Spreading Democracy?!

hunterw · Post by **hunterw** » 25 Sep 2007, 06:36

SwiftSpear wrote: Don't the top 1% also control like 60% of the total financial sum though?

Per dollar earned I doubt they pay as much tax as the bottom 50%...

The top 1% also control 100% of the government

Neddie · Post by **Neddie** » 25 Sep 2007, 08:46

The top 1% does not control 100% of the Government. It does, however, hold 64% of the total financial value.

Forboding Angel · Post by **Forboding Angel** » 25 Sep 2007, 09:01

nemppu wrote:in socialism everyone is take very good care of,, have good health care, school etc etc

Are you kidding? Or just stupid? Socialized medicine does not work. At least not on a large scale. Look at Canada for a perfect non-working example.

http://www.healthservices.gov.bc.ca/waitlist/index.html

People think that it's so great not to pay for health care, but let me ask you. If you need knee surgery, where does the money to pay the doctors,the hospital etc come from?

"The Government, Duh!"

So where does the government get the money for this? Oh that's right, your and your neighbors pocket etc. Look free very rarely means free, if you don't understand that then you're a bleeding idiot.

Privatized Medicine introduces competition into the marketplace, competition = lower prices, because companies compete for your business.

Look, even if it is from the government and it is "Free", you and everyone else is still paying for it, and if you are so blind as to think otherwise, then you should look into a course on economics.

Government schooling is good??? Are you fricking insane? Arugh, screwit. You my friend, are blind.

tombom · Post by **tombom** » 25 Sep 2007, 09:20

i like the way it's done in the uk

pretty much all the public services have been privatised in a way that lacks any competition, is subsidised horribly by public money and with no checks to see they're performing. the choice to privatise is usually done without the proper analysis of whether it would actually be better

Government schooling is good??? Are you fricking insane? Arugh, screwit. You my friend, are blind.

it's better than some people not being able to afford to go to school

SwiftSpear · Post by **SwiftSpear** » 25 Sep 2007, 09:42

Some really good points Forb. Alot of that stuff I hadn't really considered at all... However, I can definitely verify that as much as Michael Moore might like it, Canadian health care is ass.

Sleksa · Post by **Sleksa** » 25 Sep 2007, 13:38

Are you kidding? Or just stupid? Socialized medicine does not work. At least not on a large scale. Look at Canada for a perfect non-working example.

Finnish system works. But finland itself is a rather small country.

People think that it's so great not to pay for health care, but let me ask you. If you need knee surgery, where does the money to pay the doctors,the hospital etc come from?

Yes, it comes from the goverment.

The goverment on the other hand, gets its money from taxing us.

yes, basically this means that everyone pays for everyone's healthcare. Even when the man needing healthcare is unemployed or handicapped.

who are you to say that a man needing healthcare shouldnt get it?

Government schooling is good??? Are you fricking insane? Arugh, screwit. You my friend, are blind.

how are the things the teachers teach different when the money comes from the goverment(read, us) or your pocket?

There are currently 35 private colleges in finland, so basically all the schools are run by the goverment. And even the majority of those private colleges get funds from the goverment

Privatized Medicine introduces competition into the marketplace, competition = lower prices, because companies compete for your business.

this is bullshit.

Ishach · Post by **Ishach** » 25 Sep 2007, 14:47

Even if competition dosent make it cheaper, it makes sure the healthcare providers try to stay efficient and effective (in comparison to socialized)

In australia healthcare might be cheap/free but it also means you get to sleep in a corridor because there arent enough beds, have to wait cause there arent enough nurses to care for everyone.

but its okay, its 'free'

KDR_11k · Post by **KDR_11k** » 25 Sep 2007, 14:58

Many US Americans seem to consider public schools to be government propaganda indoctrination centers. Dunno why.

Forboding Angel · Post by **Forboding Angel** » 25 Sep 2007, 16:46

KDR_11k wrote:Many US Americans seem to consider public schools to be government propaganda indoctrination centers. Dunno why.

