Subsidized everything

[grinner666]

Why stop at anything like that?

What makes you "happy"?
Is it large screen tvs?
Subsidize!
Is it motorhomes with slide-outs so you can travel the country in style?
Subsidize!
Is it hot rod cars?
Subsidize!
Is it a 3,000 sq ft home?
Subsidize!

What the hell is this country coming to?

Since your profile doesn't really specify I must ASSUME that when you say your location is "The Southeast" you mean the southeastern US and NOT Southeast Asia . . . but I'll go with that assumption and simply ask what in the world you think a rumor about subsidies in the EU has to do with "this country"???

[steelish]

Since your profile doesn't really specify I must ASSUME that when you say your location is "The Southeast" you mean the southeastern US and NOT Southeast Asia . . . but I'll go with that assumption and simply ask what in the world you think a rumor about subsidies in the EU has to do with "this country"???

My brain was thinking "world". My fingers typed "country"

So sorry. (I never even noticed until you pointed it out)

[DuncanONeil]

Because the current power structure in the US thinks we should be more like Europe!

Since your profile doesn't really specify I must ASSUME that when you say your location is "The Southeast" you mean the southeastern US and NOT Southeast Asia . . . but I'll go with that assumption and simply ask what in the world you think a rumor about subsidies in the EU has to do with "this country"???

[grinner666]

Because the current power structure in the US thinks we should be more like Europe!

*yawns*

"More like Europe" is a null term. Europe consists of over two dozen countries, all of which have different governments, laws and ways of doing business.

But if what you mean is that every worker gets SIX WEEKS OF PAID VACATION, with the accompanying loss of stress and early heart attacks and strokes that involves, then SIGN ME UP FOR THE FUCKING EUROPEAN UNION!!!

EVERY European nation has higher taxes than the US, but then nearly every nation on earth has higher taxes than the US. But what's REALLY interesting is that nearly every other nation in the world has a lower incidence of heart attacks than the United States.

Frankly, if it comes to a choice between paying half (or even more) of my wages in taxes and getting six weeks of vacation every year, with government paid healthcare and retirement that beats the FUCK out of social security, or lower taxes, I'll gladly pay the higher taxes. You CAN NOT place a price on health and peace of mind.

And for those of you who don't want to pay those horrible taxes for your "economic freedom," please remember that even in the Land of the (not so economically) Free, you STILL did nothing but work for taxes this year until April 9, you got no vacation until you'd been working at least a year, very likely got no or very little health insurance, and probably still believe in the tooth fairy.

Here's the thing: if you believe your government is going to protect you without cost, you're living in a fantasy world. If you understand that government protection costs but STILL don't want to pay for those costs, then you're one of the deluded millions who believes, despite all evidence to the contrary, that you're going to be a millionaire someday and you've got to protect yourself against that vague and highly unlikely possibility.

Get over it. You're NOT going to be a millionaire someday. And if, by some miracle, you are, you'll be able to afford the taxes on your millions without feeling the pinch that the poor fucker working for minimum wage feels every week. The Rethuglicans rely on your belief that you'll someday be where they are, even though you never will.

[DuncanONeil]

*yawns*

"More like Europe" is a null term. Europe consists of over two dozen countries, all of which have different governments, laws and ways of doing business.

And your point is what? virtually all of them are operating from the same play book. Its not working and yet that is what some people wish to see as the manner of conducting the nation here.

But if what you mean is that every worker gets SIX WEEKS OF PAID VACATION, with the accompanying loss of stress and early heart attacks and strokes that involves, then SIGN ME UP FOR THE FUCKING EUROPEAN UNION!!!

If such a system is so desirable you can easily sign yourself up for that system. All it would take would be a little train or boat trip. One way of course!

EVERY European nation has higher taxes than the US, but then nearly every nation on earth has higher taxes than the US. But what's REALLY interesting is that nearly every other nation in the world has a lower incidence of heart attacks than the United States.

