I don’t think that you, me and OP have different values on this issue, actually? We all agree that the state is supposed to provide us with a structure to live in that we couldn’t have on our own, and as payment for this safety net, we contribute taxes. My and OP’s argument is that with the current projection of the economy and population growth, the state cannot provide the current generation of tax payers with the structures and support that we will eventually need, and therefore many of us would rather pay lower taxes and lose the benefits, because we won’t be getting them anyway. We know what’s coming and we don’t want to be the ones “holding the bag” when the system collapses.
I’m trying to explain OP’s point to the Americans in this thread who don’t understand that European social security systems are currently under severe strain and are on the road to collapse, and how OP feels to have to sacrifice so much of his potential income to support a failing system. The 80s stereotypes of reliable, high-quality social security no longer hold true in Europe in 2023.
I brought up the social system because you can see that everyone in this thread arguing against you is saying that your “excellent welfare system” is the reason why your income is lower than the corresponding American programmer’s. The massive taxation is obviously a big factor to your reduced income, but let’s look away from that for a bit and just focus on the American companies.
American companies in America pay more because the costs of doing business in America are much lower and there is a greater availability of loans and funding.
American companies in Europe pay more because they have the advantages listed above that local European companies don’t have and they have the resources to invest in a global expansion.
That’s it. That’s the answer.