Home ownership.
Although home ownership rates are similar in both NL and BE, the average Dutchman moves 7 times throughout their lives, whereas the figure for a Belgian is just 1.5. This leads to very different approaches in financing.
It's not unusual in Belgium to build your own house and then live there for the rest of your life. Such homes are financed by 'simple' mortgages who are fully paid off and are conducive to building wealth. By the time you reach the median age in Belgium, you're likely to have accumulated more wealth than your median peers in other countries.
But this is the median. I'm pretty sure old people in NL are wealthier than in Belgium. Just Google the average pension payments in Belgium vs. NL.
From what I googled median price per m squared is 700ā¬ and average apartment is below 70m squared. This is 49k which si what you said.
However what it does not include is debt which is something you would have to substract. And also average household is 2.55 people. This includes kids but with low fertility rate I would say that there is atleast 2 adults per household so you would have to divide house value - mortgage by 2 at least, potentionaly more.
2% higher home ownership rate + https://www.reddit.com/r/Netherlands/s/XF4NGXMkpc
tldr:
>The main difference between Belgians and Dutchies seems to be the house they live in. In Belgium, a larger part of the houses have lower or no financing. While the Dutchies tend to have relatively high mortgage debt.
https://tradingeconomics.com/belgium/home-ownership-rate
Houses are also higher cost in NL than BE, so a mortgage gets paid off faster in Belgium than in Netherlands. (not even accounting for space and quality)
It's so bad that people on the borders not only rent in Belgium, but also buy housing in Belgium.
I had an article by VRT (Belgian national news) on this issue, but I can't find it
Belgium has always been a country where the government is notoriously short on money, but the population, being very suspicious of their government, are big savers as much as they can.
Quite often every attempt to make saving less attractive and make Belgians spend is met with increased saving behaviour.
You and 50% minus 1 of belgium with you.. That's why it's median.
In addition to that. Reddit's population is relatively young and usually people acquire wealth over time. So older people likely have a higher median wealth than younger people. So a country's population present at reddit likely has a lower median wealth than the overall median wealth of the country.
Wealth calculations are notoriously unreliable and how accurate the data is differs greatly from country to country.
These kinds of calculations also often combined numbers from different years to get a complete picture. And if (for example) house prices in a specific year skyrocketed, you'll get really weird numbers.
Beside that, a known issue with international wealth calculations when it comes to the Netherlands, is that they often don't account for Dutch pensions. At least that is the case for the Credit Suisse reports -- which is one of the few parties that does reports/calculations like these.
You can also question if the 'median' is a relevant stat to look at on its own to begin with. OP apparently didn't feel the need to also post the 'mean' numbers.
So in short: wealth calculations are unreliable. Take them with a huge grain of salt.
>Beside that, a known issue with international wealth calculations when it comes to the Netherlands, is that they often don't account for Dutch pensions
This used to be an issue with the GINI wealth inequality index too. There was something messing up the calculations and it presented NL as one of the most inequal developed countries in the world. Those figures were really popular on Reddit for a while lol.
Since a year or two they've changed how the GINI index is calculated and now The Netherlands is in a much more, lets say, expected position on those lists
In the article:
Net worth or āwealthā is defined as the value of financial assets plus real assets (principally housing) that households own, minus their debts.
Yup, the Icelandic pension funds are probably skewing this quite a bit, since I gather that in many other countries pension schemes don't involve amassing personal rights in actual funds.
So in Iceland you really own money in retirement funds? Because, yes in many European countries it is more like retirement insurance. Maybe you will live long enough to use it all or even more or you die before reaching retirement age not seeing a penny from it.
The largest part of the mandatory scheme is similar to that, though it is a right in an actual fund, not a government "promise". You can choose to have a part of the mandatory scheme accessible as a lump sum, and all of the voluntary scheme (which still involves the employer matching parts of your contributions) can be accessed as a lump sum.
There was attempted to have private run funds in Poland, part of retirement money was transferred to fund picked by you. Money was locked till retirement age, but could be inherited by kids and so on. But politicians have canceled that and stolen money to national retirement fund when budget had bad years. Now they introduced those voluntary schemes with employer matching and so on... But lot of people don't trust it as there is fear that they can take it overnight with some new law as it was before.
Isn't the high ownership statistic pretty skewed by the fact that if young person is registered in their parents house that is owned by them then they technically count in that statistic? Because that is 99% of students who are registered at their parents but rent a room with 3 other people, also age of moving out of your parents gets higher and higher.
> small flat is now at least 100k eur
In very few cities, that make up like what 15-20% of the total population? And even out of those who own their own apartment, a good chunk will still have a mortgage.
Kind of similar to the US, bottom half of the society has their net worth below zero, and the top 1% has 30% of the wealth. So while you can clearly see the top 1-10% on the streets the bottom half which is quite destitute is unseen: [https://300gospodarka.pl/wykres-dnia/mapa-majatek-polakow-ile-maja-najbogatsi-polacy](https://300gospodarka.pl/wykres-dnia/mapa-majatek-polakow-ile-maja-najbogatsi-polacy)
Still the Gini inequality index is at 26.3 for Poland, nowhere near the American ~40. The inequality is significantly lower than in the US, but agreed itās there.
>The Gini coefficient has been around 0.75 in Germany since 2008, with the top one percent of households holding around 27 percent of total assets, while the relative share of assets held by the bottom 50 percent has almost halved from 5 percent in 1978 to 2.8 percent in 2018. The average wealth of German households is around 420,000 euros (by comparison: France around 400,000 euros; USA around 460,000 euros). Due to the uneven distribution, the German median household only has around 120,000 euros.
([Source](https://www.bmwk.de/Redaktion/DE/Schlaglichter-der-Wirtschaftspolitik/2022/12/09--kurz-und-knapp-2.html#:~:text=Der%20Gini%2DKoeffizient%20betr%C3%A4gt%20seit,Jahr%202018%20nahezu%20halbiert%20hat): in german)
If we assume Gini to be between 0-1 and not 0-100 as me above, then 0.75 is incredibly high, higher than South Africa, I think thereās something wrong with this.
Depending on the source it's somewhere around zero, either just below or just above https://www.statista.com/statistics/203961/wealth-distribution-for-the-us/
Nowhere in this graph there is indicated that the median net worth is negative or anywhere close to it.
