Electric Vehicles Market Share: We’re Number 21
During the first half of 2023, Tesla ranked as Number 1 (Model Y) and Number 2 (Model 3) in the worldwide EV market. The next four positions were held by the Chinese company BYD. Chinese companies held twelve of the twenty top spots in EV sales during this time. Chinese EV manufacturers are producing highly sophisticated, beautifully designed, and most importantly, affordable vehicles, that are rapidly filling markets throughout the world—except for the United States. In May 2024, the Biden administration imposed a 100 percent tariff on Chinese EVs. President Biden justified the move to protect American jobs and market share, arguing that the Chinese “are flooding the market. It’s not competing—it’s cheating.” Indeed, the threat was real. Ford Motor Company CEO Jim Farley was “shocked” in a 2024 visit to China, seeing first-hand the extraordinary improvement in manufacturing, design, and features in Chinese EVs. Ford, which until very recently had been the second ranked EV producer (behind Tesla) in the United States, had been losing an estimated $36,000 on each of the 36,000 EVs it had delivered to its dealers during the third quarter of 2024. General Motors postponed plans for a $4 billion electric vehicle plant to be opened in Michigan.
The government of China has determined that the production of EVs would be a strategic investment, providing economic benefits as well as reducing air pollution and dependence on foreign oil. By 2022, the automobile company BYD had sold 1.85 million EVs, becoming the world’s second largest producer, behind Tesla; in 2023, BYD became the world leader in fully electric cars. Its best-selling EV, the Seagull, sells for around $11,000. Currently, the Chinese consumer can choose from almost 300 models; in addition, 80 percent of the top EVs sold in China are made by Chinese companies. Like Norway, China has offered a series of subsidies and tax breaks, both for the manufacturers of EVs and their customers, often making EVs cheaper than ICE vehicles. For BYD, the Chinese government had invested $2.6 billion from 2008 through 2022; the company was also given critical assistance from American investor Warren E. Buffet, who bought 10 percent of BYD in 2008, giving the company a critical infusion of cash. The central government also has invested in 760,000 public fast-charging stations and 1 million public slower-charging stations—more than the rest of the world combined. It also adopted a variation of the California zero-emissions mandate to eventually replace subsidies.
As journalist Joel Jaeger noted, “policies mandating 100 percent EV sales are the single most effective policy to drive the transition. Currently, sixteen countries including Canada, Japan and the United Kingdom, have some form of policy mandating 100 percent EV sales in 2035 or earlier.”
Sources: José Pontes, “World EV Sales Now 19% of World Sales!” CleanTechnica.com, August 2, 2023, https://cleantechnica.com/2023/08/02/world-ev-sales-now-19-of-world-auto-sales/; Mike Colias, “What Scared Ford’s CEO in China,” Wall Street Journal, September 14, 2024, https://www.wsj.com/business/autos/ford-china-ev-competition-farley-ceo-50ded461; Biden quote from Natalie Sherman, “Biden Hits Chinese Electric Cars and Solar Cells with Higher Tariffs,” BBC, May 14, 2024, https://www.bbc.com/news/business-69004520; David Shepherdson and Nathan Gomes, “Ford Cuts F-150 Lightning Production as EV Demand Softens,” Reuters, January 19, 2024, https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/ford-reduce-f-150-lightning-production-2024-01-19/#:~:text=Ford%20lost%20an%20estimated%20%2436%2C000,sales%20of%20gas%2Delectric%20hybrids; Keith Bradsher, “How China built BYD, Its Tesla Killer,” New York Times, February 10, 2023, https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/12/business/byd-china-electric-vehicle.html; Joel Jaeger, “These Countries Are Adopting Electric Vehicles the Fastest,” World Resources Institute, September 14, 2023, https://www.wri.org/insights/countries-adopting-electric-vehicles-fastest#:~:text=The%20top%205%20countries%20with,%25)%2C%20according%20to%20our%20analysis.
Topping the list of EV adoptions is Norway, which in 2022 saw 87.8 percent of its new automobiles as EVs; in 2013, that figure was just 6.1 percent. Iceland is 2nd, with 56.1 percent new car adoptions (1.3 percent in 2013); Sweden is tied for 2nd with 56.1 percent adoption (0.7 percent in 2013); Denmark is 4th, with 38.6 percent adoption (0.3 in 2013), and Finland is 5th, with 37.5 percent adoption (none in 2013).
The United States comes in 21st place, with 7.7 percent EV adoption in 2022, with a 0.16 percent adoption in 2013.
But with the second Trump administration, electric vehicles were no longer a priority. Trump, two months before taking office for his second term, vowed to get rid of the $7,500 tax credit for electric vehicle purchases. His close adviser, Elon Musk, heartily agreed. “Take away the subsidies, it will only help Tesla,” Musk posted on X, the social media platform he owns. The elimination of the tax credit would most likely hurt General Motors, Ford, Rivian, and Stellantis—the weakest American rivals to Tesla. On January 20, 2025, his first day in office, Trump cancelled the EV tax credit. Edmunds.com, an automobile purchasing guide, warned that “the potential elimination of the federal tax credit for electric vehicles by the Trump administration—without another form of incentive to replace it—could derail the trajectory of EV sales in the United States.”
Sources: Executive Order, “Unleashing American Energy,” White House, January 20, 2025, https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/unleashing-american-energy; /Kate Gibson, “Trump’s Win Could Sharply Raise the Cost of Electric Vehicles. Here’s Why,” CBS News, November 15,2024, https://www.cbsnews.com/news/tesla-elon-musk-donald-trump-ev-tax-credit/.
During the first half of 2023, Tesla ranked as Number 1 (Model Y) and Number 2 (Model 3) in the worldwide EV market. The next four positions were held by the Chinese company BYD. Chinese companies held twelve of the twenty top spots in EV sales during this time. Chinese EV manufacturers are producing highly sophisticated, beautifully designed, and most importantly, affordable vehicles, that are rapidly filling markets throughout the world—except for the United States. In May 2024, the Biden administration imposed a 100 percent tariff on Chinese EVs. President Biden justified the move to protect American jobs and market share, arguing that the Chinese “are flooding the market. It’s not competing—it’s cheating.” Indeed, the threat was real. Ford Motor Company CEO Jim Farley was “shocked” in a 2024 visit to China, seeing first-hand the extraordinary improvement in manufacturing, design, and features in Chinese EVs. Ford, which until very recently had been the second ranked EV producer (behind Tesla) in the United States, had been losing an estimated $36,000 on each of the 36,000 EVs it had delivered to its dealers during the third quarter of 2024. General Motors postponed plans for a $4 billion electric vehicle plant to be opened in Michigan.
The government of China has determined that the production of EVs would be a strategic investment, providing economic benefits as well as reducing air pollution and dependence on foreign oil. By 2022, the automobile company BYD had sold 1.85 million EVs, becoming the world’s second largest producer, behind Tesla; in 2023, BYD became the world leader in fully electric cars. Its best-selling EV, the Seagull, sells for around $11,000. Currently, the Chinese consumer can choose from almost 300 models; in addition, 80 percent of the top EVs sold in China are made by Chinese companies. Like Norway, China has offered a series of subsidies and tax breaks, both for the manufacturers of EVs and their customers, often making EVs cheaper than ICE vehicles. For BYD, the Chinese government had invested $2.6 billion from 2008 through 2022; the company was also given critical assistance from American investor Warren E. Buffet, who bought 10 percent of BYD in 2008, giving the company a critical infusion of cash. The central government also has invested in 760,000 public fast-charging stations and 1 million public slower-charging stations—more than the rest of the world combined. It also adopted a variation of the California zero-emissions mandate to eventually replace subsidies.
As journalist Joel Jaeger noted, “policies mandating 100 percent EV sales are the single most effective policy to drive the transition. Currently, sixteen countries including Canada, Japan and the United Kingdom, have some form of policy mandating 100 percent EV sales in 2035 or earlier.”
Sources: José Pontes, “World EV Sales Now 19% of World Sales!” CleanTechnica.com, August 2, 2023, https://cleantechnica.com/2023/08/02/world-ev-sales-now-19-of-world-auto-sales/; Mike Colias, “What Scared Ford’s CEO in China,” Wall Street Journal, September 14, 2024, https://www.wsj.com/business/autos/ford-china-ev-competition-farley-ceo-50ded461; Biden quote from Natalie Sherman, “Biden Hits Chinese Electric Cars and Solar Cells with Higher Tariffs,” BBC, May 14, 2024, https://www.bbc.com/news/business-69004520; David Shepherdson and Nathan Gomes, “Ford Cuts F-150 Lightning Production as EV Demand Softens,” Reuters, January 19, 2024, https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/ford-reduce-f-150-lightning-production-2024-01-19/#:~:text=Ford%20lost%20an%20estimated%20%2436%2C000,sales%20of%20gas%2Delectric%20hybrids; Keith Bradsher, “How China built BYD, Its Tesla Killer,” New York Times, February 10, 2023, https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/12/business/byd-china-electric-vehicle.html; Joel Jaeger, “These Countries Are Adopting Electric Vehicles the Fastest,” World Resources Institute, September 14, 2023, https://www.wri.org/insights/countries-adopting-electric-vehicles-fastest#:~:text=The%20top%205%20countries%20with,%25)%2C%20according%20to%20our%20analysis.
