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.
One thing is for sure, they are willing for you and I to pay them.
The middle class in Scandinavia is definitely much stronger than in America. Just because people people like you are filthy rich doesnt mean you dont have a responsibility towards the society and nation where you earned your massive wealth. Its not only the middle class that benefits from such policies as in Scandinavia, but also rich people like you who get to live in a better educated, healthier and more productive and ultimately more competitive society.
People earn good wages in Scandinavia, they have 6 weeks of paid vacation to improve family connections and health, 1 year of paid family and sick leave to bond with their newborn babies and say goodbye to their dying parents, a medicare for all system, no chance of going bankrupt because of cancer treatment, no for-profit prisons that wants more and more people incarcerated, child care costs $2000 a year, not $20 000 a year like in the US and they have publicly funded elections so politicians are not in the pockets of billionaires and corporations but serve their people and invest in the quality of life of the population.
Well, you advocate far right policies that does not benefit you, but the filthy rich, so I assumed you were. Sorry.
One day the Cold War generation will die. When they do,that's when we will begin to see an America that makes sense and isn't ruled by the most greedy, most brainwashed generation since their fathers and grandfathers built the modern welfare state, an American creation by the way
Odd that those who question how we would pay for things like health care rarely seem to question how we are going to pay for all these useless wars nor do they support raising taxes to pay them.
Why is it wrong to not pay for health care but its O.K. to attack other countries bases upon false pretenses and not pay for it?
Keep in mind, income inequality is much lower in these countries, so far more of the wealth of these nations lie in the hands of the middle class.
There's a REASON for that. And economists KNOW it:
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
Because of our highly progressive tax system, the government is overly dependent on making sure the income gap is as wide as possible, and that they don't discourage the revenue producers too much by taxing them at rates that are too high therefore either driving them and/or their capital available for investment out of the country, or causing them to scale back on their productivity and income because there's a tipping point at which they decide they have enough for now and don't need to earn as much thereby significantly lowering their effective tax rate and dramatically reducing federal tax revenue.
I'll let this economist explain it:
Quote:
"[Economist Anatole] Kaletsky argues that over-reliance on progressive taxes creates "a perverse incentive for governments to promote income inequality. Ifthe solvency of the stateand the ability to fund basic services for the poorest people in society depends on the rich getting even richer, it is tempting for even the most progressive politicians to support widening inequalities."
For example, in the U.S., the top 1% earns 18.7% of the income, but pays 35.1% of the federal income tax revenue, roughly twice their fair share which is 4 times what the middle class pays (the middle class pays only about half of their fair share of the federal income tax compared to their share of the income). The problem with our country's progressive tax system is that it creates a perverse incentive for the federal government to enact policies that promote as wide of an income gap as possible in order to maximize tax revenue.
As long as the U.S. has a progressive tax system, the incentive remains to keep the income gap as wide as possible, and this is why: When the top 1% loses income share, the federal government loses twice that much in tax revenue. But when the top 1% gains income share, the federal government consequently gains twice that much in tax revenue. Another way to look at it is that the federal government receives 4 times more income tax revenue per dollar earned from the top 1% than they do from the middle class, so guess whose income they're going to favor and protect.
Furthermore, the countries with more income equality have regressive tax systems, mostly based on VAT, consumption, etc., instead of one's income. Pay close attention to the charts:
Think very carefully about that... It's counterintuitive, and some people get angry when this is pointed out to them, but it actually turns out to be true.
And true to form, Mr. 'tax the rich's' presidency has resulted in EXACTLY what was predicted by the liberal economist quoted above.
the middle class in the USA was much stronger before Obama took office.
the middle class can be great again without higher taxes and nationalized everything. We did it before.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PCALMike
The middle class in Scandinavia is definitely much stronger than in America. Just because people people like you are filthy rich doesnt mean you dont have a responsibility towards the society and nation where you earned your massive wealth. Its not only the middle class that benefits from such policies as in Scandinavia, but also rich people like you who get to live in a better educated, healthier and more productive and ultimately more competitive society.
People earn good wages in Scandinavia, they have 6 weeks of paid vacation to improve family connections and health, 1 year of paid family and sick leave to bond with their newborn babies and say goodbye to their dying parents, a medicare for all system, no chance of going bankrupt because of cancer treatment, no for-profit prisons that wants more and more people incarcerated, child care costs $2000 a year, not $20 000 a year like in the US and they have publicly funded elections so politicians are not in the pockets of billionaires and corporations but serve their people and invest in the quality of life of the population.
Odd that those who question how we would pay for things like health care rarely seem to question how we are going to pay for all these useless wars nor do they support raising taxes to pay them.
Why is it wrong to not pay for health care but its O.K. to attack other countries bases upon false pretenses and not pay for it?
That's a politicians' game, and both sides do it (e.g., the most American war deaths have come at the hands of Democrat Administrations). Americans in general don't want to fund wars anywhere. But we have no say in how taxpayer money gets spent.
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.
