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.
The chart YOU posted supports exactly what I've said: the more regressive the tax system, the higher the rate of transfers. Or are you simply unable to understand the info a scatter plot chart displays?
Sure. The chart also clearly states the US is deficient in social transfer compared to other modern countries. That could be fixed by a VAT or similar or fixed by a change in the income tax. You are making the mistake of assuming causality when none is present. Yes if we plotted percent of GDP spent on defense as the axis we could show that social transfer is inversely related to defense spending. So you think we can increase social transfer by decreasing defense spending?
The whole thing betrays a lack of understanding numbers.
Check any of the lists for best countries or best country to live in or best country to raise children...
Guess what Scandinavian countries rank very high. Often better than the US. Go for poverty levels...same thing.
So all these bankrupt and immoral places turn out to be great places to live...
Your posts would be funny if they were not so sad...
Yeah, I know, it's always wonderful and peachy "over there in Europe", based on some silly leftist United Nations criteria. With half-baked millennial-pleasing "data" and "statistics".
Guess what? I don't care about Scandinavia. If they want to live under a philosophy of redistributive theft, with "need" making it OK to plunder good people, then that's their funeral. That is not the American way, where we value individual rights OVER collective tyranny. Where freedom is more important than the ability to steal one's way to free food and free adult diapers and dental care.
We don't do that here, we shouldn't do it here. We're better than Scandinavia and Europe and all the leftist paradises "over there in Europe".
Which by the way, the whole Leftist Scandinavian meme is nonsense:
Sure. The chart also clearly states the US is deficient in social transfer compared to other modern countries. That could be fixed by a VAT or similar or fixed by a change in the income tax. You are making the mistake of assuming causality when none is present. Yes if we plotted percent of GDP spent on defense as the axis we could show that social transfer is inversely related to defense spending. So you think we can increase social transfer by decreasing defense spending?
The whole thing betrays a lack of understanding numbers.
Look how this guy uses, without judgment or critical or moral analysis, an horrific and evil term like "social transfer". Like it is absolutely nothing evil at all. We just "transfer" the property of some people to others. Why? Because they need it.
Think about the Holocaustic magnitude of this concept. And the way it is thrown about without a care in the world for what is moral or right.
If you base a society on such an evil underpinning, what evil will you be fine with heaping on top of the decayed foundation. And actually, why bother?
The European system is completely bankrupt and immoral, and that is why European countries that have embraced the collectivist-theft model are languishing. We see a backlash against that now in the form of Brexit and the rise of populist groups in nearly every country expressing outrage and frustration with economic policies that depend on stealing from Peter to give to Paul.
No.
The populist movements in Europe wanted to preserve or expand what you consider to be "collectivist-theft".
Quote:
But despite the NHS pledge having been at the heart of their message in the run-up to the 23 June vote, and displayed on the official Vote Leave battlebus, the Change Britain website made no mention of the NHS in its manifesto about how to make a success of Brexit.
Instead, Change Britain said on its “Brexit Means Brexit” page that any savings made as a result of no longer having to pay into the EU budget (assuming the UK leaves the single market) should be spent on guaranteeing “continued funding for farming, science, universities and poorer regions of the UK”. The website was taken down, although cached versions of its pages were still accessible through search engines.
Sure. The chart also clearly states the US is deficient in social transfer compared to other modern countries. That could be fixed by a VAT or similar or fixed by a change in the income tax. You are making the mistake of assuming causality when none is present.
Yet the chart YOU chose to post shows a direct correlation between higher VAT taxes and higher rates of transfers.
Like I said, and like the research shows... the more regressive the tax system, the more progressive the transfers.
And the lower the defense spending the higher the social transfer. So we go for a high VAT and shut down the defense department?
We can't shut down the defense department; it's required by the Constitution. Transfers aren't required, though. Let's shut those down. Problem solved.
We can't shut down the defense department; it's required by the Constitution. Transfers aren't required, though. Let's shut those down. Problem solved.
*******************************
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
******************************************
Just swear off all that silliness?
*******************************
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
You've just proven my point. "Provide for" and "promote" are not the same. One requires it be provided for, the other has no such requirement.
You've just proven my point. "Provide for" and "promote" are not the same. One requires it be provided for, the other has no such requirement.
One can argue, if you provide for, you are promoting general welfare.
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.