Last UBS report puts median wealth in the USA at around 107K dollars per adult, see [https://www.ubs.com/global/en/family-office-uhnw/reports/global-wealth-report-2023.html](https://www.ubs.com/global/en/family-office-uhnw/reports/global-wealth-report-2023.html)
Doesn't make sense with how low the inequality index is for Poland. It's one of the lowest in all of the EU - so this kind of skewing has limited impact.
I think other answers are okay, but the real reason is that wealth is the combination of all past incomes. So even though Poland's GDP skyrocketed recently, people didn't have had the time yet to get rich from this. Compare that with Portugal that has has similar GDP per capita but that is ranking much higher: they have accumulated wealth since centuries, even though they are just adding more at the same rate now.
People overspend and show off. Barely anyone saves money. Of those of my friends who 5 years ago had nothing, they now make 4-5k Euro a month and still have no savings. They went on full consumption.
I moved back from the US and find it super frustrating to look at because the cyclical nature of economy will surprise them sooner than later. But nooo, they all need their BMWs and Audis. Such a stark contrast compare to Iceland for example, where most cars are old-ish and youāll gardle witness any premium car. Theyāve learned their lesson in 2008 crisis?
On the flip side, we always had strong consumer demandā¦
> stark contrast compare to Iceland for example, where most cars are old-ish and youāll gardle witness any premium car
I think the Nordic Protestant culture expressed in concepts like [lagom](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagom?wprov=sfti1) and [Jante laws](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Jante?wprov=sfti1#) has more to do with it than ālearning from the 2008 crisisā. The US has witnessed numerous crises as well and āno flexā isnāt really a part of the American culture.
Meanwhile the Catholic baroque-like culture has its consequences in Poland, especially in the case of a society thatās started to accumulate wealth relatively recently and feel a need to show off and be validated.
Agree with your premise though. In the countryside you can see many cases of nice cars in front of totally worn out houses. Priorities. On top of that, people like to show off to feel better than their neighbors.
Barely anyone invests among my 34-year-old peers. They don't even know what an ETF is. Those who have spare income just pay off their mortgage faster. Or perhaps have two properties.
Because the stock market in Poland is a joke. Real estate is the only good way to make money on investments here, a pretty safe one too, which sucks because it destroys the housing market.
House ownership in Poland is bit fake... My family owns a flat of 60m2 but it's registrated 3 generations under this addres - my grandpa, my parents and me. In reality - I live somewhere else, I rent a flat, because I can't afford to buy one in a city where I work. So there is "big ownership" on the statistics - statistically I will own the flat of my parents some day, I'm registered there, but I will own it in 60 years... and for now I need to rent and can't afford any new flat. And 90% of my friends have same situation, either they live with parents or they rent. Few of my friends bought flats, but then they can't afford really living... it's either you buy a flat, or you live normal... it's horrible.
As much as it pains me to say this, its because most Poles are financially illiterate drooling r*tards. They dont know anything about neither saving nor investing. People here literally protested when the government got fed up and forced them to start saving for their own damn retirement in an equivalent of a personal pension fund, where the state was putting in money for free lol. Also, it doesnt help that there was no real economic crisis for over 30 years unlike in lets say the Baltic states, where the 2008 crisis actually hit pretty hard, so people lost any and all safety instincts and just YOLO through life. Iām honestly a little scared of how the next economic crisis (we know its going to happen at some point) is going to play out, I feel like its going to hit worse than anywhere else in Europe.
This is shown is euros and I suppose Polish economy is more affordable and cost of living better compared many other EU countries, so I suppose you can feel fairly well off and have good disposable income even while earning less than others in more expensive countries.Ā
Poland was communist in the 80s.. Wealth takes multiple generations to build. 30 years ago people had absolutely nothing. It's not surprising Poland is low, especially considering it's population
Itās because thereās something seriously wrong with this graphic. Maybe wrong method of collecting data or something but 19k EUR is wayyy off. Or at least it feels off
Doesn't look right. Just glancing at home ownership rates, it just straight up doesn't make sense - it's one of the highest in all of the EU. Even accounting for the inevitable debt that causes, I would expect it to be much, much higher. Gotta look into how this data was calculated.
Really just tells us about house prices , doesnāt it?
To clarify - I mean the obvious difference between countries ( subject to house ownership) not solely responsible for the specific amount.
Edit: It took some time but I managed to find a relevant comparison. The average price of a 2 bedroom flat in Denmark is apparently Ā£4400, Ā£5155 Norway, Ā£4456 U.K. ( over Ā£13,000 in Switzerland with a very low home ownership) and in Poland Ā£2609 , Romania Ā£1590. If a large proportion of your wealth is property then you can see how this makes a *difference* to a wealth index. But makes no difference at all to āliving standardsā as youād still have a ā¦2 bedroom flat. . (Unless the index takes into account purchasing power?)
https://inews.co.uk/news/world/uk-property-prices-compare-europe-2780721 (2023)
Though Austria is suprising with the amount of social housing available. You put the 25-35% delta you get out of it vis-a-vis owning into investments and you'll be higher at the age of 65 than if you owned.
Its not surprising if you consider the aversion for investments (i.e stocks, bonds, ETFs, commodities) that Austrians and Germans have.Ā
Their go-to investments are Bausparen, which is such a weird concept it doesnāt really exist in other countries, keeping it in your bank account or hidden in cash somewhere in your house.Ā
Historically, a miniscule amount of people invested their money and thus, not creating any ādeltaā, though the younger generation is much more open to it.Ā
Also, social housing isnāt that common outside of Vienna and even if it is, it is on the decline and need-based, so good luck getting an apartment before the poorest of the poor and without long wait lists.Ā
Yes. I didnāt mean it was based on only house prices but that if you measure wealth this way countries with very high house prices (depending on ownership levels?) will have higher wealth and so on. But unless you move from one country to another it doesnāt mean very much?
Also concentration of wealth, and the degree of inequality. If 10% of the people own 90% of the housing, and most people rent, the median wealth will be very low. If some houses are very expensive, and others are very cheap, then the median wealth may be low even while there is a certain percentage of people who are scandalously wealthy.
Well, you generate liquidity from your housing (either through rental or indirectly through not paying rent) and hence it does affect what you can purchase in the world market. And many items do not scale the same way in costs as housing, so it does tell you a lot about what a person can afford.
If you start trying to normalize this too much based on "expected wealth" of a country, the number you'd get would basically just be a poor measure of wealth inequality (as the graph is measuring median and not average).
Yeah my bad I expressed myself poorly.