To answer you directly KDR. Socialism. It is a cancer that threatens to erode the basis upon which this country was founded.

Sleksa, you are from finland which as you stated is quite small so I'll give ya a break.

I believe you don't understand what Privatived means in american terms. It means Free Market. Basically heres the deal. No one gets taxed for health care (on a large basis, of course there are small government programs to take care of those who truly do not have the means to pay for it themselves - And no, not medicare... Medicare is far too broad, in fact it's so broad that it sucks in terms of actual care blah blah blah). Everything gets handled by private insurance businesses. Those business compete, you win.

Why the hell are you putting your faith in the government to do things for you? Name one thing that your government (in america) tries to do for you that you can't do better yourself.

Government programs are created to try to solve problems, but government programs end up becoming the problem. For a great example, look at the welfare system in America. It was created with the intent of helping people get on their feet, but instead of helping people get off their asses, it keeps them there by making people dependant on the program.

Case in point: My Fiancee had our son out of wedlock. Here's the totally messed up thing. The biological sperm doner (biological father for those of you in rio linda) ran out a week after he found out she was pregnant. Could not be found, so lets take a look at our favorite government programs that are meant to help unwed mothers get on their feet.

TANIF, Basically government child support, problem is it's only $200 bucks a month, not really enough there to help out much, but hey it's "Free".

Food Stamps, Here is one government program that actually is helpful, but it's extremely wasteful. $410 bucks for 1 mother and 1 toddler per month?

Government assisted childcare (basically the government pays for daycare), Here is the one that pisses me off the most. If she has a job, even a low paying one, the government will not pay for daycare. However, if she doesn't have a job the government is more than happy to pay for daycare so that she can sit on her ass all day and do nothing to further herself.

For those of you without kids let me clue you in to daycare for a toddler. It's 160 bucks a week. A WEEK! If she gets a job to help us out, I am screwed. I can't afford that, even if she was making decent money, it would even out to nil because of the huge costs associated with it. Regardless of the fact that I have a relatively high paying job I am far from rich.

Now lets get on to one that jsut blows my mind. My son has free healthcare till he turns 18. That means anything he wants is paid for. Braces, broken bones, etc., IT EVEN COVERS PLASTIC SURGERY! Now I can understand covering until say maybe 8 yrs old (cause those are generally the years that the cost is crippling) on necessities, but 18? That's just ludicrous. And guess who is paying for that? Thats right, all you other americans who have jobs and pay your taxes. It also includes me as well.

If she gets married, all that goes away. So whats the motivation for an unwed mother to get married? Also, don't forget the ludicrous "Marriage Penalty Tax".

Socialism is bad Mkay? Might work for really small countries, but it will work for the US about as well as it does for canada, that is... Not at all.

Look people, Free is not free. Freedom has NEVER been free. That is something you need to understand because it is a fact of life.

Sleksa · Post by **Sleksa** » 25 Sep 2007, 17:34

Sleksa, you are from finland which as you stated is quite small so I'll give ya a break.

yeah i kinda relied on this statement made a while back ~_~

Also what comes to the childcare stuff you said;

Finland has one of the biggest tax percentages in europe, for example taxation when you buy a new car is so high, that some people go to germany/someplace else to buy a new car. This basically solves 2 things. First of all, it provides funds for the goverment, and secondly encourages people to use public transportation.

The goverment child support in here is around;

110├óÔÇÜ┬¼ for 1 child
120├óÔÇÜ┬¼ for 2 children
130 for 3 children
and 4+ children is 150-170├óÔÇÜ┬¼

But also, when a woman is pregnant, she gets a "mother-vacation" that starts between 30-50 days before giving birth, and it lasts for 105 days, and she gets pay during that time too.

also the fathers get some time off, but its a lot smaller than for the mother.

wasnt the US version like 2 weeks long?