Topping the list of EV adoptions is Norway, which in 2022 saw 87.8 percent of its new automobiles as EVs; in 2013, that figure was just 6.1 percent. Iceland is 2nd, with 56.1 percent new car adoptions (1.3 percent in 2013); Sweden is tied for 2nd with 56.1 percent adoption (0.7 percent in 2013); Denmark is 4th, with 38.6 percent adoption (0.3 in 2013), and Finland is 5th, with 37.5 percent adoption (none in 2013).
The United States comes in 21st place, with 7.7 percent EV adoption in 2022, with a 0.16 percent adoption in 2013.
But with the second Trump administration, electric vehicles were no longer a priority. Trump, two months before taking office for his second term, vowed to get rid of the $7,500 tax credit for electric vehicle purchases. His close adviser, Elon Musk, heartily agreed. “Take away the subsidies, it will only help Tesla,” Musk posted on X, the social media platform he owns. The elimination of the tax credit would most likely hurt General Motors, Ford, Rivian, and Stellantis—the weakest American rivals to Tesla. On January 20, 2025, his first day in office, Trump cancelled the EV tax credit. Edmunds.com, an automobile purchasing guide, warned that “the potential elimination of the federal tax credit for electric vehicles by the Trump administration—without another form of incentive to replace it—could derail the trajectory of EV sales in the United States.”
Sources: Executive Order, “Unleashing American Energy,” White House, January 20, 2025, https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/unleashing-american-energy; /Kate Gibson, “Trump’s Win Could Sharply Raise the Cost of Electric Vehicles. Here’s Why,” CBS News, November 15,2024, https://www.cbsnews.com/news/tesla-elon-musk-donald-trump-ev-tax-credit/.
Road Quality: We’re Number 17
The US received high marks in terms of road connectivity, ranking Number One in road connectivity, according to a survey conducted by the World Atlas. Altogether, there are 4.2 million miles of highway in the US, including Hawaii and Alaska. Just 1 percent of the road network is made up of the Interstate Highway system; but that 1 percent carries 25 percent of all auto and truck traffic. Along with the Interstate system are 175,000 miles of major roadways, maintained by both the federal government and state governments. About 77 percent of the American roadway is maintained by local governments and 19 percent is maintained by state governments.
The World Economic Forum, through its Executive Opinion Survey, asked 14,000 business leaders in 144 countries to rate the quality of their country’s road system. Just one question was asked: rate the roads on a scale of 1 (underdeveloped) to 7 (extensive and efficient by international standards). In the most recent World Economic Forum survey, the road quality in the US was given a score of 5.5 (out of 7), and the US ranked 17th in the world in quality of its roads. One estimate was that 200,000 miles of major highways were in mediocre condition and in need of critical repair and that nearly 8 percent of bridges were structurally deficient.
Ranking highest in road quality were Singapore, Netherlands, Switzerland, Hong Kong, Japan, and Austria.
Sources: “Top 10 Countries with the Best Road Connectivity,” World Atlas, n.d., https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/top-10-countries-with-the-best-road-connectivity.html#:~:text=Road%20Network%20In%20The%20United,one%2Dquarter%20of%20the%20traffic. GlobalEconomy.com, https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/rankings/roads_quality/; data from World Economic Forum.
The US received high marks in terms of road connectivity, ranking Number One in road connectivity, according to a survey conducted by the World Atlas. Altogether, there are 4.2 million miles of highway in the US, including Hawaii and Alaska. Just 1 percent of the road network is made up of the Interstate Highway system; but that 1 percent carries 25 percent of all auto and truck traffic. Along with the Interstate system are 175,000 miles of major roadways, maintained by both the federal government and state governments. About 77 percent of the American roadway is maintained by local governments and 19 percent is maintained by state governments.
The World Economic Forum, through its Executive Opinion Survey, asked 14,000 business leaders in 144 countries to rate the quality of their country’s road system. Just one question was asked: rate the roads on a scale of 1 (underdeveloped) to 7 (extensive and efficient by international standards). In the most recent World Economic Forum survey, the road quality in the US was given a score of 5.5 (out of 7), and the US ranked 17th in the world in quality of its roads. One estimate was that 200,000 miles of major highways were in mediocre condition and in need of critical repair and that nearly 8 percent of bridges were structurally deficient.
Ranking highest in road quality were Singapore, Netherlands, Switzerland, Hong Kong, Japan, and Austria.
Sources: “Top 10 Countries with the Best Road Connectivity,” World Atlas, n.d., https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/top-10-countries-with-the-best-road-connectivity.html#:~:text=Road%20Network%20In%20The%20United,one%2Dquarter%20of%20the%20traffic. GlobalEconomy.com, https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/rankings/roads_quality/; data from World Economic Forum.
Life Expectancy: We’re Number 27
Life expectancy in the United States has seen a “historic decline” since 2015, the biggest decrease in a century, partly due to the opioid crisis and party due to the COVID pandemic. In 2019, before the pandemic, life expectancy in the United States was 78.85 years; in 2020, in decreased to 76.98 years, and in 2021 decreased again to 76.44 years. Altogether, there was a net loss of life expectancy of 2.41 years. Hit the hardest during the pandemic were Hispanic, Black, Native American, and Asian populations. But in 2021, the largest decreases occurred in non-Hispanic white population.
Jessica Y. Ho found that “life expectancy in the United States lags well behind that of other high-income countries,” dropping from near the middle in the 1980s to near the bottom in the mid-2000s. Her study found that American men lived 5.18 years lower and American women lived 5.82 years lower than their peers in the world’s high-income countries. Young Americans, ages 25-29, have experienced death rates three times their counterparts.
In their study of early deaths in America, titled “Missing Americans,” Jacob Bor and his colleagues note that 1 million US deaths in 2020 and another 1.1 million US deaths in 2021 “would have been averted if the United States had the mortality rates of other wealthy nations.” They note that the number of excess US deaths relative to its peers is “unprecedented in modern times.”
In 2006, a report called the Eight Americas study examined the health inequities in the United States by separating out and analyzing eight distinct groups based on race, urbanicity, geography, income per capita, and homicide rates. In a November 2024 study, the Eight Americas groups were expanded to ten. The authors of the new study found the disparities “truly alarming,” with over a twenty-year gap in life expectancy between the highest group (Asian Americans, who lived an average of 84 years) and the lowest (American Indian and Alaska Native persons, who lived an average of 63.6 years). One of the lead authors, Christopher J.L. Murray, stated that "These disparities reflect the unequal and unjust distribution of resources and opportunities that have profound consequences on well-being and longevity, especially in marginalized populations."
What countries do better in life expectancy? First is Japan, with a life expectancy of 84.45 years; in second place is Switzerland (83.85); then South Korea (83.53), Australia (83.30), and Spain (83.18). The United States comes in 27th with an average life expectancy of 76.33.
Sources: Claire Klobucista, “US Life Expectancy Is in Decline. Why Aren’t Other Countries Suffering the Same Problem?” Council on Foreign Relations (September 8, 2022), https://www.cfr.org/in-brief/us-life-expectancy-decline-why-arent-other-countries-suffering-same-problem#:~:text=U.S.%20life%20expectancy%20was%20slightly,States%20have%20higher%20life%20expectancie. Ryan K. Masters, Laudan Y. Aron, and Steven H. Woolf, “Changes in Life Expectancy Between 2019 and 2021 in the United States and 21 Peer Countries,” MedRxiv, June 1, 2021, https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.04.05.22273393v4. Jessica Y. Ho, “Causes of America’s Lagging Life Expectancy: An International Comparative Perspective,” Journals of Gerontology: SOCIAL SCIENCES, 2022 77 (S2), https://academic.oup.com/psychsocgerontology/article/77/Supplement_2/S117/6533432. Jacob Bor, Andrew Stokes, Julia Raifman, Atheendar Venkataramani, Mary T. Bassett, David Himmelstein, and Steffie Woolhandler, “Missing Americans: Early Death in the United States—1933-2021,” PNAS Nexus 2 (6) (June 2023), https://doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgad173. Laura Dwyer-Lindgren, Mathew M. Bauman, Zuochen Li, Yikaterina O. Kelly, Chris Schmidt, Chloe Searchinger, et al., “Ten Americas: A Systematic Analysis of Life Expectancy Disparities in the USA,” The Lancet, November 21, 2024, https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(24)01495-8/fulltext. The ten Americas are defined as: “America 1—Asian individuals; America 2—Latino individuals in other counties; America 3—White (majority), Asian, and American Indian or Alaska Native (AIAN) individuals in other counties; America 4—White individuals in non-metropolitan and low-income Northlands; America 5—Latino individuals in the Southwest; America 6—Black individuals in other counties; America 7—Black individuals in highly segregated metropolitan areas; America 8—White individuals in low-income Appalachia and Lower Mississippi Valley; America 9—Black individuals in the non-metropolitan and low-income South; and America 10—AIAN individuals in the West.” Murray quoted in Sara Moniuszko, “Life Expectancy Gap in US Widens to 20 Years Due to ‘Truly Alarming’ Health Disparities, Researchers Say,” CBS News, November 21, 2024, https://www.cbsnews.com/news/life-expectancy-gap-20-years/. “Life Expectancy at Birth, Total Years,” World Bank, https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.DYN.LE00.IN).
Life expectancy in the United States has seen a “historic decline” since 2015, the biggest decrease in a century, partly due to the opioid crisis and party due to the COVID pandemic. In 2019, before the pandemic, life expectancy in the United States was 78.85 years; in 2020, in decreased to 76.98 years, and in 2021 decreased again to 76.44 years. Altogether, there was a net loss of life expectancy of 2.41 years. Hit the hardest during the pandemic were Hispanic, Black, Native American, and Asian populations. But in 2021, the largest decreases occurred in non-Hispanic white population.