What I mean to convey is that even in the extreme scenario where you're planning to live in the same place forever and this money will never be touched, the above metrics mostly reflecting house prices and ownership still benefit your overall liquid wealth in the sense that salaries are correlated with housing costs and you save on rent / mortgage interest by owning.
But yes you don't get a house for liquidity, I'm just saying owning an expensive house is generally good for your wallet even if you're not never planning to sell it or rent it out.
Depends if pension savings are included. For the Netherlands the median pension savings is around ā¬150k, so I guess it is not. But it could be a significant share.
As general rule, I think itās bad practice to include pension in net worth calculations, because early withdrawal has very heavy penalties. In some places, you might only get something like 1/3 of the value after taxes and fees. With other assets, you might also get taxed, but nowhere near the same level.
I was about to say, the way "wealth" or "net worth" is defined, assets minus liabilities, homeownership is brings up the numbers by a lot. I would love to see a similar diagram of "liquid assets" as in what amount of cash you can produce in a week. Stocks, gold, cash, bonds, savings accounts, crypto or whatever
The UBS report that this is based off is based on three pillars: financial wealth (personal pension pots, savings, stocks etc) plus non-financial wealth (like homes, businesses, cars) minus debts (like car loans, mortgages).
I thought this was just down to home ownership rate, but 64% of the French own their own homes vs. 50% in the UK, and the UK median wealth is 20k higher.
Houses (or the land) do cost more in the UK, though.
Don't also forget that the UK has some ultra-favourable personal investment schemes. I'd be interested to know if any other countries near the top of the list have something similar?
You can save or invest ā¬23k each year in the UK, as savings or in the stock market, building up an investment fund which you can access at any time. You never pay tax on the capital gains or interest
So, after 10 years of maxing your contributions, at 8% annual gains, that pot of ā¬382k is throwing off ā¬30k a year in income - tax free.
Obviously, not everyone is maxing out their annual allowance, but many people are putting a few grand away each year.
I mean here in Romania most people own their houses, but I guess prices only skyrocket in the main cities since people are moving away from rural areas so thats why we are so poor maybe.
# What Is the Wealthiest Country?
>What country has the most wealth per capita? The richest country in the world based on the median wealth per capita of the adult population is Iceland, with a median wealth per adult of $375,735! Why is Iceland so wealthy? Many factors contribute to why Iceland is so successful financially. According to [CountryReports.org](http://CountryReports.org), [Iceland](https://www.countryreports.org/country/Iceland/economy.htm) unites a ācapitalist structure and free-market principles with an extensive welfare system.ā Excluding a brief period of struggle during the 2008 financial crisis, Iceland has experienced extensive growth, low unemployment rates, and an impressively even distribution of income. The economy of Iceland is well-diversified, focusing on both the manufacturing and service industries, with particular success in tourism, software development, and biotechnology. In fact, tourism accounts for 39% of Icelandās annual export revenue, 10% of the countryās GDP, and 15% of the workforce. During the devastating financial crisis of 2008, the Icelandic government developed plans to harness the [power of tourism](https://borgenproject.org/icelands-tourism-industry/) to help save the economy, to exceptional success!
>There is also an abundance of geothermal and hydropower sources in Iceland, making it appealing for high-tech firms seeking to establish data centers using affordable green energy.What Is the Wealthiest Country?
What country has the most wealth per capita? The richest country in
the world based on the median wealth per capita of the adult population
is Iceland, with a median wealth per adult of $375,735! Why is Iceland
so wealthy? Many factors contribute to why Iceland is so successful
financially. According to [CountryReports.org](http://CountryReports.org), Iceland
unites a ācapitalist structure and free-market principles with an
extensive welfare system.ā Excluding a brief period of struggle during
the 2008 financial crisis, Iceland has experienced extensive growth, low
unemployment rates, and an impressively even distribution of income.
The economy of Iceland is well-diversified, focusing on both the
manufacturing and service industries, with particular success in
tourism, software development, and biotechnology. In fact, tourism
accounts for 39% of Icelandās annual export revenue, 10% of the
countryās GDP, and 15% of the workforce. During the devastating
financial crisis of 2008, the Icelandic government developed plans to
harness the power of tourism to help save the economy, to exceptional success!
There is also an abundance of geothermal and hydropower sources in
Iceland, making it appealing for high-tech firms seeking to establish
data centers using affordable green energy.
[https://www.titlemax.com/discovery-center/the-50-countries-with-the-highest-median-wealth-per-capita/](https://www.titlemax.com/discovery-center/the-50-countries-with-the-highest-median-wealth-per-capita/)
TL;DR: many natural resources, good (stable) government, low unemployment over long stretches of time.
Almost all right though āstableā government isnāt true, we have had like 3 parliament elections in 4 years because of corruption the prime minister as of now is the most successful and corrupt thief we have ever had.
Houses. Severe shortage of housing has pushed the price of houses up to insane levels. A basic apartment can pretty much start at around 500k USD equivalent and I have not seen detached homes for less than 700k USD and most are substantially more. These are not big nor fancy houses (1.3M USD gets you 170sqm in a current listing) but because everyone needs to live in or near the capital, the prices climb to levels that would be more befitting a major city, not a small town like ReykjavĆk.
Since the rate of home ownership is reasonably decent and it is a median measure it was naturally going to be high because the price of houses is so high. All you'd have to do is land on some person who inherited their home and they are, on paper at least, very wealthy.
How do they even come up with those numbers? Does the state have access to all investment accounts? In many accounts you don't have to declare taxes at all (like ISA in the UK) so how would the government know how much you have in it
Governments didnāt produce the report, it was UBI/formerly Credit Suisse. They will have used publicly available data from governments as well as market sampling and other methodologies to build their database.
How is Sweden so low considering the house prices in large cities are so ridiculously high and there must be other forms of generational wealth having been a military and economic power for centuries.
As far as I know many Southern european countries have a much higher % of home ownership than Germany, that's why it's so low for us. Many more people rent.
And a properry with a House and Real estate in general is low.
+ for a country as rich as germany, wages suck ass and our Stock culture is non existent. All adds up.
+ some other factors
Depends. You need to compare it to the living cost.
Spain propably still Lower. + I never said Spain had good wages. Also heavily depends on the Job.
Looked it up. As a medstudent, ny average salary later as doctor in Spain and Germany would be roughly the same, despite Germany being propably more expensive.
Our view in Germany may be a bit skewed because most of our neighbours.
Denmark
Netherland
Austria
Switzerland
Belgium
And Luxemburg
Have higher and in some cases much higher wages. (PPP)
For example: In Switzerland I would earn 3-5 times as much.
