Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I keep forgetting the Ignore option on C-D that allows you to ignore people who continously make inane comments (whether ignorant shrill anti-american or the socialist-phobic). Seems to work for a better experience.
Or even better how about the corporations and top earners paying a fair share of tax? Something at least approaching what working folk are compelled to do.
Socialism in the demorcratic sense is the only process that delievers at least in part fairer outcomes to society as a whole.
Far sooner our system than yours but sadly American influences are coming into play.
Doesn't deliver anything but misery. Hasn't made those people any happier or more prosperous getting money given to them taken from other people. People don't appreciate things given by random people, only what they have earned themselves.
The USSR, Zimbabwe, North Korea and many other examples have confiscated successful, profitable individual property for everyone's use or redistribution and they all ended up as some of the most miserable, ragged people in modern history.
The top earners do pay their "fair share" in tax.
In the USA(according to the IRS in 2009):
The top 1% pay 36.73% of all income tax paid
The top 5% pay 58.66% of all income tax paid
The top 10% pay 70.67% of all income tax paid
The top 25% pay 87.30% of all income tax paid
The top 50% pay 97.75% of all income tax paid
The bottom 50% of all earners paid 2.25% of all income tax paid.
If anything the bottom 50% of adults in the USA are coasting and cruising and the upper 50% of earners are paying the bill for them.
So your "they don't pay their fair share" hypothesis is poppycock.
In Australia, a vast percentage of Aboriginals are on welfare and are dependent on government and taxpayers redistributing their income to them. Does that look like a happy community of people to you? It doesn't to me. Going by your reasoning these people should be having the time of their lives.
Cinnabun, the original poster, do you think seeing she's unhappy with welfare in the USA, would be a happy, productive, useful citizen to Australia on welfare there? I'm guessing not.
OP, are you an enrolled tribal member? You can apply to the tribe for a college scholarship, or start out at a tribal college (the Eastern Cherokees have one, I don't know about the Oklahoma Cherokees). You would also qualify for a Pell Grant. As a tribal member, you would probably have guaranteed employment, if the tribal businesses are doing well. You never know, your best bet might be to stay home and research potential resources there.
Doesn't deliver anything but misery. Hasn't made those people any happier or more prosperous getting money given to them taken from other people. People don't appreciate things given by random people, only what they have earned themselves.
The USSR, Zimbabwe, North Korea and many other examples have confiscated successful, profitable individual property for everyone's use or redistribution and they all ended up as some of the most miserable, ragged people in modern history.
The top earners do pay their "fair share" in tax.
In the USA(according to the IRS in 2009):
The top 1% pay 36.73% of all income tax paid
The top 5% pay 58.66% of all income tax paid
The top 10% pay 70.67% of all income tax paid
The top 25% pay 87.30% of all income tax paid
The top 50% pay 97.75% of all income tax paid
The bottom 50% of all earners paid 2.25% of all income tax paid.
If anything the bottom 50% of adults in the USA are coasting and cruising and the upper 50% of earners are paying the bill for them.
So your "they don't pay their fair share" hypothesis is poppycock.
In Australia, a vast percentage of Aboriginals are on welfare and are dependent on government and taxpayers redistributing their income to them. Does that look like a happy community of people to you? It doesn't to me. Going by your reasoning these people should be having the time of their lives.
Cinnabun, the original poster, do you think seeing she's unhappy with welfare in the USA, would be a happy, productive, useful citizen to Australia on welfare there? I'm guessing not.
From where I sit many folk in USA live rather miserable lives. Don't agree with most of what you say. I didn't mention PDRK or USSR. I said social demorcratic nations. I of course refer to Germany/Netherlands/France and the like. Far healthier societies. No corporations do not pay their fair share. Cleaver accounting allowed many big corporates to avoid tax as came to light in UK recently.
As for the rich,well need you ask. So many tax avoidance schemes allows them minimal payments from gross earnings.
You are welcome to your system but please keep it to yourselves. Are you trying to tell me countries with no welfare system in place are happier. Tell that to Africa. Aboriginal issues are complicated. What would your solution be? No welfare?
Welfare systems were designed as a safety net not a lifestyle choice!
Quote:
Originally Posted by the troubadour
From where I sit many folk in USA live rather miserable lives. Don't agree with most of what you say. I didn't mention PDRK or USSR. I said social demorcratic nations. I of course refer to Germany/Netherlands/France and the like. Far healthier societies. No corporations do not pay their fair share. Cleaver accounting allowed many big corporates to avoid tax as came to light in UK recently.
As for the rich,well need you ask. So many tax avoidance schemes allows them minimal payments from gross earnings.
You are welcome to your system but please keep it to yourselves. Are you trying to tell me countries with no welfare system in place are happier. Tell that to Africa. Aboriginal issues are complicated. What would your solution be? No welfare?
I guess by social democratic nations in Europe you're also referring to Spain,Italy,Portugal,Ireland and Greece-Yes I guess those folks looked pretty happy at what's going on in their country- about as happy as Germany is as they continue to bail them out.
As to the OP's original question yes most countries "expect" you to get a job or go to college-or both-it's called taking responsibility -trying to figure out if you can go to another country and get them to foot the bill is naive at best. Research what education grants you are eligible for in the USA-go to a local instate college and get a part job -like alot of people do.
America may not be perfect but I will take it over the problems in Europe.
The solution is to watch your borders and to strongly control immigration to your country because with having a good welfare system there are going to be people who will want to move in(along with all of their family) because of it like the OP of this thread.
Troubador, I can't rep you again, but exactly. Everyone in America is terrified of losing their job. They would literally starve on the streets. A childless adult gets nothing but food stamps, and even that is limited to three months every three years
. Everyone in America is terrified of losing their job. They would literally starve on the streets. A childless adult gets nothing but food stamps, and even that is limited to three months every three years
I guess you forgot the rest of the sentence ........known as Able-Bodied Adults Without Dependents ......They are limited to three months of food stamps in a 36-month period unless they work 20 hours a week, or spend the same number of hours in a job training or a SNAP “workfare” program. (Even if they are disqualified, however, these adults without dependents can resume benefits if they work or participate in job training for 80 hours in a 30-day period. And other stipulations enable some to receive up to six months of benefits in that three-year period without working.) This requirement was also temporarily suspended during the height of the recession
This is usually on top of unemployment benefits after allowable deductions for rent and utilities are taken out if they have already been paying into the system from previous employment.
I guess you forgot the rest of the sentence ........known as Able-Bodied Adults Without Dependents ......They are limited to three months of food stamps in a 36-month period unless they work 20 hours a week, or spend the same number of hours in a job training or a SNAP “workfare” program. (Even if they are disqualified, however, these adults without dependents can resume benefits if they work or participate in job training for 80 hours in a 30-day period. And other stipulations enable some to receive up to six months of benefits in that three-year period without working.) This requirement was also temporarily suspended during the height of the recession
This is usually on top of unemployment benefits after allowable deductions for rent and utilities are taken out if they have already been paying into the system from previous employment.
Thank you for pointing out the obvious omission and clarification..the omission makes me one lose credibility on these forums.. even more so than they have lost with their shrill anti-yank diatribes.. so tiresome.. yawn
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Welfare systems were designed as a safety net not a lifestyle choice!