Jessica Y. Ho found that “life expectancy in the United States lags well behind that of other high-income countries,” dropping from near the middle in the 1980s to near the bottom in the mid-2000s. Her study found that American men lived 5.18 years lower and American women lived 5.82 years lower than their peers in the world’s high-income countries. Young Americans, ages 25-29, have experienced death rates three times their counterparts.
In their study of early deaths in America, titled “Missing Americans,” Jacob Bor and his colleagues note that 1 million US deaths in 2020 and another 1.1 million US deaths in 2021 “would have been averted if the United States had the mortality rates of other wealthy nations.” They note that the number of excess US deaths relative to its peers is “unprecedented in modern times.”
In 2006, a report called the Eight Americas study examined the health inequities in the United States by separating out and analyzing eight distinct groups based on race, urbanicity, geography, income per capita, and homicide rates. In a November 2024 study, the Eight Americas groups were expanded to ten. The authors of the new study found the disparities “truly alarming,” with over a twenty-year gap in life expectancy between the highest group (Asian Americans, who lived an average of 84 years) and the lowest (American Indian and Alaska Native persons, who lived an average of 63.6 years). One of the lead authors, Christopher J.L. Murray, stated that "These disparities reflect the unequal and unjust distribution of resources and opportunities that have profound consequences on well-being and longevity, especially in marginalized populations."
What countries do better in life expectancy? First is Japan, with a life expectancy of 84.45 years; in second place is Switzerland (83.85); then South Korea (83.53), Australia (83.30), and Spain (83.18). The United States comes in 27th with an average life expectancy of 76.33.
Sources: Claire Klobucista, “US Life Expectancy Is in Decline. Why Aren’t Other Countries Suffering the Same Problem?” Council on Foreign Relations (September 8, 2022), https://www.cfr.org/in-brief/us-life-expectancy-decline-why-arent-other-countries-suffering-same-problem#:~:text=U.S.%20life%20expectancy%20was%20slightly,States%20have%20higher%20life%20expectancie. Ryan K. Masters, Laudan Y. Aron, and Steven H. Woolf, “Changes in Life Expectancy Between 2019 and 2021 in the United States and 21 Peer Countries,” MedRxiv, June 1, 2021, https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.04.05.22273393v4. Jessica Y. Ho, “Causes of America’s Lagging Life Expectancy: An International Comparative Perspective,” Journals of Gerontology: SOCIAL SCIENCES, 2022 77 (S2), https://academic.oup.com/psychsocgerontology/article/77/Supplement_2/S117/6533432. Jacob Bor, Andrew Stokes, Julia Raifman, Atheendar Venkataramani, Mary T. Bassett, David Himmelstein, and Steffie Woolhandler, “Missing Americans: Early Death in the United States—1933-2021,” PNAS Nexus 2 (6) (June 2023), https://doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgad173. Laura Dwyer-Lindgren, Mathew M. Bauman, Zuochen Li, Yikaterina O. Kelly, Chris Schmidt, Chloe Searchinger, et al., “Ten Americas: A Systematic Analysis of Life Expectancy Disparities in the USA,” The Lancet, November 21, 2024, https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(24)01495-8/fulltext. The ten Americas are defined as: “America 1—Asian individuals; America 2—Latino individuals in other counties; America 3—White (majority), Asian, and American Indian or Alaska Native (AIAN) individuals in other counties; America 4—White individuals in non-metropolitan and low-income Northlands; America 5—Latino individuals in the Southwest; America 6—Black individuals in other counties; America 7—Black individuals in highly segregated metropolitan areas; America 8—White individuals in low-income Appalachia and Lower Mississippi Valley; America 9—Black individuals in the non-metropolitan and low-income South; and America 10—AIAN individuals in the West.” Murray quoted in Sara Moniuszko, “Life Expectancy Gap in US Widens to 20 Years Due to ‘Truly Alarming’ Health Disparities, Researchers Say,” CBS News, November 21, 2024, https://www.cbsnews.com/news/life-expectancy-gap-20-years/. “Life Expectancy at Birth, Total Years,” World Bank, https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.DYN.LE00.IN).
Best Healthcare Systems: We’re Number 30
In 2021, CEOWorld magazine published The Healthcare Index which looked at the overall quality of healthcare, ranking countries according to their health infrastructure, healthcare professionals, costs, availability, and government readiness (such as imposing penalties on risks such as tobacco use and obesity). Altogether, eighty-nine countries were ranked. The Index measured health infrastructure, professionals, cost, medicine availability, and government readiness to support healthcare.
The study determined that South Korea had the highest level of quality healthcare, scoring 78.72 (out of 100) in its Index. Second was Taiwan (77.70), Denmark (74.11), Austria (71.32), Japan (70.73), Australia (67.99), and France (65.38).
The United States came in 30th, with an overall quality healthcare score of 45.62.
Source: Sophie Ireland, “Revealed: Countries with the Best Healthcare Systems,” CEO World, April 27, 2021, https://ceoworld.biz/2021/04/27/revealed-countries-with-the-best-health-care-systems-2021/
The United States can rightly boast of having some of the finest hospitals, doctors, and specialty care facilities in the world; but at the same time, many rural hospitals in America have been forced to close, leading to a crisis in rural healthcare access. In 2021, Newsweek magazine and Statista compiled a list of the best specialized hospitals in the world. American hospitals garnered high marks in each of the specializations of cardiology, oncology, endocrinology, neurology, gastroenterology, and orthopedics. In the field of cardiology, for example, eight of the top ten hospitals were in the United States; American hospitals also ranked high in the other specialized fields of medicine.
At the other end of the spectrum are rural hospitals, many of which are in critical financial straits; and without federal or state assistance many will have closed their doors. The Center for Healthcare Quality and Payment Reform, a national healthcare policy organization, noted that more than 100 rural hospitals had closed over the past decade, 200 more are at immediate risk of closure, and that more than 600 additional rural hospitals (30 percent of all rural hospitals) are in precarious financial conditions. This is the dilemma for millions of Americans who live in rural areas: even if they have insurance to pay for medical care, their communities cannot provide the healthcare they need. These hospitals lose money delivering services to patients, and, especially in states withdrawing patients from Medicaid eligibility, the financial difficulties become even more challenging.
Another major concern, no matter where in the country, is the growing shortage of physicians. In October 2023, Jesse M. Ehrenfeld, president of the American Medical Association, warned that “there is an insidious crisis going on in medicine today that is having a profound impact on our ability to care for patients, and yet isn’t receiving the attention it deserves. This crisis is physician burnout.” Physicians everywhere, in every part of the country and every medical specialty, Ehrenfeld noted, “continue to carry tremendous burdens that have us frustrated, burned out, abandoning hope. . . and in increasingly worrying numbers, turning our backs on the profession we’ve dedicated our lives to.” The American Association of Medical Colleges has projected a national physician shortfall over the next decade of at least 37,000, perhaps even 100,000. Covid burnout, the administrative and bureaucratic health care system drowning physicians in paperwork, the attack on science undermining the trust in physicians, the government intrusion into health care decision and aggressive efforts to criminalize health care, the widening healthcare disparities suffered by marginalize communities, the increases in gun violence and drug overdoses, and the shrinking Medicare reimbursement that has pushed many small, independent medical practices to the brink of financial collapse—all these have contributed to the loss of doctors and the consequent repercussions for millions of patients.
Ehrenfeld noted that some 83 million Americans do not have sufficient access to primary care physicians; 90 percent of counties in the US do not have access to pediatric ophthalmologists, 80 percent of counties do not have infectious disease specialists, and “more than 30 percent of Black Americans live in cardiac deserts.”
Sources: “World’s Best Specialized Hospitals,” Newsweek, n.d., https://www.newsweek.com/worlds-best-specialized-hospitals-2021. Cardiology, hospitals and world ranking: Cleveland Clinic, Ohio (1); Mayo Clinic-Rochester, Minnesota (2); Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Massachusetts (3); Massachusetts General Hospital, Massachusetts (4); Mount Sinai Hospital, New York (5); The Johns Hopkins Hospital, Maryland (6); Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, California (7), New York-Presbyterian Hospital-Columbia and Cornell (8).Oncology, hospitals and world ranking: MD Anderson Cancer Center, Texas (1); Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York (2); Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Massachusetts (3); Mayo Clinic-Rochester, Minnesota (4); The Johns Hopkins Hospital, Maryland (8). Endocrinology, hospitals and world ranking: Mayo Clinic-Rochester, Minnesota (1); Cleveland Clinic, Ohio (2); Massachusetts General Hospital, Massachusetts (3); Johns Hopkins Hospital, Maryland (5); Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Massachusetts (10). Neurology, hospitals and world ranking: Mayo Clinic-Rochester, Minnesota (1); Massachusetts General Hospital, Massachusetts (5); Cleveland Clinic, Ohio (7); The Johns Hopkins Hospital, Maryland (9). Gastroenterology, hospitals and world ranking: Mayo Clinic-Rochester, Minnesota (1); Mount Sinai Hospital, New York (2); Massachusetts General Hospital, Massachusetts (4); The Johns Hopkins Hospital, Maryland (9). Orthopedics, hospitals and world ranking: Hospital for Special Surgery, New York (1); Mayo Clinic-Rochester, Minnesota (2); The Johns Hopkins Hospital, Maryland (7); and Massachusetts General Hospital, Massachusetts (8).