High taxes are not a measure of a successful country. As far as the heart attack rates I have heard that said myself. But what do we find in the data? The WHO has a report, which I suspect you will dismiss since it is not by country, that does not provide such a clear cut position. It does divide the world by major groupings; Africa, The Americas, South-East Asia, Europe, Eastern Med, and Western Pacific. Now I know the first complaint will be lumping the Americas together but even then the rates in the WHO report are within less than 5 points of other reports of US specific data. That being said the highest rate of cardiovascular deaths is in Europe at .56% or 561 per 100,000. for the other regions the numbers are as follows;

• Africa - 154
• The Americas - 226
• SE Asia - 453
• Eastern Med - 214
• Western Pacific - 222

It seems that two regions of the world beat us in this unenviable statistic and two others are nearly the same.

Frankly, if it comes to a choice between paying half (or even more) of my wages in taxes and getting six weeks of vacation every year, with government paid healthcare and retirement that beats the FUCK out of social security, or lower taxes, I'll gladly pay the higher taxes. You CAN NOT place a price on health and peace of mind.

"You CAN NOT place a price on health and peace of mind. " But that is exactly what you are doing when you let the Government make those decisions for you. Whether you like their decisions or not you have no choice once you surrender. That same peace of mind you seek can come from your own choices in insurance, savings, or investments.

And for those of you who don't want to pay those horrible taxes for your "economic freedom," please remember that even in the Land of the (not so economically) Free, you STILL did nothing but work for taxes this year until April 9, you got no vacation until you'd been working at least a year, very likely got no or very little health insurance, and probably still believe in the tooth fairy.

The last bit there was uncalled for and a bit demeaning! Consider what you have expressed a willingness to do just a little bit above this paragraph. Work for the Government until at least June 30 instead of working to find a way to get more of the money that you work for into your own pocket rather than somebody elses' pocket. There is such a plan that I favor and would like to see as it does a great deal for the economy, without Government intervention.

Here's the thing: if you believe your government is going to protect you without cost, you're living in a fantasy world. If you understand that government protection costs but STILL don't want to pay for those costs, then you're one of the deluded millions who believes, despite all evidence to the contrary, that you're going to be a millionaire someday and you've got to protect yourself against that vague and highly unlikely possibility.

The true question is not "protection" but "protection from what"! Do you believe it is the Governments job to protect you from yourself? That is much of what people are asking for and virtually all that the Government is offering. While at the same time letting sit fallow the very things that the Government is actually directed to do.
I do not need the Government to establish for me how many miles I must get to a gallon of gas. Nor how much salt I can consume, how many eggs, how much bacon, how many time I can go to McDonalds, how much exercise I must accomplish, or how. Yes Government protection costs! But more often that not the Government seeks to lower the funds spent on defense, be it the Military or INS & ICE.
To say that "to be a millionaire someday" is a "vague and highly unlikely possibility" is to deny that the USA is the Land of Opportunity!

Get over it. You're NOT going to be a millionaire someday. And if, by some miracle, you are, you'll be able to afford the taxes on your millions without feeling the pinch that the poor fucker working for minimum wage feels every week. The Rethuglicans rely on your belief that you'll someday be where they are, even though you never will.

You honestly believe, and can say with a straight face, that somehow a tax rate of 2.99% on $15,000 hurts more than a tax rate of 21.46% on $1,040,000. I don't think so! In the former that is my mortgage payment in the latter it is two cars or a really nice Harley! Or look at it another way the 2.99% is 13 meals out I'd have to pass on. Even at the most expensive meal I bought my wife and I the latter would be 171 outings. By any practical measure the claim is not supported that our current tax structure hurts the lesser in favor of the greater.

[Thorne]

You honestly believe, and can say with a straight face, that somehow a tax rate of 2.99% on $15,000 hurts more than a tax rate of 21.46% on $1,040,000. I don't think so! In the former that is my mortgage payment in the latter it is two cars or a really nice Harley! Or look at it another way the 2.99% is 13 meals out I'd have to pass on. Even at the most expensive meal I bought my wife and I the latter would be 171 outings. By any practical measure the claim is not supported that our current tax structure hurts the lesser in favor of the greater.