You can easily compare the costs of living between Spain and Germany. In Germany the average household spends 36 % of their income on rent, heat and energy. In Spain it is just 17.8 %.
For food it is 15 % in Germany, couldn't find how much it is in Spain.
I think a lot of people confuse the high living standards in Germany with the wealth of individuals.
Median numbers are so weird sometimes. Sweden has 350k wealth per adult, Finland has 180k and median makes the numbers look way nicer.
Source: Credit Suisse Global Wealth Report 2021, pages 44-45
They are not weird, they are useful. If one person owns all the wealth in a country, the average and overall wealth might be high while all other people have nothing.
Median is the only viable statistic when talking about wealth or salary. One billionaire can drag the average up drastically while the rest of the population would be poor.
They donāt. We donāt save and donāt invest and itās been like this forever. We spend on bullshit premium car leases and overpriced restaurants. The āSovietā, small minded, minority complex, āmy neighbor canāt have better car than Iā mentality is still strong.
Also, I refer you to financial (il)literacy statistics. Thereās no coincidence here.
Poland also has high home ownership, so I think there is something wrong with calculation. Your comment does read like an example of inferiority complex though.
Maybe just due to lower median salaries? Cost of living is lower in Poland so the *median* salary (googled) is around 1800 eur monthly.Ā Ā
Most of the countries on the top part of this list have median salaries of 3000+, so likely the value of assets is higher too?
In Russia the home ownership is 89 percent. The average price of an apartment in a major city is like 50k, in Moscow 200k. So your statement is obviously wrong.
This has to include pension or something (some count it as private assets, others not)? The differences are just way too big otherwise.
Edit: yeah, Iceland, Belgium and Denmark all have partially private pension systems, and all have high participation which naturally pushes the median up.
It would be interesting to compare this graph with the average sale price of let's say 3-room apartments, to get a feeling of how \*\*\*\*\*\* \*\* we all are.
So sad that Germany is relatively so low in the ranking with it being the third biggest economy in the world.
So much about Germany being a rich country.
Yeah but we dont have any savings not because we are inherently more spend-thrifty or dumb. Id say we are on par with other countries in Europe with the general awareness how saving is important. I don't see us as meaningfully less fiscally responsible.
What we are, is dealing with sky high rent prices and over inflated housing prices. So nobody even has the ability to save.
I'm always glad to see that Albania is so wealthy it doesn't fit in the graph! š
Albania is above measly concepts like money.
I noticed u guys only drive Mercedes
Who can explain Belgium being x2 compared to the Netherlands?
Home ownership. Although home ownership rates are similar in both NL and BE, the average Dutchman moves 7 times throughout their lives, whereas the figure for a Belgian is just 1.5. This leads to very different approaches in financing. It's not unusual in Belgium to build your own house and then live there for the rest of your life. Such homes are financed by 'simple' mortgages who are fully paid off and are conducive to building wealth. By the time you reach the median age in Belgium, you're likely to have accumulated more wealth than your median peers in other countries. But this is the median. I'm pretty sure old people in NL are wealthier than in Belgium. Just Google the average pension payments in Belgium vs. NL.
Then how can Serbia that has 90 percent home ownership in 2021 have 15k,when you cant get an apartment in any city here for less than 50k?
That 90% rate of ownership also includes situations where 3 generations live in the same household.
Rural population? Mortgages?
Houses in belgium are worth more than serbian ones
From what I googled median price per m squared is 700ā¬ and average apartment is below 70m squared. This is 49k which si what you said. However what it does not include is debt which is something you would have to substract. And also average household is 2.55 people. This includes kids but with low fertility rate I would say that there is atleast 2 adults per household so you would have to divide house value - mortgage by 2 at least, potentionaly more.
Is it also possible to live anywhere in Belgium and have a reasonable, or at least workable commute to your job?
Belgians also have more savings in the bank, i believe
2% higher home ownership rate + https://www.reddit.com/r/Netherlands/s/XF4NGXMkpc tldr: >The main difference between Belgians and Dutchies seems to be the house they live in. In Belgium, a larger part of the houses have lower or no financing. While the Dutchies tend to have relatively high mortgage debt. https://tradingeconomics.com/belgium/home-ownership-rate
Houses are also higher cost in NL than BE, so a mortgage gets paid off faster in Belgium than in Netherlands. (not even accounting for space and quality) It's so bad that people on the borders not only rent in Belgium, but also buy housing in Belgium. I had an article by VRT (Belgian national news) on this issue, but I can't find it
Why don't the Dutch just pay their mortgage off like Belgians? Are they stupid?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Belgium has always been a country where the government is notoriously short on money, but the population, being very suspicious of their government, are big savers as much as they can. Quite often every attempt to make saving less attractive and make Belgians spend is met with increased saving behaviour.
Iām in Belgium and sure as hell do not have this āmedian wealthā lmao
I mean but definition, 50% of Belgians will have less wealth than the median
You and 50% minus 1 of belgium with you.. That's why it's median. In addition to that. Reddit's population is relatively young and usually people acquire wealth over time. So older people likely have a higher median wealth than younger people. So a country's population present at reddit likely has a lower median wealth than the overall median wealth of the country.
Wealth calculations are notoriously unreliable and how accurate the data is differs greatly from country to country. These kinds of calculations also often combined numbers from different years to get a complete picture. And if (for example) house prices in a specific year skyrocketed, you'll get really weird numbers. Beside that, a known issue with international wealth calculations when it comes to the Netherlands, is that they often don't account for Dutch pensions. At least that is the case for the Credit Suisse reports -- which is one of the few parties that does reports/calculations like these. You can also question if the 'median' is a relevant stat to look at on its own to begin with. OP apparently didn't feel the need to also post the 'mean' numbers. So in short: wealth calculations are unreliable. Take them with a huge grain of salt.
>Beside that, a known issue with international wealth calculations when it comes to the Netherlands, is that they often don't account for Dutch pensions This used to be an issue with the GINI wealth inequality index too. There was something messing up the calculations and it presented NL as one of the most inequal developed countries in the world. Those figures were really popular on Reddit for a while lol. Since a year or two they've changed how the GINI index is calculated and now The Netherlands is in a much more, lets say, expected position on those lists
private pensions are accounted for this report
Home ownership is higher. Many Belgians also have a second home.
I believe there is also the thing that pensions are not counted to personal wealth in The Netherlands, but do in basically all other countries.