“The Crisis in Rural Healthcare,” Saving Rural Hospitals, n.d., http://ruralhospitals.chqpr.org;Press Release, “AMA President Sounds Alarm on National Physician Shortage,” American Medical Association, October 25, 2023, https://www.ama-assn.org/press-center/press-releases/ama-president-sounds-alarm-national-physician-shortage.
In 2021, CEOWorld magazine published The Healthcare Index which looked at the overall quality of healthcare, ranking countries according to their health infrastructure, healthcare professionals, costs, availability, and government readiness (such as imposing penalties on risks such as tobacco use and obesity). Altogether, eighty-nine countries were ranked. The Index measured health infrastructure, professionals, cost, medicine availability, and government readiness to support healthcare.
The study determined that South Korea had the highest level of quality healthcare, scoring 78.72 (out of 100) in its Index. Second was Taiwan (77.70), Denmark (74.11), Austria (71.32), Japan (70.73), Australia (67.99), and France (65.38).
The United States came in 30th, with an overall quality healthcare score of 45.62.
Source: Sophie Ireland, “Revealed: Countries with the Best Healthcare Systems,” CEO World, April 27, 2021, https://ceoworld.biz/2021/04/27/revealed-countries-with-the-best-health-care-systems-2021/
The United States can rightly boast of having some of the finest hospitals, doctors, and specialty care facilities in the world; but at the same time, many rural hospitals in America have been forced to close, leading to a crisis in rural healthcare access. In 2021, Newsweek magazine and Statista compiled a list of the best specialized hospitals in the world. American hospitals garnered high marks in each of the specializations of cardiology, oncology, endocrinology, neurology, gastroenterology, and orthopedics. In the field of cardiology, for example, eight of the top ten hospitals were in the United States; American hospitals also ranked high in the other specialized fields of medicine.
At the other end of the spectrum are rural hospitals, many of which are in critical financial straits; and without federal or state assistance many will have closed their doors. The Center for Healthcare Quality and Payment Reform, a national healthcare policy organization, noted that more than 100 rural hospitals had closed over the past decade, 200 more are at immediate risk of closure, and that more than 600 additional rural hospitals (30 percent of all rural hospitals) are in precarious financial conditions. This is the dilemma for millions of Americans who live in rural areas: even if they have insurance to pay for medical care, their communities cannot provide the healthcare they need. These hospitals lose money delivering services to patients, and, especially in states withdrawing patients from Medicaid eligibility, the financial difficulties become even more challenging.
Another major concern, no matter where in the country, is the growing shortage of physicians. In October 2023, Jesse M. Ehrenfeld, president of the American Medical Association, warned that “there is an insidious crisis going on in medicine today that is having a profound impact on our ability to care for patients, and yet isn’t receiving the attention it deserves. This crisis is physician burnout.” Physicians everywhere, in every part of the country and every medical specialty, Ehrenfeld noted, “continue to carry tremendous burdens that have us frustrated, burned out, abandoning hope. . . and in increasingly worrying numbers, turning our backs on the profession we’ve dedicated our lives to.” The American Association of Medical Colleges has projected a national physician shortfall over the next decade of at least 37,000, perhaps even 100,000. Covid burnout, the administrative and bureaucratic health care system drowning physicians in paperwork, the attack on science undermining the trust in physicians, the government intrusion into health care decision and aggressive efforts to criminalize health care, the widening healthcare disparities suffered by marginalize communities, the increases in gun violence and drug overdoses, and the shrinking Medicare reimbursement that has pushed many small, independent medical practices to the brink of financial collapse—all these have contributed to the loss of doctors and the consequent repercussions for millions of patients.
Ehrenfeld noted that some 83 million Americans do not have sufficient access to primary care physicians; 90 percent of counties in the US do not have access to pediatric ophthalmologists, 80 percent of counties do not have infectious disease specialists, and “more than 30 percent of Black Americans live in cardiac deserts.”
Sources: “World’s Best Specialized Hospitals,” Newsweek, n.d., https://www.newsweek.com/worlds-best-specialized-hospitals-2021. Cardiology, hospitals and world ranking: Cleveland Clinic, Ohio (1); Mayo Clinic-Rochester, Minnesota (2); Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Massachusetts (3); Massachusetts General Hospital, Massachusetts (4); Mount Sinai Hospital, New York (5); The Johns Hopkins Hospital, Maryland (6); Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, California (7), New York-Presbyterian Hospital-Columbia and Cornell (8).Oncology, hospitals and world ranking: MD Anderson Cancer Center, Texas (1); Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York (2); Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Massachusetts (3); Mayo Clinic-Rochester, Minnesota (4); The Johns Hopkins Hospital, Maryland (8). Endocrinology, hospitals and world ranking: Mayo Clinic-Rochester, Minnesota (1); Cleveland Clinic, Ohio (2); Massachusetts General Hospital, Massachusetts (3); Johns Hopkins Hospital, Maryland (5); Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Massachusetts (10). Neurology, hospitals and world ranking: Mayo Clinic-Rochester, Minnesota (1); Massachusetts General Hospital, Massachusetts (5); Cleveland Clinic, Ohio (7); The Johns Hopkins Hospital, Maryland (9). Gastroenterology, hospitals and world ranking: Mayo Clinic-Rochester, Minnesota (1); Mount Sinai Hospital, New York (2); Massachusetts General Hospital, Massachusetts (4); The Johns Hopkins Hospital, Maryland (9). Orthopedics, hospitals and world ranking: Hospital for Special Surgery, New York (1); Mayo Clinic-Rochester, Minnesota (2); The Johns Hopkins Hospital, Maryland (7); and Massachusetts General Hospital, Massachusetts (8).
“The Crisis in Rural Healthcare,” Saving Rural Hospitals, n.d., http://ruralhospitals.chqpr.org;Press Release, “AMA President Sounds Alarm on National Physician Shortage,” American Medical Association, October 25, 2023, https://www.ama-assn.org/press-center/press-releases/ama-president-sounds-alarm-national-physician-shortage.
International Student Scores (TIMSS): We’re Number 27, 22, and 15
In early December 2024, the results of the 2023 TIMSS (Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study) international assessments in mathematics and science were published. Every four years, fourth and eighth grade students in sixty-four countries are tested and evaluated. Once again, the scores of American students were not impressive. In mathematics, American fourth graders ranked 27th (Singapore, Taiwan, South Korea, Hong Kong, and Japan topped the list); eighth graders did slightly better, ranking 22nd (Singapore, Taiwan, South Korea, Hong Kong, and Japan scored highest in this list). In science, American fourth graders and eighth graders ranked 15th (Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, Turkey, and England topped the list of fourth graders; Singapore, Taiwan, South Korea, Hong Kong, and Japan were at the top of the eighth grader achievements).
Source: “TIMSS International Results in Mathematics and Science,” IEA (International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement), in partnership with the TIMSS and PIRLS International Study Center at Boston College, and the United Arab Emirates Ministry of Education, https://timss2023.org/results/ (accessed December 4, 2024). Fifty-eight countries participated in the mathematics and science achievement assessments for fourth graders; forty-four countries participated in the mathematics and science achievement assessments for eighth graders.
In early December 2024, the results of the 2023 TIMSS (Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study) international assessments in mathematics and science were published. Every four years, fourth and eighth grade students in sixty-four countries are tested and evaluated. Once again, the scores of American students were not impressive. In mathematics, American fourth graders ranked 27th (Singapore, Taiwan, South Korea, Hong Kong, and Japan topped the list); eighth graders did slightly better, ranking 22nd (Singapore, Taiwan, South Korea, Hong Kong, and Japan scored highest in this list). In science, American fourth graders and eighth graders ranked 15th (Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, Turkey, and England topped the list of fourth graders; Singapore, Taiwan, South Korea, Hong Kong, and Japan were at the top of the eighth grader achievements).
Source: “TIMSS International Results in Mathematics and Science,” IEA (International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement), in partnership with the TIMSS and PIRLS International Study Center at Boston College, and the United Arab Emirates Ministry of Education, https://timss2023.org/results/ (accessed December 4, 2024). Fifty-eight countries participated in the mathematics and science achievement assessments for fourth graders; forty-four countries participated in the mathematics and science achievement assessments for eighth graders.
International Student Scores (PISA): We’re Number 22
When it comes to competing with students from around the world, American fourth and eighth graders are simply not measuring up. Every three years, the OECD conducts the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), a global educational examination involving around 600,000 15-year-old students from around the world. Students take a two-hour test in mathematics, science, and reading. Over sixty-five countries, representing 90 percent of the world’s economies, participate in the PISA program. The 2022 results are the latest; PISA was postponed during the pandemic years. The World Population Review noted that “Since a high ranking on PISA corresponds to economic success, researchers have concluded that PISA is one of the indicators of whether school systems are preparing students for the 21st-century global knowledge economy.”
Students in the United States ranked 22nd overall in the 2022 PISA testing. American students ranked 11th in science but ranked 28th in mathematics. The “bleak” math scores were offset by improved scores in reading and science. About 66 percent of US students performed at least at the basic level of math, while 80 percent scored at the basic levels in science and reading. China scored the highest. The World Population Review noted, however, that these scores from China should be taken with a “pinch of salt.” The Chinese scores were based on students living in Beijing, Shanghai, and two adjacent provinces, rather than testing throughout the country. Yet, the level of income in these testing regions was well below the OECD average.
In addition, students in the United Kingdom, New Zealand, Netherlands, Denmark, Germany, Belgium, Australia, Switzerland, Norway, and the Czech Republic all scored higher than students in the United States. Students in France, Portugal, and Austria scored slightly below the American students.
