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.
they are authoritarianist because they are muslim states, canada, australia, france, germany arent authoritarian, some of these countries have more freedoms than the us
Yeah, there is a difference between authoritarian and socialistic. Authoritarian states can be Socialistic, and Socialistic states can be Authoritarian but they need not necessarily be both - and they are not one and the same.
There are plenty of examples of Authoritarian states that have little that is Socialistic about them - states that heavily oppress their people but provide little to nothing in the way of services to them - leaving them to sink or swim on their own. In fact, this has been the most common form of rule throughout history - and still exists in many places today.
nobody pays 50% tax rate except the ultra rich, this is a common misconseption, even in the US during the 50s and 60s, the higest tax rate was 91% for the rich, ierland pays less personal income taxes than the US
If you look at the mean in Norway of nearly 40%, it's not a stretch to think that there are large numbers of people paying in the neighborhood of 50% - maybe not exactly 50%. Secondly, this does not include all of the taxes people pay. For example, in some of these countries, "the church" is run by the state and you pay a tax to the church on top of the income tax. In addition, in many of these countries, people fall into the high brackets at a fairly average level of income. They also tend to have very large local taxes.
socialists must hate the founding fathers. All of these quotes where from Ben Franklin.
When the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.
It would be a hard government that should tax its people one-tenth part of their income.
I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it.
The Constitution only gives people the right to pursue happiness. You have to catch it yourself.
Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become more corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.
Perhaps if more socialists put their money where their mouth is and actually gave money to charities, they wouldn't have to steal from the wealthy and give to the poor. Perhaps if they didn't look at government as a provider and crutch, this country would be better off. The very psychology of liberalism is destructive. Putting faith in government and collectivism over God, liberty, and individualism is complete insane as the author of The Liberal Mind goes into with great detail. It's an excellent read folks. I highly recommend it.
That's because they have an absurdly low corporate tax rate that brings in big buisiness - mostly from the US, because of our high corporate tax rates - both Obama and Clinton want to increase further.
Actually, Norway has a moderate corporate tax rate:
"Norway has a high income tax rate and a moderate corporate tax rate. The top income tax rate is 47.8 percent, and the top corporate tax rate is 28 percent. Other taxes include a value-added tax (VAT) and a tax on net wealth. In the most recent year, overall tax revenue as a percentage of GDP was 43.6 percent."
they are authoritarianist because they are muslim states, canada, australia, france, germany arent authoritarian, some of these countries have more freedoms than the us
The more socialist a state becomes, the more authoritarian they become. My point was that Iran and Saudi Arabia are not less socialist that the US, as Hilltopper claimed. Everything that the individual has comes from the State.
Mediocrity isn't a higher quality of life. A longer average life span isn't a higher quality of life. Having the opportunity and freedom to create your own prosperity without the government raping you is.
So you reject tangible benefits in favor of glittering generalities? Tell me, does "freedom to create" and "oppurtunity" put food on the table?
This is what is wrong with everything in this country. The population falls for demagoguery instead of dealing in reality. If a longer lifespan isn't a sign of a higher quality of life, what is?
Actually, Norway has a moderate corporate tax rate:
"Norway has a high income tax rate and a moderate corporate tax rate. The top income tax rate is 47.8 percent, and the top corporate tax rate is 28 percent. Other taxes include a value-added tax (VAT) and a tax on net wealth. In the most recent year, overall tax revenue as a percentage of GDP was 43.6 percent."
So you reject tangible benefits in favor of glittering generalities? Tell me, does "freedom to create" and "oppurtunity" put food on the table?
This is what is wrong with everything in this country. The population falls for demagoguery instead of dealing in reality. If a longer lifespan isn't a sign of a higher quality of life, what is?
I prefer the benefits of my work. My paycheck puts food on the table and more of it would put more on the table.
The reality is that a repeal of the tax cuts will take about 3,000 dollars from taxpayers over the course of a year. That hurts the middle class. That's before we decide that we want to pay for healthcare for everyone.
I'd do some reading if I were you. Saudi Arabia and Iran are about as socialist as they come. Socialism and Authoritarianism go hand in hand.
Since you are obviously more well read than myself, why don't you please enlighten me. Can you cite some examples of the socialist nature of Saudi Arabia and Iran? Are you suggesting they are more socialist in nature than we are?
Again, can anyone point to other countries LESS socialist than the United States that have a better standard of living and better quality of life?
Yeah, well the Founding Fathers were great men, no doubt about it, but like everyone else they were a product of their time and NOT all-knowing nor all-seeing. The denied women the vote and kept blacks as slaves. Certainly the time for those ideas are past and civilization has changed in other ways they could not have foreseen. In 1776 the country (or what was to become the country) was almost entirely agrarian - indeed largely a wilderness and the ability to live you life independent of others was far easier to achieve - one could at the very least simply head West and carve out your own parcel of land.
Where can you do that nowadays?
MAYBE in Alaska, but the fact is there are a LOT more people now, all living in much closer quarters and all affecting each other a lot more than they did back then.
It is a different time now, with a whole new set of different challenges. The trick is to meet and overcome those challenges without giving up the basic freedoms that make us what we are and provide for our way of life.
Ken
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.