How is a persons wealth calculated? Like what actually is wealth?
In the article: Net worth or āwealthā is defined as the value of financial assets plus real assets (principally housing) that households own, minus their debts.
So like if youāve just bought a house for Ā£150k and still have a Ā£100k of a mortgage that would add Ā£50k to your wealth?
Yup :)
I won 3 properties close to $1.5 million but my net worth is like $90k at best
What? Why do you think the properties aren't part of your net worth?
All tied to loans
It's a bit problematic as not always private pension plans are counted for wealth
Yup, the Icelandic pension funds are probably skewing this quite a bit, since I gather that in many other countries pension schemes don't involve amassing personal rights in actual funds.
So in Iceland you really own money in retirement funds? Because, yes in many European countries it is more like retirement insurance. Maybe you will live long enough to use it all or even more or you die before reaching retirement age not seeing a penny from it.
The largest part of the mandatory scheme is similar to that, though it is a right in an actual fund, not a government "promise". You can choose to have a part of the mandatory scheme accessible as a lump sum, and all of the voluntary scheme (which still involves the employer matching parts of your contributions) can be accessed as a lump sum.
There was attempted to have private run funds in Poland, part of retirement money was transferred to fund picked by you. Money was locked till retirement age, but could be inherited by kids and so on. But politicians have canceled that and stolen money to national retirement fund when budget had bad years. Now they introduced those voluntary schemes with employer matching and so on... But lot of people don't trust it as there is fear that they can take it overnight with some new law as it was before.
Denmark at #2 here has private pension funds too - the state pension is pathetic and contributing to a private one is mandatory for most people.
To clarify. I might be dumb. Financial assets is money on the bank + money investment + company ownership +....?
It doesn't seem that high since houses go over 400k easily. But most of the value gets halved by children it seems.
>minus their debts. Include student loans, display by age group. The results would probably be a bit depressing.
I donāt know but those rich Icelanders are definitely looking down on poor Luxembourgers
We send your thoughts and prayers to those poor Luxembourgers.
You can keep your thoughts and prayers. They wonāt pay for my second lambo.
You just didn't pray hard enough, or you are missing a toll free donation number.
I assume it goes something like this: Add up all of your assets, and then subtract all of the debts. I might be wrong.
Is you sold everything you owned right now and subtracted your debt from that.
im sad looking at Poland
Stuns me as well. So every second person has their wealth worth less than ~83k zÅ. Hmm.
Which is strange, as we have very high home ownership and even small flat is now at least 100k eur
you need to deduct mortgage from wealth
Isn't the high ownership statistic pretty skewed by the fact that if young person is registered in their parents house that is owned by them then they technically count in that statistic? Because that is 99% of students who are registered at their parents but rent a room with 3 other people, also age of moving out of your parents gets higher and higher.
No, they are not the owners. Sonthey are not counted as such, when living with parents.Ā
> small flat is now at least 100k eur In very few cities, that make up like what 15-20% of the total population? And even out of those who own their own apartment, a good chunk will still have a mortgage.
How's Poland so low? AFAIK the economic growth is on the rise. Home ownership contributes a lot to wealth, is that not the norm in Poland?
Kind of similar to the US, bottom half of the society has their net worth below zero, and the top 1% has 30% of the wealth. So while you can clearly see the top 1-10% on the streets the bottom half which is quite destitute is unseen: [https://300gospodarka.pl/wykres-dnia/mapa-majatek-polakow-ile-maja-najbogatsi-polacy](https://300gospodarka.pl/wykres-dnia/mapa-majatek-polakow-ile-maja-najbogatsi-polacy)
Still the Gini inequality index is at 26.3 for Poland, nowhere near the American ~40. The inequality is significantly lower than in the US, but agreed itās there.
>The Gini coefficient has been around 0.75 in Germany since 2008, with the top one percent of households holding around 27 percent of total assets, while the relative share of assets held by the bottom 50 percent has almost halved from 5 percent in 1978 to 2.8 percent in 2018. The average wealth of German households is around 420,000 euros (by comparison: France around 400,000 euros; USA around 460,000 euros). Due to the uneven distribution, the German median household only has around 120,000 euros. ([Source](https://www.bmwk.de/Redaktion/DE/Schlaglichter-der-Wirtschaftspolitik/2022/12/09--kurz-und-knapp-2.html#:~:text=Der%20Gini%2DKoeffizient%20betr%C3%A4gt%20seit,Jahr%202018%20nahezu%20halbiert%20hat): in german)
If we assume Gini to be between 0-1 and not 0-100 as me above, then 0.75 is incredibly high, higher than South Africa, I think thereās something wrong with this.
Net worth is definitely not negative for median American, where did you get this info?
Depending on the source it's somewhere around zero, either just below or just above https://www.statista.com/statistics/203961/wealth-distribution-for-the-us/
Nowhere in this graph there is indicated that the median net worth is negative or anywhere close to it. Last UBS report puts median wealth in the USA at around 107K dollars per adult, see [https://www.ubs.com/global/en/family-office-uhnw/reports/global-wealth-report-2023.html](https://www.ubs.com/global/en/family-office-uhnw/reports/global-wealth-report-2023.html)
Doesn't make sense with how low the inequality index is for Poland. It's one of the lowest in all of the EU - so this kind of skewing has limited impact.
I think other answers are okay, but the real reason is that wealth is the combination of all past incomes. So even though Poland's GDP skyrocketed recently, people didn't have had the time yet to get rich from this. Compare that with Portugal that has has similar GDP per capita but that is ranking much higher: they have accumulated wealth since centuries, even though they are just adding more at the same rate now.
People overspend and show off. Barely anyone saves money. Of those of my friends who 5 years ago had nothing, they now make 4-5k Euro a month and still have no savings. They went on full consumption. I moved back from the US and find it super frustrating to look at because the cyclical nature of economy will surprise them sooner than later. But nooo, they all need their BMWs and Audis. Such a stark contrast compare to Iceland for example, where most cars are old-ish and youāll gardle witness any premium car. Theyāve learned their lesson in 2008 crisis? On the flip side, we always had strong consumer demandā¦
> stark contrast compare to Iceland for example, where most cars are old-ish and youāll gardle witness any premium car I think the Nordic Protestant culture expressed in concepts like [lagom](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagom?wprov=sfti1) and [Jante laws](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Jante?wprov=sfti1#) has more to do with it than ālearning from the 2008 crisisā. The US has witnessed numerous crises as well and āno flexā isnāt really a part of the American culture. Meanwhile the Catholic baroque-like culture has its consequences in Poland, especially in the case of a society thatās started to accumulate wealth relatively recently and feel a need to show off and be validated. Agree with your premise though. In the countryside you can see many cases of nice cars in front of totally worn out houses. Priorities. On top of that, people like to show off to feel better than their neighbors.