Sources: “PISA Scores by Country, 2022”, OECD, https://www.oecd.org/publication/pisa-2022-results/; “PISA Scores by Country, 2018,” World Population Review, https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/pisa-scores-by-country Data from OECD 2019 PISA report; Sarah Mervosh, “Math Scores Dropped Globally, but the US Still Trails Other Countries,” New York Times, December 5, 2023, https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/05/us/math-scores-pandemic-pisa.html.
When it comes to competing with students from around the world, American fourth and eighth graders are simply not measuring up. Every three years, the OECD conducts the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), a global educational examination involving around 600,000 15-year-old students from around the world. Students take a two-hour test in mathematics, science, and reading. Over sixty-five countries, representing 90 percent of the world’s economies, participate in the PISA program. The 2022 results are the latest; PISA was postponed during the pandemic years. The World Population Review noted that “Since a high ranking on PISA corresponds to economic success, researchers have concluded that PISA is one of the indicators of whether school systems are preparing students for the 21st-century global knowledge economy.”
Students in the United States ranked 22nd overall in the 2022 PISA testing. American students ranked 11th in science but ranked 28th in mathematics. The “bleak” math scores were offset by improved scores in reading and science. About 66 percent of US students performed at least at the basic level of math, while 80 percent scored at the basic levels in science and reading. China scored the highest. The World Population Review noted, however, that these scores from China should be taken with a “pinch of salt.” The Chinese scores were based on students living in Beijing, Shanghai, and two adjacent provinces, rather than testing throughout the country. Yet, the level of income in these testing regions was well below the OECD average.
In addition, students in the United Kingdom, New Zealand, Netherlands, Denmark, Germany, Belgium, Australia, Switzerland, Norway, and the Czech Republic all scored higher than students in the United States. Students in France, Portugal, and Austria scored slightly below the American students.
Sources: “PISA Scores by Country, 2022”, OECD, https://www.oecd.org/publication/pisa-2022-results/; “PISA Scores by Country, 2018,” World Population Review, https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/pisa-scores-by-country Data from OECD 2019 PISA report; Sarah Mervosh, “Math Scores Dropped Globally, but the US Still Trails Other Countries,” New York Times, December 5, 2023, https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/05/us/math-scores-pandemic-pisa.html.
Social Spending: We’re Number 16 (Public Social Spending) and 2 (Total Net Spending)
How does the United States compare with other OECD countries in terms of social spending? There are two terms involved here: “Public Social Spending” means social spending with financial flows controlled by general government (different levels of government and social security funds), such as social insurance and social assistance payments. “Total Net Social Spending” takes into account public and private social expenditures, and also include the effect of direct taxes (income tax and social security contributions), indirect taxation of consumption on cash benefits as well as tax breaks for social purposes.
In comparison with other OECD countries, the United States is tucked into the middle, ranking 16th in public social spending as a percentage of GDP. But when looking at total net social spending, which includes private social expenditures and indirect taxes and tax breaks, the US ranks as 2nd among OECD countries. The average public social spending for OECD countries is 21.1 percent of GDP, while the average total net social spending is 20.9 percent of GDP.
Source: A complete list of data sets on US public social spending is available at www.oecd.org/social/expenditure.htm.
How does the United States compare with other OECD countries in terms of social spending? There are two terms involved here: “Public Social Spending” means social spending with financial flows controlled by general government (different levels of government and social security funds), such as social insurance and social assistance payments. “Total Net Social Spending” takes into account public and private social expenditures, and also include the effect of direct taxes (income tax and social security contributions), indirect taxation of consumption on cash benefits as well as tax breaks for social purposes.
In comparison with other OECD countries, the United States is tucked into the middle, ranking 16th in public social spending as a percentage of GDP. But when looking at total net social spending, which includes private social expenditures and indirect taxes and tax breaks, the US ranks as 2nd among OECD countries. The average public social spending for OECD countries is 21.1 percent of GDP, while the average total net social spending is 20.9 percent of GDP.
Source: A complete list of data sets on US public social spending is available at www.oecd.org/social/expenditure.htm.
Food Sustainability: We’re Number 30
In an analysis conducted by the Economist, the United States ranked 30th in food sustainability and food wasted. The countries with the best performance were Sweden, Japan, Canada, Finland, and Austria. In the individual categories of sustainability, the United States ranked this way: in Food Loss (score 77), it was 8th out of 78 countries; in Sustainable Agriculture (score 55), it was 75th out of 78; in Nutritional Challenges (score 64), it was States was 47th out of 78.
Source: Economist Impact, n.d., https://impact.economist.com/projects/foodsustainability/interactive-world-map/
In an analysis conducted by the Economist, the United States ranked 30th in food sustainability and food wasted. The countries with the best performance were Sweden, Japan, Canada, Finland, and Austria. In the individual categories of sustainability, the United States ranked this way: in Food Loss (score 77), it was 8th out of 78 countries; in Sustainable Agriculture (score 55), it was 75th out of 78; in Nutritional Challenges (score 64), it was States was 47th out of 78.
Source: Economist Impact, n.d., https://impact.economist.com/projects/foodsustainability/interactive-world-map/
Childcare and Early Childhood Education: We’re Number 28
As part of the “Build Back Better” plan the Biden administration described the childcare provisions as “the largest investment in childcare in the nation’s history,” a $425 billion package including universal and free kindergarten, expanded child tax credits, and a wage boost for caregivers. But the effort was stalled in Congress. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (Republican-Kentucky) berated the childcare provisions as a “toddler takeover.” The Democrats, McConnell insisted in a floor speech, “want to ram though a radical, reckless, multi-trillion-dollar taxing and spending spree between now and Christmas. And a huge part of their bill would completely upend childcare and pre-K as they exist for families across America.” The legislation was stalled and ultimately died.
In April 2023, President Joe Biden tried again, bypassing Congress and signing an executive order directing federal agencies to make childcare cheaper and more accessible. Biden noted that “almost every federal agency will collectively take over fifty actions to provide more peace of mind for families and dignity for care workers.” Biden emphasized that this executive order, limited to the action of the federal agencies, wouldn’t require any new spending. “It’s about making sure taxpayers get the best value for the investments they’ve already made.” Executive agencies would lower co-pays for services, ensure that Medicare and Medicaid dollars could go further, improve care for veterans and Native Americans. This executive order was certainly helpful, but these provisions are a far cry from his earlier, unrealized commitment for $225 billion to cover childcare for low-income parents and another $200 billion for universal preschool education. Despite the efforts of the Biden administration and the signing of the executive order, a comprehensive federal childcare program is still not a reality.
During the pandemic, Congress set aside $24 billion in stimulus money for childcare. It helped keep many childcare facilities afloat. Yet during the first two years of the pandemic one-tenth (20,000) of all childcare centers folded. When the federal money ran out in September 2023, the Century Fund estimated that 70,000 childcare programs would close, affecting 3.2 million children, and causing a $10.6 billion loss to the US economy.
For single parents in the United States, the childcare costs as a percentage of their net income are the highest among all the OECD countries. For single parents in the United States, up to 50 percent of their income goes to childcare; for New Zealand single mothers it is 14 percent, for mothers in the United Kingdom, it is 8 percent; for German single parents, the percentage of childcare costs is 1 percent.
Sources: Floor statement of Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, December 7, 2021, https://www.republicanleader.senate.gov/newsroom/remarks/democrats-toddler-takeover-huge-childcare-inflation-and-discrimination-against-religion; Michael D. Shear, “Biden Signs Executive Order That Aims to Make Childcare Cheaper,” New York Times, April 18, 2023, https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/18/us/politics/biden-executive-order-child-care.html; Abha Bhattarai, “Childcare is About to Get More Expensive, As Federal Funds Dry Up,” Washington Post, September 5, 2023, https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2023/09/05/child-care-cliff-day-care/.
As part of the “Build Back Better” plan the Biden administration described the childcare provisions as “the largest investment in childcare in the nation’s history,” a $425 billion package including universal and free kindergarten, expanded child tax credits, and a wage boost for caregivers. But the effort was stalled in Congress. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (Republican-Kentucky) berated the childcare provisions as a “toddler takeover.” The Democrats, McConnell insisted in a floor speech, “want to ram though a radical, reckless, multi-trillion-dollar taxing and spending spree between now and Christmas. And a huge part of their bill would completely upend childcare and pre-K as they exist for families across America.” The legislation was stalled and ultimately died.
In April 2023, President Joe Biden tried again, bypassing Congress and signing an executive order directing federal agencies to make childcare cheaper and more accessible. Biden noted that “almost every federal agency will collectively take over fifty actions to provide more peace of mind for families and dignity for care workers.” Biden emphasized that this executive order, limited to the action of the federal agencies, wouldn’t require any new spending. “It’s about making sure taxpayers get the best value for the investments they’ve already made.” Executive agencies would lower co-pays for services, ensure that Medicare and Medicaid dollars could go further, improve care for veterans and Native Americans. This executive order was certainly helpful, but these provisions are a far cry from his earlier, unrealized commitment for $225 billion to cover childcare for low-income parents and another $200 billion for universal preschool education. Despite the efforts of the Biden administration and the signing of the executive order, a comprehensive federal childcare program is still not a reality.
During the pandemic, Congress set aside $24 billion in stimulus money for childcare. It helped keep many childcare facilities afloat. Yet during the first two years of the pandemic one-tenth (20,000) of all childcare centers folded. When the federal money ran out in September 2023, the Century Fund estimated that 70,000 childcare programs would close, affecting 3.2 million children, and causing a $10.6 billion loss to the US economy.