Sorry Duncan, but I have to argue with your numbers here. The question is not how much someone is paying in taxes but how much does he have left AFTER taxes.

The blue collar guy making $15000 per year will have only $14550 left after paying his 2.99%, but the millionaire will still have $816816 left. A very big difference. Which would you rather have?

[DuncanONeil]

The dollars taken away by the Government nor the dollars remaning after the Government has taken away a portion is not germane. Would you rather have 97% of your salary remaining or 79%.
To say that the larger dollar figure is better just because it is bigger is essentially saying that money equals happiness. We know that is not true. Further such a simplistic statement ignores a significant number of other issues. For Example Al Gore falls into the second category under discussion here and we know he has been spending as much as 20 other homes in his neighborhood for electricity alone.
If you remember in my post I related the two different tax figures to a situation outside of either person, I chose myself, and in one case it is a mortgage payment in the other two cars that are confiscated for taxes.

The point is that you think that paying a greater share of the tax burden is FAIR if you have more money and paying the same rate is somehow unfair. That implies the only way you would be happy is if Mr Rich Person after paying his tax bill had $14550 left. I on the other hand believe that paying the same rate is fair.
Having said that I feel compelled to state that I favor the truly voluntary tax called FairTax over what we have and any Government driven fixing thereof. And any VAT tax is even worse than the awful system currently existing.

Sorry Duncan, but I have to argue with your numbers here. The question is not how much someone is paying in taxes but how much does he have left AFTER taxes.

The blue collar guy making $15000 per year will have only $14550 left after paying his 2.99%, but the millionaire will still have $816816 left. A very big difference. Which would you rather have?

[Thorne]

The point is that you think that paying a greater share of the tax burden is FAIR if you have more money and paying the same rate is somehow unfair. That implies the only way you would be happy is if Mr Rich Person after paying his tax bill had $14550 left. I on the other hand believe that paying the same rate is fair.

That's not my point at all. The government requires a certain amount of money to function. Naturally, the first priority should be to trim down that necessity to the bare minimums. But once that is done a certain amount of needed money will remain. Obviously that money will have to be brought in by taxes, of one sort or another.

Now according to you, it's only fair to make everyone pay the same percentage. So let's assume for simplicity's sake that the government determines that, in order to balance their budget, everyone will have to pay 15% of their earnings in taxes. What does this mean? Well, the man making $1 million will pay $150K in taxes. Wow! A lot of money. But that still leaves him with $850K of discretionary income. Of course, having to pay $100 K for the mortgage on his 12 bedroom mansion, and another $100K for his brand new Rolls, will eat into that somewhat, too. He might have to cut his Hawaiian vacation down to only two weeks! And he and his family can't afford to eat out ... more than 4 or 5 times a week. Such hardship!

Meanwhile, we have our other man making $20K, working 2 jobs. He'll be left with a whopping $17,500 dollars. Hell, anybody can get by on that! So what if his kids can't go to private schools? So what if they have to cram a family of 6 into a two-bedroom, 1½ bath flat? So what if they can only buy a used car every five or six years, at best? As long as he's paying the same rate, everything will be fine!

No, my point is that the wealthier man can afford to pay a larger share of the tax burden, and because of his wealth will reap more benefits from the infrastructure those taxes pay for. The poor don't much care about maintaining the interstate, or building better airports, or keeping the harbors running properly. They can't afford to use those facilities anyway.

If you drop our poor working man's taxes down to only, say, 2% he'll end up paying only $400 in taxes. While still painful for him, he can probably handle that. His family might not eat steak, but it won't hurt them too badly. How much must our rich man pay to make up for that? An extra $2100, or 15.2% TOTAL. Holy cow! That just might break the bank!

Yes, I realize it's not quite that simple, there being so many more poor people than rich. But the point is the same. The more money you make the more you tend to benefit from the money the government spends, either directly or indirectly, so you pay more taxes. And there is less of a burden on the poor.