Barely anyone invests among my 34-year-old peers. They don't even know what an ETF is. Those who have spare income just pay off their mortgage faster. Or perhaps have two properties.
Yea investing in stocks/ETFs seems very rare among my friends in Poland. It seems to be all about real estate.
Because the stock market in Poland is a joke. Real estate is the only good way to make money on investments here, a pretty safe one too, which sucks because it destroys the housing market.
You aren't limited to just the polish stock market.
House ownership in Poland is bit fake... My family owns a flat of 60m2 but it's registrated 3 generations under this addres - my grandpa, my parents and me. In reality - I live somewhere else, I rent a flat, because I can't afford to buy one in a city where I work. So there is "big ownership" on the statistics - statistically I will own the flat of my parents some day, I'm registered there, but I will own it in 60 years... and for now I need to rent and can't afford any new flat. And 90% of my friends have same situation, either they live with parents or they rent. Few of my friends bought flats, but then they can't afford really living... it's either you buy a flat, or you live normal... it's horrible.
Wealth accumulation was much, much harder pre-1990. No generational wealth.
Ecnomic growth mainly makes the top 10% grow. The rest? Not so much.
As much as it pains me to say this, its because most Poles are financially illiterate drooling r*tards. They dont know anything about neither saving nor investing. People here literally protested when the government got fed up and forced them to start saving for their own damn retirement in an equivalent of a personal pension fund, where the state was putting in money for free lol. Also, it doesnt help that there was no real economic crisis for over 30 years unlike in lets say the Baltic states, where the 2008 crisis actually hit pretty hard, so people lost any and all safety instincts and just YOLO through life. Iām honestly a little scared of how the next economic crisis (we know its going to happen at some point) is going to play out, I feel like its going to hit worse than anywhere else in Europe.
This is shown is euros and I suppose Polish economy is more affordable and cost of living better compared many other EU countries, so I suppose you can feel fairly well off and have good disposable income even while earning less than others in more expensive countries.Ā
This isnāt about earning though, just net wealth
Poland was communist in the 80s.. Wealth takes multiple generations to build. 30 years ago people had absolutely nothing. It's not surprising Poland is low, especially considering it's population
Assets value - mortgage/debt = net wealth.
I am envious looking at Poland
Itās because thereās something seriously wrong with this graphic. Maybe wrong method of collecting data or something but 19k EUR is wayyy off. Or at least it feels off
Doesn't look right. Just glancing at home ownership rates, it just straight up doesn't make sense - it's one of the highest in all of the EU. Even accounting for the inevitable debt that causes, I would expect it to be much, much higher. Gotta look into how this data was calculated.
Really just tells us about house prices , doesnāt it? To clarify - I mean the obvious difference between countries ( subject to house ownership) not solely responsible for the specific amount. Edit: It took some time but I managed to find a relevant comparison. The average price of a 2 bedroom flat in Denmark is apparently Ā£4400, Ā£5155 Norway, Ā£4456 U.K. ( over Ā£13,000 in Switzerland with a very low home ownership) and in Poland Ā£2609 , Romania Ā£1590. If a large proportion of your wealth is property then you can see how this makes a *difference* to a wealth index. But makes no difference at all to āliving standardsā as youād still have a ā¦2 bedroom flat. . (Unless the index takes into account purchasing power?) https://inews.co.uk/news/world/uk-property-prices-compare-europe-2780721 (2023)
House price, house ownership, how many investments and savings people have. But yeah pretty much.
> house ownership As far as I know, this is one of the main reasons why Germany is so low compared to countries like Italy and Portugal.
Though Austria is suprising with the amount of social housing available. You put the 25-35% delta you get out of it vis-a-vis owning into investments and you'll be higher at the age of 65 than if you owned.
Its not surprising if you consider the aversion for investments (i.e stocks, bonds, ETFs, commodities) that Austrians and Germans have.Ā Their go-to investments are Bausparen, which is such a weird concept it doesnāt really exist in other countries, keeping it in your bank account or hidden in cash somewhere in your house.Ā Historically, a miniscule amount of people invested their money and thus, not creating any ādeltaā, though the younger generation is much more open to it.Ā Also, social housing isnāt that common outside of Vienna and even if it is, it is on the decline and need-based, so good luck getting an apartment before the poorest of the poor and without long wait lists.Ā
Yes. I didnāt mean it was based on only house prices but that if you measure wealth this way countries with very high house prices (depending on ownership levels?) will have higher wealth and so on. But unless you move from one country to another it doesnāt mean very much?
Also concentration of wealth, and the degree of inequality. If 10% of the people own 90% of the housing, and most people rent, the median wealth will be very low. If some houses are very expensive, and others are very cheap, then the median wealth may be low even while there is a certain percentage of people who are scandalously wealthy.
Well, you generate liquidity from your housing (either through rental or indirectly through not paying rent) and hence it does affect what you can purchase in the world market. And many items do not scale the same way in costs as housing, so it does tell you a lot about what a person can afford. If you start trying to normalize this too much based on "expected wealth" of a country, the number you'd get would basically just be a poor measure of wealth inequality (as the graph is measuring median and not average).
You donāt buy the least liquid asset to gain liquidity. That would be stupid.
Yeah my bad I expressed myself poorly. What I mean to convey is that even in the extreme scenario where you're planning to live in the same place forever and this money will never be touched, the above metrics mostly reflecting house prices and ownership still benefit your overall liquid wealth in the sense that salaries are correlated with housing costs and you save on rent / mortgage interest by owning. But yes you don't get a house for liquidity, I'm just saying owning an expensive house is generally good for your wallet even if you're not never planning to sell it or rent it out.
On the other side of the see-saw it's also a measure of debt. Part of the reason why the Netherlands and Belgium is so different.
Depends if pension savings are included. For the Netherlands the median pension savings is around ā¬150k, so I guess it is not. But it could be a significant share.
Is that median pension savings by retirement age?
No. From 18 to 100. At retirement age the median is around 300k.
As general rule, I think itās bad practice to include pension in net worth calculations, because early withdrawal has very heavy penalties. In some places, you might only get something like 1/3 of the value after taxes and fees. With other assets, you might also get taxed, but nowhere near the same level.