For single parents in the United States, the childcare costs as a percentage of their net income are the highest among all the OECD countries. For single parents in the United States, up to 50 percent of their income goes to childcare; for New Zealand single mothers it is 14 percent, for mothers in the United Kingdom, it is 8 percent; for German single parents, the percentage of childcare costs is 1 percent.
Sources: Floor statement of Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, December 7, 2021, https://www.republicanleader.senate.gov/newsroom/remarks/democrats-toddler-takeover-huge-childcare-inflation-and-discrimination-against-religion; Michael D. Shear, “Biden Signs Executive Order That Aims to Make Childcare Cheaper,” New York Times, April 18, 2023, https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/18/us/politics/biden-executive-order-child-care.html; Abha Bhattarai, “Childcare is About to Get More Expensive, As Federal Funds Dry Up,” Washington Post, September 5, 2023, https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2023/09/05/child-care-cliff-day-care/.
Prevalence of Overall Poverty: We’re Number 28
The level and depth of poverty in the United States should trouble us all. Recent studies, written by sociologists Matthew Desmond and Mark Robert Rank, economist Anne Case and Angus Deaton, and economist Joseph Stiglitz, among many others, explore the depths of American poverty and its consequences. Deaton once observed that “There are millions of Americans whose suffering, through material poverty or poor health, is as bad or worse than that of the people of Africa or in Asia.” Furthermore, nearly 18 million Americans, 6 percent of the population, live in what is categorized as “deep poverty.” These individuals survive at less than one-half the official poverty rate. For single adults, that half-poverty line figure is $6,380; for a family of four, it is $13,100.
When comparing the poverty rates among the OECD countries, we find that the United States is the definite outlier. It has the highest percentage of overall poverty (15.1 percent) and the highest rate of child poverty (20.9 percent). Using 2019 data, the average overall poverty rate among OECD countries is 10.7 percent; the average child (ages 0 to 17 years old) poverty rate among the 25 OECD countries is 11.7 percent.
Of the 28 countries surveyed, the United States is the outlier, ranked as 28th.
Sources: Matthew Desmond, Poverty, By America; Mark Robert Rank, The Poverty Paradox: Understanding Economic Hardship Amid American Prosperity (New York: Oxford University Press, 2023); Anne Case and Angus Deaton, Death of Despair and the Future of Capitalism (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2021); Sitglitz, The Price of Inequality. “America’s Poor Are Worse Off Than Elsewhere,” Confronting Poverty, n.d., https://confrontingpoverty.org/poverty-facts-and-myths/americas-poor-are-worse-off-than-elsewhere/ (accessed March 22, 2023). Statistica, https://www.statista.com/statistics/233910/poverty-rates-in-oecd-countries.
The level and depth of poverty in the United States should trouble us all. Recent studies, written by sociologists Matthew Desmond and Mark Robert Rank, economist Anne Case and Angus Deaton, and economist Joseph Stiglitz, among many others, explore the depths of American poverty and its consequences. Deaton once observed that “There are millions of Americans whose suffering, through material poverty or poor health, is as bad or worse than that of the people of Africa or in Asia.” Furthermore, nearly 18 million Americans, 6 percent of the population, live in what is categorized as “deep poverty.” These individuals survive at less than one-half the official poverty rate. For single adults, that half-poverty line figure is $6,380; for a family of four, it is $13,100.
When comparing the poverty rates among the OECD countries, we find that the United States is the definite outlier. It has the highest percentage of overall poverty (15.1 percent) and the highest rate of child poverty (20.9 percent). Using 2019 data, the average overall poverty rate among OECD countries is 10.7 percent; the average child (ages 0 to 17 years old) poverty rate among the 25 OECD countries is 11.7 percent.
Of the 28 countries surveyed, the United States is the outlier, ranked as 28th.
Sources: Matthew Desmond, Poverty, By America; Mark Robert Rank, The Poverty Paradox: Understanding Economic Hardship Amid American Prosperity (New York: Oxford University Press, 2023); Anne Case and Angus Deaton, Death of Despair and the Future of Capitalism (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2021); Sitglitz, The Price of Inequality. “America’s Poor Are Worse Off Than Elsewhere,” Confronting Poverty, n.d., https://confrontingpoverty.org/poverty-facts-and-myths/americas-poor-are-worse-off-than-elsewhere/ (accessed March 22, 2023). Statistica, https://www.statista.com/statistics/233910/poverty-rates-in-oecd-countries.
Social Mobility (OECD and selected other countries): Number 27
How about Social Mobility, that widespread assumption that American sons and daughters, if they worked hard and played by the rules, would have a better life than their parents? This may be true in some countries, but increasingly not in the United States.
But in groundbreaking economic analysis, titled “The Fading American Dream,” economist Raj Chetty and his colleagues have shown that the prospects for children to earn more than their parents “have faded over the past half-century in the United States. The fraction of children earning more than their parents fell from approximately 90 percent for children born in 1940 to around 50 percent for children entering the labor market today. Absolute income mobility has fallen across the entire income distribution, with the largest declines for families in the middle class.” What would help reverse this downward trend? “A more even distribution of economic growth, rather than more growth, would allow more children to fulfill their dreams.”
Why is the United States only 27th on this list? The OECD used several pillars to calculate its rankings. The US ranked high on Work Opportunities and Technology Access pillars but had the lowest scores in the region on the Fair Wages pillar; further, it ranked low on the Social Protection pillar and the Health pillar, where it performs “quite poorly.” Indeed, in America today, a child’s future ability to earn is closely tied with the socio-economic standing of its parents. “The game is half over,” wrote philosopher Matthew Stewart, “once you’ve selected your parents.”
The Scandinavian countries—Denmark (85.2), Norway (83.6), Finland (83.6), Sweden (83.5), along with Iceland (82.7), the Netherlands (82.4), and Switzerland (82.1) In addition, Germany ranked 11th (78.8), France ranked 12th (76.7), Canada and Japan ranked 14th (76.1), and South Korea ranked 25th (71.4)—all having social mobility scores higher than the United States (70.4). The Russian Federation ranked 39th (64.7), China ranked 45th (61.5), and Mexico ranked 58th (52.6).
Source: Raj Chetty, David Grusky, Maximilian Hell, Nathaniel Hendren, Robert Manduca, and Jimmy Narang, “The Fading American Dream” Trends in Absolute Income Mobility Since 1940,” Science 356 (6336) (April 24, 2017), https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aal4617#editor-abstract. Matthew Stewart, “The 9.9 Percent is the New American Aristocracy,” The Atlantic, June 2018, https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/06/the-birth-of-a-new-american-aristocracy/559130/.
How about Social Mobility, that widespread assumption that American sons and daughters, if they worked hard and played by the rules, would have a better life than their parents? This may be true in some countries, but increasingly not in the United States.
But in groundbreaking economic analysis, titled “The Fading American Dream,” economist Raj Chetty and his colleagues have shown that the prospects for children to earn more than their parents “have faded over the past half-century in the United States. The fraction of children earning more than their parents fell from approximately 90 percent for children born in 1940 to around 50 percent for children entering the labor market today. Absolute income mobility has fallen across the entire income distribution, with the largest declines for families in the middle class.” What would help reverse this downward trend? “A more even distribution of economic growth, rather than more growth, would allow more children to fulfill their dreams.”
Why is the United States only 27th on this list? The OECD used several pillars to calculate its rankings. The US ranked high on Work Opportunities and Technology Access pillars but had the lowest scores in the region on the Fair Wages pillar; further, it ranked low on the Social Protection pillar and the Health pillar, where it performs “quite poorly.” Indeed, in America today, a child’s future ability to earn is closely tied with the socio-economic standing of its parents. “The game is half over,” wrote philosopher Matthew Stewart, “once you’ve selected your parents.”
The Scandinavian countries—Denmark (85.2), Norway (83.6), Finland (83.6), Sweden (83.5), along with Iceland (82.7), the Netherlands (82.4), and Switzerland (82.1) In addition, Germany ranked 11th (78.8), France ranked 12th (76.7), Canada and Japan ranked 14th (76.1), and South Korea ranked 25th (71.4)—all having social mobility scores higher than the United States (70.4). The Russian Federation ranked 39th (64.7), China ranked 45th (61.5), and Mexico ranked 58th (52.6).
Source: Raj Chetty, David Grusky, Maximilian Hell, Nathaniel Hendren, Robert Manduca, and Jimmy Narang, “The Fading American Dream” Trends in Absolute Income Mobility Since 1940,” Science 356 (6336) (April 24, 2017), https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aal4617#editor-abstract. Matthew Stewart, “The 9.9 Percent is the New American Aristocracy,” The Atlantic, June 2018, https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/06/the-birth-of-a-new-american-aristocracy/559130/.
National Minimum Wage: We’re Number 17
In 2009, the US federal minimum wage was set at $7.25 an hour; despite repeated efforts to raise the rate, today it remains at $7.25. This is the longest period of time, since first enacted in 1938, that the rate has not increased. Adjusted for inflation, this minimum wage is 40 percent lower than the minimum wage ($1.60) set in 1970 ($11.95 in 2023 dollars). With the greater cost of food, housing, and other necessities following the pandemic, the $7.25 minimum has shrunk even further.
In 2013, Republicans in the House voted unanimously to defeat a bill that would have raised the federal minimum wage to $10.10 an hour; in 2014, a Republican filibuster in the Senate blocked similar wage increase. In 2019, Democrats introduced the Raise the Wage Act of 2019, with the goal of reaching $15 an hour by 2023, and eliminating the subminimum wage for tipped employees, which now is $2.13 an hour. Under this proposal, beginning in 2025, the minimum wage would be indexed to median wages, so that every year that the median wage grew, so too would the minimum wage. If enacted, the Raise the Wage Act would have affected 26.6 percent of the American wage-earning workforce, a total of 39.7 million workers. The proposal went nowhere, but was reintroduced two years later by Sanders and Scott.
