "fast-food steak".

The poverty line is a general guideline. It doesn't take into account particular circumstances.

I'd prefer not to have to keep making the "life or death" argument but people continually bring it up, probably to try to conflate it with the question of "should you be able to live comfortably without working?"

I would argue you can already live a comfortable life with a minimum of work (say 20h per week part time at big city minimum wage, $13/hr). For example, in Chicago you could rent a room with heating and AC, cook your own basic but flavorful meals, have healthcare through Medicaid and basic transportation on the bus/trains, thrift store clothing and a cheap cell phone with data plan for internet.

Buy a one way ticket to Southern California, buy a tent and apply for SNAP and Medicaid.

At least if we're talking about the US (and probably EU as well), it isn't the choice between life and death. Anyone can go be homeless in California and get a couple hundred a month in food stamps and medicaid. Or panhandle a few hundred a month from tourists.

I agree you shouldn't literally die if you choose not to work in a first world country, but you should only receive the bare minimum to keep you alive (e.g. a tent, basic medical treatment and a steady diet of government cheese).