[tedteague]

*yawns*

"More like Europe" is a null term. Europe consists of over two dozen countries, all of which have different governments, laws and ways of doing business.

But if what you mean is that every worker gets SIX WEEKS OF PAID VACATION, with the accompanying loss of stress and early heart attacks and strokes that involves, then SIGN ME UP FOR THE FUCKING EUROPEAN UNION!!!

EVERY European nation has higher taxes than the US, but then nearly every nation on earth has higher taxes than the US. But what's REALLY interesting is that nearly every other nation in the world has a lower incidence of heart attacks than the United States.

Frankly, if it comes to a choice between paying half (or even more) of my wages in taxes and getting six weeks of vacation every year, with government paid healthcare and retirement that beats the FUCK out of social security, or lower taxes, I'll gladly pay the higher taxes. You CAN NOT place a price on health and peace of mind.

And for those of you who don't want to pay those horrible taxes for your "economic freedom," please remember that even in the Land of the (not so economically) Free, you STILL did nothing but work for taxes this year until April 9, you got no vacation until you'd been working at least a year, very likely got no or very little health insurance, and probably still believe in the tooth fairy.

Here's the thing: if you believe your government is going to protect you without cost, you're living in a fantasy world. If you understand that government protection costs but STILL don't want to pay for those costs, then you're one of the deluded millions who believes, despite all evidence to the contrary, that you're going to be a millionaire someday and you've got to protect yourself against that vague and highly unlikely possibility.

Get over it. You're NOT going to be a millionaire someday. And if, by some miracle, you are, you'll be able to afford the taxes on your millions without feeling the pinch that the poor fucker working for minimum wage feels every week. The Rethuglicans rely on your belief that you'll someday be where they are, even though you never will.

false, europe is not a collection of different countries all with their own way of doing things. it is a UNION. and while local governments may be elected on their own, western europe is much more like the US, the nation is europe, the state/province/territories are italy, france, ect al

[fetishdj]

false, europe is not a collection of different countries all with their own way of doing things. it is a UNION. and while local governments may be elected on their own, western europe is much more like the US, the nation is europe, the state/province/territories are italy, france, ect al

Not at all. The EU is actually less formal than that. The nation is not Europe at all as each of the member states still see themselves as 'nations'. It is more of a tight alliance. The 'president' of the EU, for example, is not even elected nor do they have any real power other than as a figurehead. Instead, the heads of state (or the Prime Minister in the case of UK, as the PM is not the head of state he is only the representative of the head of state) of EU members rotate the presidential seat amongst themselves.

The move is more towards a federal state system but, beyond a common currency (which at least one member does not currently follow and several member states are now regretting joining due to the massive economical problems it has caused because of the initial massive differences in the values of the original currencies) and some EU laws and regulations (mainly linked to environmental issues, trade agreements and weights and measures) the countries are still largely independent. We don't pay taxes to the EU directly (though each member pays for the upkeep of the bureaucracy of the system), many countries conveniently ignore some of the laws of the EU (which makes them unlike the federal laws of the US which are stringently enforced) and there is a lot of squabbling between countries. I suspect that this is because, unlike the the US, we have had neither a war of independence nor a civil war to unify us under one banner (cos there is nothing like a common external threat to make even warring neighbours band together in the long term...) plus the EU has not been around as long as the US and was initially a set of trade agreements established post WWII with no formal unification until much later.

[Cathryn Blackthorne]

Because the current power structure in the US thinks we should be more like Europe!

Well, some of us living in the US agree. Not everyone buys into the propaganda of slogans like: "America is the greatest country in the world," and believe it's possible things here could do with change/improvement.

[steelish]

Well, some of us living in the US agree. Not everyone buys into the propaganda of slogans like: "America is the greatest country in the world," and believe it's possible things here could do with change/improvement.