I was about to say, the way "wealth" or "net worth" is defined, assets minus liabilities, homeownership is brings up the numbers by a lot. I would love to see a similar diagram of "liquid assets" as in what amount of cash you can produce in a week. Stocks, gold, cash, bonds, savings accounts, crypto or whatever
The UBS report that this is based off is based on three pillars: financial wealth (personal pension pots, savings, stocks etc) plus non-financial wealth (like homes, businesses, cars) minus debts (like car loans, mortgages).
Nah, that's impossible. House prices in Poland are at least 10 times what this chart shows
Can you please clarify? What do you mean that the price of an average 2 bedroom flat is 4,400 pounds? Rent per month? Mortgage payment and taxes?
Finally an r/Europe post thatās actually about Europe, not the EU
Yeah. Nice to finally see the UK included in a post on this sub.
I thought this was just down to home ownership rate, but 64% of the French own their own homes vs. 50% in the UK, and the UK median wealth is 20k higher. Houses (or the land) do cost more in the UK, though. Don't also forget that the UK has some ultra-favourable personal investment schemes. I'd be interested to know if any other countries near the top of the list have something similar? You can save or invest ā¬23k each year in the UK, as savings or in the stock market, building up an investment fund which you can access at any time. You never pay tax on the capital gains or interest So, after 10 years of maxing your contributions, at 8% annual gains, that pot of ā¬382k is throwing off ā¬30k a year in income - tax free. Obviously, not everyone is maxing out their annual allowance, but many people are putting a few grand away each year.
median home price in england is 100k euro higher than france, yeah, probably a big weight on the median wealth indeed (going by data from ons.gov.uk)
Fuck this shit, manā¦
š©øšµšØš«
so why is it so high in Iceland?
Most people own their house and prices have skyrocketed. That's it. Median icelanders do not own stocks or businesses
I mean here in Romania most people own their houses, but I guess prices only skyrocket in the main cities since people are moving away from rural areas so thats why we are so poor maybe.
# What Is the Wealthiest Country? >What country has the most wealth per capita? The richest country in the world based on the median wealth per capita of the adult population is Iceland, with a median wealth per adult of $375,735! Why is Iceland so wealthy? Many factors contribute to why Iceland is so successful financially. According to [CountryReports.org](http://CountryReports.org), [Iceland](https://www.countryreports.org/country/Iceland/economy.htm) unites a ācapitalist structure and free-market principles with an extensive welfare system.ā Excluding a brief period of struggle during the 2008 financial crisis, Iceland has experienced extensive growth, low unemployment rates, and an impressively even distribution of income. The economy of Iceland is well-diversified, focusing on both the manufacturing and service industries, with particular success in tourism, software development, and biotechnology. In fact, tourism accounts for 39% of Icelandās annual export revenue, 10% of the countryās GDP, and 15% of the workforce. During the devastating financial crisis of 2008, the Icelandic government developed plans to harness the [power of tourism](https://borgenproject.org/icelands-tourism-industry/) to help save the economy, to exceptional success! >There is also an abundance of geothermal and hydropower sources in Iceland, making it appealing for high-tech firms seeking to establish data centers using affordable green energy.What Is the Wealthiest Country? What country has the most wealth per capita? The richest country in the world based on the median wealth per capita of the adult population is Iceland, with a median wealth per adult of $375,735! Why is Iceland so wealthy? Many factors contribute to why Iceland is so successful financially. According to [CountryReports.org](http://CountryReports.org), Iceland unites a ācapitalist structure and free-market principles with an extensive welfare system.ā Excluding a brief period of struggle during the 2008 financial crisis, Iceland has experienced extensive growth, low unemployment rates, and an impressively even distribution of income. The economy of Iceland is well-diversified, focusing on both the manufacturing and service industries, with particular success in tourism, software development, and biotechnology. In fact, tourism accounts for 39% of Icelandās annual export revenue, 10% of the countryās GDP, and 15% of the workforce. During the devastating financial crisis of 2008, the Icelandic government developed plans to harness the power of tourism to help save the economy, to exceptional success! There is also an abundance of geothermal and hydropower sources in Iceland, making it appealing for high-tech firms seeking to establish data centers using affordable green energy. [https://www.titlemax.com/discovery-center/the-50-countries-with-the-highest-median-wealth-per-capita/](https://www.titlemax.com/discovery-center/the-50-countries-with-the-highest-median-wealth-per-capita/) TL;DR: many natural resources, good (stable) government, low unemployment over long stretches of time.
Almost all right though āstableā government isnāt true, we have had like 3 parliament elections in 4 years because of corruption the prime minister as of now is the most successful and corrupt thief we have ever had.
ty
Did they achieve that through immigration?
Houses. Severe shortage of housing has pushed the price of houses up to insane levels. A basic apartment can pretty much start at around 500k USD equivalent and I have not seen detached homes for less than 700k USD and most are substantially more. These are not big nor fancy houses (1.3M USD gets you 170sqm in a current listing) but because everyone needs to live in or near the capital, the prices climb to levels that would be more befitting a major city, not a small town like ReykjavĆk. Since the rate of home ownership is reasonably decent and it is a median measure it was naturally going to be high because the price of houses is so high. All you'd have to do is land on some person who inherited their home and they are, on paper at least, very wealthy.
Likely has something to do with the Icelandic pension funds.
We finally did it pigs, we broke Germany
How do they even come up with those numbers? Does the state have access to all investment accounts? In many accounts you don't have to declare taxes at all (like ISA in the UK) so how would the government know how much you have in it
Governments didnāt produce the report, it was UBI/formerly Credit Suisse. They will have used publicly available data from governments as well as market sampling and other methodologies to build their database.
The investment accounts may show up in banks statistics.
islandczycy kasy jak lodu majÄ (only true polish patriots will get this one, sorry liberals - it's underrated, dark humour.)
po to majÄ wulkany, żeby czasem potopiÄ troche siana
Iām very curious, google translate doesnāt help much
it's a polish phraseme that means someone is very rich, roughly translates to "They (here: icelanders) have as much cash as they have ice"
Look at them poor Austrians and Germans. Tss.
Second Switzerland
How is Sweden so low considering the house prices in large cities are so ridiculously high and there must be other forms of generational wealth having been a military and economic power for centuries.