Forboding Angel · Post by **Forboding Angel** » 25 Sep 2007, 17:41

Sleksa wrote:
Sleksa, you are from finland which as you stated is quite small so I'll give ya a break.
yeah i kinda relied on this statement made a while back ~_~

Also what comes to the childcare stuff you said;

Finland has one of the biggest tax percentages in europe, for example taxation when you buy a new car is so high, that some people go to germany/someplace else to buy a new car. This basically solves 2 things. First of all, it provides funds for the goverment, and secondly encourages people to use public transportation.

The goverment child support in here is around;

110├óÔÇÜ┬¼ for 1 child
120├óÔÇÜ┬¼ for 2 children
130 for 3 children
and 4+ children is 150-170├óÔÇÜ┬¼

But also, when a woman is pregnant, she gets a "mother-vacation" that starts between 30-50 days before giving birth, and it lasts for 105 days, and she gets pay during that time too.

also the fathers get some time off, but its a lot smaller than for the mother.

wasnt the US version like 2 weeks long?

If any of the above was done in America it would be an utter disaster. The thought of those types of things being implemented here is nothing short of scary.

BTW, lower taxation increases government revenues substantially, for a recent referance, look at the bush tax cuts. Government revenues shot up substantially from where they were. People have more money, and they generally end up spending it as well as investing large amounts.

Neddie · Post by **Neddie** » 25 Sep 2007, 17:44

Lower taxation CAN increase revenue or it CAN decrease revenue. It depends on a number of factors which I'm not getting into here.

Decimator · Post by **Decimator** » 25 Sep 2007, 18:23

Lower taxes greatly increase revenue. Somewhere you'll hit the point that it actually starts decreasing revenue, but I can assure you that it's far below the 30% or so income tax that we're paying now.

Swift, the very wealthy also tend to make their money off of high risk investments, which are taxed less to promote investment. I think that capital gains is around 15% versus the 30% or so income tax. Again, you must remember that it's just plain stupid to sit on money, they invest it.

Neddie · Post by **Neddie** » 25 Sep 2007, 18:26

They greatly increase revenue when certain conditions are met. It requires, among other things; a strong consumer market, significant imports and the enthusiasm of the populace - in short, a consumer culture and a heavily dependent infrastructure.

Decimator · Post by **Decimator** » 25 Sep 2007, 18:30

Well, how can you have a strong consumer market when the consumers' money is taxed away? Or if prices have to be raised because producers' money is being taxed away?

I'll put it in simple terms, tax something and you'll get less of it. Subsidize something and you'll get more of it. So if we want more stuff being sold, we should tax it less. Subsidies cost money, while the objective here is more money for the government.

Sleksa · Post by **Sleksa** » 25 Sep 2007, 19:25

Decimator wrote:Well, how can you have a strong consumer market when the consumers' money is taxed away? Or if prices have to be raised because producers' money is being taxed away?

I'll put it in simple terms, tax something and you'll get less of it. Subsidize something and you'll get more of it. So if we want more stuff being sold, we should tax it less. Subsidies cost money, while the objective here is more money for the government.

Well, how can you have a strong consumer market when the consumers' money is taxed away

You forgot that the money taxed away will come back to you with the services the system provides for you.

also what makes you think the finnish consumer market is poor?

Decimator · Post by **Decimator** » 25 Sep 2007, 19:36

You forgot that the money taxed away will come back to you with the services the system provides for you.

No, it won't. Governments are good at only one thing, and that's wasting money.

FLOZi · Post by **FLOZi** » 25 Sep 2007, 19:41

Socialism. It is a cancer that threatens to erode the basis upon which this country was founded.

.

(There's no point bothering with any lengthier reply than that.)

tombom · Post by **tombom** » 25 Sep 2007, 20:01

I'm interested about anybody participating in this conversation: do you have any formal qualification/education in politics or economics? Have you read good books on the subject?

Just wondering.

Neddie · Post by **Neddie** » 25 Sep 2007, 20:03

I, and Felix, both have personal interest in Politics. I'm studying it at the current time, but find the courses rather primitive. As for Economics, I'm supposed to be a social scientist. I can't ignore them.

Spring RTS Engine

Spreading Democracy?!