See, this is what I've never understood. America is unique among countries. Why should it change? To use your exact words; "There are some of us living in the US" who want it to be as the Founding Fathers intended. Why can't it be that and those who don't like it can move? After all, there are plenty of other nations to choose from.

For example, if you specifically want a Ford Expedition, you go buy a Ford Expedition...you don't buy a Ford F250, put a topper on it and pretend it's a Ford Expedition.

[TantricSoul]

See, this is what I've never understood. America is unique among countries. Why should it change? To use your exact words; "There are some of us living in the US" who want it to be as the Founding Fathers intended. Why can't it be that and those who don't like it can move? After all, there are plenty of other nations to choose from.

Every country is unique and everything changes ... no exceptions ... and what the founding fathers intended over two hundred years ago ... well a majority of that just isn't relevant to today's world.

[DuncanONeil]

Every country is unique and everything changes ... no exceptions ... and what the founding fathers intended over two hundred years ago ... well a majority of that just isn't relevant to today's world.

Which parts do you think those are?

[tedteague]

See, this is what I've never understood. America is unique among countries. Why should it change? To use your exact words; "There are some of us living in the US" who want it to be as the Founding Fathers intended. Why can't it be that and those who don't like it can move? After all, there are plenty of other nations to choose from.

For example, if you specifically want a Ford Expedition, you go buy a Ford Expedition...you don't buy a Ford F250, put a topper on it and pretend it's a Ford Expedition.

Which founding father? They collectively agreed on very little

[steelish]

Which founding father? They collectively agreed on very little

They collectively wrote the Constitution. I would say they agreed on that. (They did, after all, sign the document)

[IAN 2411]

The EU recently announced it will begin subsidizing vacations. What's next?

Well nothing surprises me about the EU, let’s see what have we had from the European intelligence bank, the bananas from Africa had to be sent back if they never had the correct curve on them. [I suppose that is only fair] LMFAO.

The cucumbers that had too many twists and had to be thrown away because they were hard to slice when making a salad, good thing too I don’t like cucumbers.

Eggs that are to big have to be thrown out and destroyed, because new boxes would have to be produced to carry them producing more waste. There has to be a hidden logic there somewhere. And what about the poor chickens asses that laid them should they have been sewn up?
All signs in the UK had to be converted to KPH because it was confusing to the rest of Europe, good because when I was over there for two years theirs were confusing to me. At least the UK government in the last week has seen sense and told them to back off.

Because the current power structure in the US thinks we should be more like Europe!

Looking at the load of crap Europe is throwing out over the past eight years, the US had better get rid of its current power structure and fast.

See, this is what I've never understood. America is unique among countries. Why should it change? To use your exact words; "There are some of us living in the US" who want it to be as the Founding Fathers intended. Why can't it be that and those who don't like it can move? After all, there are plenty of other nations to choose from.

There is no need for it to change, as the world polices evolve there will be three economies remaining, American, European and Asian. I have nothing against Europe, it’s the idiots that are finding new laws in their Christmas crackers and passing them.

It might seem by the tings I write about the EU that I am anti but in actual fact I’m not, it is as one person told me it is the natural progress of things. However until every country puts in the same amount of money to feed the EU, and all the time there is the theme of every country is equal but some are more equal than others it will never be a united states of Europe.

Regards ian 2411

[tedteague]

They collectively wrote the Constitution. I would say they agreed on that. (They did, after all, sign the document)

Kicking and screaming, and after it was done, they had to write another couple of pages of crap they didn't include the frst time, then the two major players fought with each other until they both died, which coincidentally happened on the same day

[DuncanONeil]

Well, some of us living in the US agree. Not everyone buys into the propaganda of slogans like: "America is the greatest country in the world," and believe it's possible things here could do with change/improvement.

It may seem like a trite question, and it is a question. But if you do not think America is the greatest country in the world why not live in one you think is the greatest?

Change and improvement can always occur. And that is usually a good thing. But change is not always an improvement. The desire to change to be more like European countries when the very policies that are desired to be co-opted have brought said countries to near failure. Why would you want to go the route of failure??