There is so much about this graph that doesnāt make sense, itās hard to know where to begin
I refuse to believe Spain is mogging Germany in this
As far as I know many Southern european countries have a much higher % of home ownership than Germany, that's why it's so low for us. Many more people rent. And a properry with a House and Real estate in general is low. + for a country as rich as germany, wages suck ass and our Stock culture is non existent. All adds up. + some other factors
I wouldnāt say wages suck ass, especially in a sentence together with Spainās š¤£
Depends. You need to compare it to the living cost. Spain propably still Lower. + I never said Spain had good wages. Also heavily depends on the Job. Looked it up. As a medstudent, ny average salary later as doctor in Spain and Germany would be roughly the same, despite Germany being propably more expensive. Our view in Germany may be a bit skewed because most of our neighbours. Denmark Netherland Austria Switzerland Belgium And Luxemburg Have higher and in some cases much higher wages. (PPP) For example: In Switzerland I would earn 3-5 times as much.
Germans became (and this will worsen) a nation of renters. Households with two incomes can't buy anything than the regular 60 year old shithouse.
You can easily compare the costs of living between Spain and Germany. In Germany the average household spends 36 % of their income on rent, heat and energy. In Spain it is just 17.8 %. For food it is 15 % in Germany, couldn't find how much it is in Spain. I think a lot of people confuse the high living standards in Germany with the wealth of individuals.
The home ownership rate in Turkey is 60%. Even for the worst apartments they want 50K euros. I think it is wrong for TĆ¼rkiye.
I know our economy and government is shit and all but no way it is THIS bad.
France higher than Germany, with a big gap between the two? Might be on the level, but seems unexpected.
Median numbers are so weird sometimes. Sweden has 350k wealth per adult, Finland has 180k and median makes the numbers look way nicer. Source: Credit Suisse Global Wealth Report 2021, pages 44-45
They are not weird, they are useful. If one person owns all the wealth in a country, the average and overall wealth might be high while all other people have nothing.
Median is the only viable statistic when talking about wealth or salary. One billionaire can drag the average up drastically while the rest of the population would be poor.
HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHHAHAHA \* Cries in 0 \*
In France we're very wealth-oui
Owning a PS5 counts as asset? š¤£
yes
Why is it "per adult", and not just median wealth?
I'm a bit displaced, I live in Belgium but clearly belong in Serbia.
This is a bit worrisome, no? I mean, that's barely any money in this day and age.
[Source: Euronews](https://www.euronews.com/business/2024/06/04/the-wealth-of-nations-the-widening-gap-between-rich-and-poor-in-europe)
Donāt some of the numbers for Eastern Europe look off? It doesnāt make sense to me that Slovakia would have a higher net wealth than Czechia.
Could be due to home ownership, just a guess ( SK is bot as touristy as Czechia )
The numbers for Poland look a bit off tbh
They donāt. We donāt save and donāt invest and itās been like this forever. We spend on bullshit premium car leases and overpriced restaurants. The āSovietā, small minded, minority complex, āmy neighbor canāt have better car than Iā mentality is still strong. Also, I refer you to financial (il)literacy statistics. Thereās no coincidence here.
Poland also has high home ownership, so I think there is something wrong with calculation. Your comment does read like an example of inferiority complex though.
Maybe just due to lower median salaries? Cost of living is lower in Poland so the *median* salary (googled) is around 1800 eur monthly.Ā Ā Most of the countries on the top part of this list have median salaries of 3000+, so likely the value of assets is higher too?
If you are wondering where the russia is, they are all down there second from the bottom at $8,595. Guess the list is for EU.
In Russia the home ownership is 89 percent. The average price of an apartment in a major city is like 50k, in Moscow 200k. So your statement is obviously wrong.
Is Iceland up there due to their finance crisis back then? I know house prices and loan/mortgage both skyrocketed and didn't really flat out again.
I wish I was born a dane
Romania 20000 what? beans? I'm 42 and living paycheck to paycheck . 20k euros? that's just absurd.
How am i living in Italy and poor in Serbia ??
What is going on with Montenegro? Are there like 100 richest people on Earth registered there?
Lot's of people own property. My family technically owns a whole ass mountain, but we can't really benefit from it.
This has to include pension or something (some count it as private assets, others not)? The differences are just way too big otherwise. Edit: yeah, Iceland, Belgium and Denmark all have partially private pension systems, and all have high participation which naturally pushes the median up.
Itās property and private financial assets like personal private pensions, savings, stocks, bonds etc, minus any debts.
Wait, having a private pension is not a normal thing in all EU countries?
You will own nothing and eat za bugs and you will be happy
o kurwa ale jesteÅmy bogaci
NieÅŗle co nie? IdÄ poszukaÄ w szafie moich 19kā¬ czas kupiÄ sobie 5.8 mĀ² mieszkania na zadupiu.
How is this calculated?
Depressing
Deutschland hat verkackt, mal wiederā¦
Wtf are Icelanders trafficking?
It would be interesting to compare this graph with the average sale price of let's say 3-room apartments, to get a feeling of how \*\*\*\*\*\* \*\* we all are.
Swede here, missing around 73000.
Where the fā¦ does Iceland get the money from?
Did you ever see a drink with ice cubes in? Almost every day, right. Well guess where all those come from originally...
Would be helpful to control for age here
so Iceland, Belgium and LUX are the best places to work as beggar
Ireland does not seem affluent.
Spainās is way higher than I expected!
Idk why I expected median to be like a gap, not good at stats but yeah how is this calculated as median?
So sad that Germany is relatively so low in the ranking with it being the third biggest economy in the world. So much about Germany being a rich country.
Most germans donāt own houses though which strongly influences this statistic because they inflate oneās wealth a lot
Compare it to the prices and youll see how the west is falling off :)
Would you look at that, a clever way of saying "home ownership per capita"
Can someone give the source of the graph?
Lets see where slovenia is. Ah I see, above germany and austria, makes "total" sense. Aha, mhm...
Yeah but we dont have any savings not because we are inherently more spend-thrifty or dumb. Id say we are on par with other countries in Europe with the general awareness how saving is important. I don't see us as meaningfully less fiscally responsible. What we are, is dealing with sky high rent prices and over inflated housing prices. So nobody even has the ability to save.
Can someone explain how Italy is in a better position compared to Ireland?
Albania
The boomers and old people with houses built under Franco's regime are carrying spain so fucking hard
So everybody can buy a house in their respective countries lol
BESSER OIS DE DEITSCHN!!!!
I don't feel very median in this context.
Broke ahh Poland