While Congress has stalled, several cities and states have adjusted their minimum wages to keep up with inflation. In 2012, an advocacy campaign, Fight for $15, was launched among fast-food workers. Since then, several states and cities have increased, or soon plan to increase, their minimum wage to $15 per hour.
Four countries, Luxembourg, Australia, France, and Germany, have minimum wages above $12 per hour.
Sources: Raise the Minimum Wage website,
https://raisetheminimumwage.com/federal-campaigns/. “Raising the Federal Minimum Wage to $15 by 2024 Would Lift Pay for Nearly 40 Million Workers,” Economic Policy Institute, February 5, 2019, https://www.epi.org/publication/raising-the-federal-minimum-wage-to-15-by-2024-would-lift-pay-for-nearly-40-million-workers/; “Ranking of OECD Countries by National Minimum Wage in 2021,” Statista, https://www.statista.com/statistics/322716/ranking-of-oecd-countries-by-national-minimum-wage/.
In 2009, the US federal minimum wage was set at $7.25 an hour; despite repeated efforts to raise the rate, today it remains at $7.25. This is the longest period of time, since first enacted in 1938, that the rate has not increased. Adjusted for inflation, this minimum wage is 40 percent lower than the minimum wage ($1.60) set in 1970 ($11.95 in 2023 dollars). With the greater cost of food, housing, and other necessities following the pandemic, the $7.25 minimum has shrunk even further.
In 2013, Republicans in the House voted unanimously to defeat a bill that would have raised the federal minimum wage to $10.10 an hour; in 2014, a Republican filibuster in the Senate blocked similar wage increase. In 2019, Democrats introduced the Raise the Wage Act of 2019, with the goal of reaching $15 an hour by 2023, and eliminating the subminimum wage for tipped employees, which now is $2.13 an hour. Under this proposal, beginning in 2025, the minimum wage would be indexed to median wages, so that every year that the median wage grew, so too would the minimum wage. If enacted, the Raise the Wage Act would have affected 26.6 percent of the American wage-earning workforce, a total of 39.7 million workers. The proposal went nowhere, but was reintroduced two years later by Sanders and Scott.
While Congress has stalled, several cities and states have adjusted their minimum wages to keep up with inflation. In 2012, an advocacy campaign, Fight for $15, was launched among fast-food workers. Since then, several states and cities have increased, or soon plan to increase, their minimum wage to $15 per hour.
Four countries, Luxembourg, Australia, France, and Germany, have minimum wages above $12 per hour.
Sources: Raise the Minimum Wage website,
https://raisetheminimumwage.com/federal-campaigns/. “Raising the Federal Minimum Wage to $15 by 2024 Would Lift Pay for Nearly 40 Million Workers,” Economic Policy Institute, February 5, 2019, https://www.epi.org/publication/raising-the-federal-minimum-wage-to-15-by-2024-would-lift-pay-for-nearly-40-million-workers/; “Ranking of OECD Countries by National Minimum Wage in 2021,” Statista, https://www.statista.com/statistics/322716/ranking-of-oecd-countries-by-national-minimum-wage/.
Median Individual Wealth: We’re Number 18
The ranking of median individual wealth shows a different picture. In 2021, Australia ranked first with $273,900 in individual wealth; Belgium ($267,890) was second; New Zealand ($231,260) was third; Hong Kong SAR ($202,380) was fourth; and Denmark ($171,170) was fifth. The United States median individual wealth was $93,270, ranking 18th.
Source: James Davies, Rodrigo Lluberas, and Anthony Shorrocks, “Credit Suisse Global Wealth Databook, 2022, Credit Suisse, https://www.credit-suisse.com/about-us/en/reports-research/global-wealth-report.html
The ranking of median individual wealth shows a different picture. In 2021, Australia ranked first with $273,900 in individual wealth; Belgium ($267,890) was second; New Zealand ($231,260) was third; Hong Kong SAR ($202,380) was fourth; and Denmark ($171,170) was fifth. The United States median individual wealth was $93,270, ranking 18th.
Source: James Davies, Rodrigo Lluberas, and Anthony Shorrocks, “Credit Suisse Global Wealth Databook, 2022, Credit Suisse, https://www.credit-suisse.com/about-us/en/reports-research/global-wealth-report.html
Public Sector Corruption: We’re Number 24
Transparency International annually publishes its list of public sector corruption. It measures 180 countries using a variety of data and formulates an index (100 being best; 0 being the worst), as perceived by experts and business executives.
Transparency International states that “corruption generally comprises illegal activities, which are deliberately hidden and only come to light through scandals, investigations or prosecutions.” Among the data captured by this Index are evidence of bribery, diversion of public funds, prevalence of public officials using public office for private gain without facing consequences, government’s ability to contain corruption, effective criminal prosecution of corrupt officials, and legal protection for whistleblowers, journalists and investigators when they report corruption. Not included in these rankings are citizens’ perceptions of corruption, tax fraud, private sector corruption, and other measures.
The United States ranked 24th. The question yet to be answered, what will be the public sector corruption score during a second Trump term as president?
Source: “Corruption Perceptions Index,” Transparency International, https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2022.
Transparency International annually publishes its list of public sector corruption. It measures 180 countries using a variety of data and formulates an index (100 being best; 0 being the worst), as perceived by experts and business executives.
Transparency International states that “corruption generally comprises illegal activities, which are deliberately hidden and only come to light through scandals, investigations or prosecutions.” Among the data captured by this Index are evidence of bribery, diversion of public funds, prevalence of public officials using public office for private gain without facing consequences, government’s ability to contain corruption, effective criminal prosecution of corrupt officials, and legal protection for whistleblowers, journalists and investigators when they report corruption. Not included in these rankings are citizens’ perceptions of corruption, tax fraud, private sector corruption, and other measures.
The United States ranked 24th. The question yet to be answered, what will be the public sector corruption score during a second Trump term as president?
Source: “Corruption Perceptions Index,” Transparency International, https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2022.
Democratic Institutions (Economist Intelligence Study): We’re Number 25
Another analysis and ranking of democratic institutions comes from the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU), a research group affiliated with the Economist media group. The EIU used five broad measures of democratic institutions: (1) electoral process and pluralism; (2) functioning of government; (3) political participation; (4) political culture; and (5) civil liberties. It categorizes countries according to four fields: “Full Democracies” (23 countries); “Flawed Democracies” (52 countries); “Hybrid Regimes” (35 countries); and “Authoritarian Regimes” (57 countries).
The United States is ranked 25th in the world and is labelled a “flawed democracy.” The top-ranked democracies, labelled “full democracies,” were Norway, Iceland, Sweden, New Zealand, Canada, Finland, Denmark, Ireland, and Australia.
Source: “Democracy Index 2020: In Sickness and In Health, Economist Intelligence Unit, https://pages.eiu.com/rs/753-RIQ-438/images/democracy-index-2020.pdf?mkt_tok=NzUzLVJJUS00MzgAAAGLz8pJxdvi-Ch0FU7h6gFETu8H5QZtpqwss-0_e6BkQHUswSruQE0C1atHVEw-_4ATGr6i0uZjfqQfTz6yd-D2HUzrELRpQcYQesiqGjnj_7hplA
Another analysis and ranking of democratic institutions comes from the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU), a research group affiliated with the Economist media group. The EIU used five broad measures of democratic institutions: (1) electoral process and pluralism; (2) functioning of government; (3) political participation; (4) political culture; and (5) civil liberties. It categorizes countries according to four fields: “Full Democracies” (23 countries); “Flawed Democracies” (52 countries); “Hybrid Regimes” (35 countries); and “Authoritarian Regimes” (57 countries).
The United States is ranked 25th in the world and is labelled a “flawed democracy.” The top-ranked democracies, labelled “full democracies,” were Norway, Iceland, Sweden, New Zealand, Canada, Finland, Denmark, Ireland, and Australia.
Source: “Democracy Index 2020: In Sickness and In Health, Economist Intelligence Unit, https://pages.eiu.com/rs/753-RIQ-438/images/democracy-index-2020.pdf?mkt_tok=NzUzLVJJUS00MzgAAAGLz8pJxdvi-Ch0FU7h6gFETu8H5QZtpqwss-0_e6BkQHUswSruQE0C1atHVEw-_4ATGr6i0uZjfqQfTz6yd-D2HUzrELRpQcYQesiqGjnj_7hplA
Social Progress Index: We’re Number 26
The Social Progress Imperative, an organization founded by Professor Michael Porter, developed the Social Progress Index, which collects data from around the world. Rather than concentrating on wealth and GDP, the Social Progress Index looks at fifty measures, grouped around nutrition and basic medical care, water and sanitation, shelter, personal safety, access to basic knowledge, access to communications and information, health and wellness, environmental quality, personal rights, personal freedom and choice, inclusiveness, and access to advanced education. In 2011, the United States ranked eleventh; then it fell to twenty-eighth in 2020; two years later, the United States ranking had improved slightly, to twenty-sixth among industrialized countries.
Who does better? It is the usual suspects: Norway, Denmark, Finland, Switzerland, and Iceland come in at the top. Ranking above the United States were every industrialized country in the OECD: Australia ranked twelfth; South Korea, seventeenth; United Kingdom, nineteenth; and France, twentieth.
Source: Social Progress Index, 2022, https://www.socialprogress.org/global-index-2022-results/.
Twenty-eighth and twenty-sixth. Surely the US federal and state governments can do better. Are we held back because Americans do not want to see improvements, or Americans simply do not know how uncompetitive we have become in the past several decades? Are we held back because a majority of policymakers believe that it is not the government’s responsibility to enact improvements? More than thirty years ago, sociologist Paul Starr, who came to prominence through his efforts for national health care during the 1990s, argued that “many Americans have become convinced that there simply are no public solutions to our national problems. Or if there are, that Congress could not possibly enact them in a rational and coherent form.” Thirty years later, Michael Porter concluded, “We’re no longer the country we think we are.”
Sources: Paul Starr, "Can Government Work?" The American Prospect (2) (Summer 1990);
Porter quoted in Nicholas Kristof, “We’re No. 28! And Dropping,” New York Times, September 9, 2020, https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/09/opinion/united-states-social-progress.html. Porter, a professor at the Harvard University Business School, chaired the advisory panel for the Social Progress Index.
The Social Progress Imperative, an organization founded by Professor Michael Porter, developed the Social Progress Index, which collects data from around the world. Rather than concentrating on wealth and GDP, the Social Progress Index looks at fifty measures, grouped around nutrition and basic medical care, water and sanitation, shelter, personal safety, access to basic knowledge, access to communications and information, health and wellness, environmental quality, personal rights, personal freedom and choice, inclusiveness, and access to advanced education. In 2011, the United States ranked eleventh; then it fell to twenty-eighth in 2020; two years later, the United States ranking had improved slightly, to twenty-sixth among industrialized countries.
Who does better? It is the usual suspects: Norway, Denmark, Finland, Switzerland, and Iceland come in at the top. Ranking above the United States were every industrialized country in the OECD: Australia ranked twelfth; South Korea, seventeenth; United Kingdom, nineteenth; and France, twentieth.
Source: Social Progress Index, 2022, https://www.socialprogress.org/global-index-2022-results/.
Twenty-eighth and twenty-sixth. Surely the US federal and state governments can do better. Are we held back because Americans do not want to see improvements, or Americans simply do not know how uncompetitive we have become in the past several decades? Are we held back because a majority of policymakers believe that it is not the government’s responsibility to enact improvements? More than thirty years ago, sociologist Paul Starr, who came to prominence through his efforts for national health care during the 1990s, argued that “many Americans have become convinced that there simply are no public solutions to our national problems. Or if there are, that Congress could not possibly enact them in a rational and coherent form.” Thirty years later, Michael Porter concluded, “We’re no longer the country we think we are.”
Sources: Paul Starr, "Can Government Work?" The American Prospect (2) (Summer 1990);
Porter quoted in Nicholas Kristof, “We’re No. 28! And Dropping,” New York Times, September 9, 2020, https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/09/opinion/united-states-social-progress.html. Porter, a professor at the Harvard University Business School, chaired the advisory panel for the Social Progress Index.
Better Life Index: We’re Number 28
Looking at the members of the OECD, we find that Norway ranks Number 1, followed by Slovenia, Luxembourg, Switzerland, Iceland, and Finland. The United States ranks an embarrassingly low 28th.
Source: OECD Better Life Index, https://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org.
Looking at the members of the OECD, we find that Norway ranks Number 1, followed by Slovenia, Luxembourg, Switzerland, Iceland, and Finland. The United States ranks an embarrassingly low 28th.
Source: OECD Better Life Index, https://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org.
Overall Infrastructure: We’re Number 11
Despite the infusion of billions of dollars from the Infrastructure legislation, the United States still has far to go in comparison with other OECD countries. Netherlands, Switzerland, Japan, South Korea, Spain, and Germany top the list of overall infrastructure. The United States comes in 11th place.
Note: Overall infrastructure score includes transport, telephony, and energy. First and second place would have gone to Singapore and Hong Kong, but they were left out of these rankings.
Source: “Ranking of Countries According to the General Quality of Infrastructure,” Statista, n.d., https://www.statista.com/statistics/264753/ranking-of-countries-according-to-the-general-quality-of-infrastructure/ (accessed October 30, 2023).
Despite the infusion of billions of dollars from the Infrastructure legislation, the United States still has far to go in comparison with other OECD countries. Netherlands, Switzerland, Japan, South Korea, Spain, and Germany top the list of overall infrastructure. The United States comes in 11th place.
Note: Overall infrastructure score includes transport, telephony, and energy. First and second place would have gone to Singapore and Hong Kong, but they were left out of these rankings.
Source: “Ranking of Countries According to the General Quality of Infrastructure,” Statista, n.d., https://www.statista.com/statistics/264753/ranking-of-countries-according-to-the-general-quality-of-infrastructure/ (accessed October 30, 2023).
Social Security Benefits: We’re Number 29
Social Security has become the Grand Contract, keeping millions of Americans out of poverty and providing a modicum of financial security for millions more. A report from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, based on the March 2022 Current Population Survey, noted that “Without Social Security, 21.7 million more adults and children would be below the poverty line.” Social Security benefits are especially important for older women and persons of color. Women “tend to earn less than men, take more time out of the paid workforce, live longer, accumulate less savings, and receive smaller pensions.” Social Security brings 8.8 million older women above the poverty line, 1.7 million African Americans, and 1.3 million Latinos. Without Social Security benefits, older women would have a poverty rate of 40.5 percent; with Social Security, that rate drops to 11.6 percent. Similarly, the poverty rate for African Americans would be 50.2 percent without Social Security but is 17.5 percent when it is included. Elderly Latinos would have a poverty rate of 44.5 percent without Social Security, but with it, the poverty rate drops to 18.7 percent. In addition, more than 8 million children are lifted above the poverty line. The average Social Security recipient receives about $21,384 per year, or $1,782 per month. This sum hardly puts a recipient on Easy Street.
Social insurance programs have a long history in Europe, with the first adopted by Germany in 1889. By the time that the United States created the Social Security Act in 1935, thirty-four nations were already operating some form of social insurance programs. Today, there are a wide variety of social security programs worldwide, some similar to those found in the United States (Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability), some with cash sickness benefits, cash maternity benefits, worker injury, unemployment benefits, or family allowances. When comparing the American programs, as vital, expensive, and necessary as they are, to programs in other countries, they fall quite short. As the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities noted, “Social Security benefits are . . . modest by international standards.”
Sources: Kathleen Romig, “Social Security Lifts More People Above the Poverty Line Than Any Other Program,” Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, June 2, 2023, https://www.cbpp.org/research/social-security/social-security-lifts-more-people-above-the-poverty-line-than-any-other; “Historical Background and Development of Social Security,” Social Security Administration, https://www.ssa.gov/history/briefhistory3.html; “Social Security Programs Throughout the World: Europe 2018,” Social Security Administration, September 2018, https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/progdesc/ssptw/2018-2019/europe/ssptw18europe.pdf; “Policy Basics: Top Ten Facts About Social Security,” Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, April 17, 2023, https://www.cbpp.org/research/social-security/top-ten-facts-about-social-security; “Pensions at a Glance, 2021: Retirement Systems in OECD Countries.
Social Security has become the Grand Contract, keeping millions of Americans out of poverty and providing a modicum of financial security for millions more. A report from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, based on the March 2022 Current Population Survey, noted that “Without Social Security, 21.7 million more adults and children would be below the poverty line.” Social Security benefits are especially important for older women and persons of color. Women “tend to earn less than men, take more time out of the paid workforce, live longer, accumulate less savings, and receive smaller pensions.” Social Security brings 8.8 million older women above the poverty line, 1.7 million African Americans, and 1.3 million Latinos. Without Social Security benefits, older women would have a poverty rate of 40.5 percent; with Social Security, that rate drops to 11.6 percent. Similarly, the poverty rate for African Americans would be 50.2 percent without Social Security but is 17.5 percent when it is included. Elderly Latinos would have a poverty rate of 44.5 percent without Social Security, but with it, the poverty rate drops to 18.7 percent. In addition, more than 8 million children are lifted above the poverty line. The average Social Security recipient receives about $21,384 per year, or $1,782 per month. This sum hardly puts a recipient on Easy Street.
Social insurance programs have a long history in Europe, with the first adopted by Germany in 1889. By the time that the United States created the Social Security Act in 1935, thirty-four nations were already operating some form of social insurance programs. Today, there are a wide variety of social security programs worldwide, some similar to those found in the United States (Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability), some with cash sickness benefits, cash maternity benefits, worker injury, unemployment benefits, or family allowances. When comparing the American programs, as vital, expensive, and necessary as they are, to programs in other countries, they fall quite short. As the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities noted, “Social Security benefits are . . . modest by international standards.”
Sources: Kathleen Romig, “Social Security Lifts More People Above the Poverty Line Than Any Other Program,” Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, June 2, 2023, https://www.cbpp.org/research/social-security/social-security-lifts-more-people-above-the-poverty-line-than-any-other; “Historical Background and Development of Social Security,” Social Security Administration, https://www.ssa.gov/history/briefhistory3.html; “Social Security Programs Throughout the World: Europe 2018,” Social Security Administration, September 2018, https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/progdesc/ssptw/2018-2019/europe/ssptw18europe.pdf; “Policy Basics: Top Ten Facts About Social Security,” Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, April 17, 2023, https://www.cbpp.org/research/social-security/top-ten-facts-about-social-security; “Pensions at a Glance, 2021: Retirement Systems in OECD Countries.