This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.

Republican? Just scream and lie.

11112141617315

Comments

  • I ask because I wonder what the "tax burden" is like for the US, since I'm guessing that a lot of the anti-health care people are worried their taxes will increase and support "those dirty illegals".
  • If you are asking about income taxes, then they total about 30 percent on average. Add to that property tax, sales tax, cigarette tax, gas tax, levy taxes, Social Security tax, Medicare tax, city and county (or parish) taxes, gift tax, estate tax, airfare tax, bed tax (hotels), licensures....

    All in all, it's very possible to end up paying 50 percent of your income to the government each year.
  • If you are asking about income taxes, then they total about 30 percent on average. Add to that property tax, sales tax, cigarette tax, gas tax, levy taxes, Social Security tax, Medicare tax, city and county (or parish) taxes, gift tax, estate tax, airfare tax, bed tax (hotels), licensures....

    All in all, it's very possible to end up paying 50 percent of your income to the government each year.
    So basically you end up paying more than I do and I've got Universal Health Care?
  • So basically you end up paying more than I do and I've got Universal Health Care?
    Well, in a really fucked up way, the middle class and poor end up paying far more for health care than the rich. I get effectively free care, while many people making far less than me have to pay high premiums through their employer for mediocre coverage.
  • So basically you end up paying more than I do and I've got Universal Health Care?
    Well, in a really fucked up way, the middle class and poor end up paying far more for health care than the rich. I get effectively free care, while many people making far less than me have to pay high premiums through their employer for mediocre coverage.
    This confuses me... Is this what freedom tastes like?
  • This confuses me... Is this what freedom tastes like?
    Pretty much... it's kind of salty, too.

    The rich spur the poor to action on their behalf, often so well that the poor don't even realize they're playing right into the hands of the rich. The media catches on, blows it up, and everybody loses their shit. Then it gets debated in Congress, where an often insignificant change may or may not be made to the status quo. Things don't really change that often, and the indoctrinated continue to not know how bad they've really got it while the indoctrinators sit on their laurels and reap the benefits. There often continue to be rabble-rousers, but once the media's buried it, it stays pretty much buried.

    But that's just an overly simplistic and cynical view of things. It is very possible to enact real change, to do real good, to fight for what's right, etc. but it so rarely happens and so rarely succeeds even when it happens that I (and from what I've seen, many members of this here forum as well) tend not to get our hopes up over it very much anymore.
  • edited September 2009
    So basically you end up paying more than I do and I've got Universal Health Care?
    Well, in a really fucked up way, the middle class and poor end up paying far more for health care than the rich. I get effectively free care, while many people making far less than me have to pay high premiums through their employer for mediocre coverage.
    Far more as a flat amount or far more as a percentage of their income? Please cite statistics and hard numbers.
    This confuses me... Is this what freedom tastes like?
    Yes. Freedom includes the freedom to fail.
    Post edited by HMTKSteve on
  • edited September 2009
    I was aware that the US tax system was convoluted from my research into possibly moving there when I was offered a job in NYC but I had no idea it was hovering around 50%.
    I've lived in the UK and its tax system is very similar to Australia except the VAT equivalent in Australia (the GST) is 10% and the tax brackets are -
    $0-6000 tax free
    $6001 - $34000 tax of 15%
    $34001 - $80000 tax of 30%
    $80001 - $180000 tax of 40%
    EDIT:
    Medicare Levy of 1.5%
    Exemptions for those who get a sickness allowance from Social Security or earn less than $21000
    Reductions for Seniors and Pensioners who have incomes less than $30000 to $33000
    Medicare Surcharge of 1% if you don't have Privater Hospital Care Cover

    On my current salary I end up paying a similar 20% tax which is similar to Kidder's tax range.

    However I'd much rather live in Australia than the UK as I found the cost of living to be crazily expensive.
    It seems you would need a radical tax overhaul too but you would need to strip the local counties of their ability to tax you all and minimise the variance between states.

    The prior 5 posts seem to clear up why this is a more complex issue then I initially perceived but it shouldn't stop you from having a Government managed medical security net.
    Post edited by sK0pe on
  • So basically you end up paying more than I do and I've got Universal Health Care?
    Well, in a really fucked up way, the middle class and poor end up paying far more for health care than the rich. I get effectively free care, while many people making far less than me have to pay high premiums through their employer for mediocre coverage.
    Far more as a flat amount or far more as a percentage of their income? Please cite statistics and hard numbers.
    This confuses me... Is this what freedom tastes like?
    Yes. Freedom includes the freedom to fail.
    The freedom to fail is different from a party attempting to hoarde everything for people who fall in lockstep with their beliefs and ensure a condition in which those who disagree and the middle and lower classes are put into a position to fail no matter what, jackass.
  • Freedom to fail should always include possibility of redemption. Considering that 40% of family bankruptcies last year were due solely to medical emergency expenses, I'd say there's clearly a case that these peoples' failures cannot be blamed entirely on their lack of hard work or effort. ;^)
  • Somewhat dated, but helpful in looking at overall tax burdens: (Article here.)
    image
  • edited September 2009
    I pay about 30%. There aren't tax brackets per say, it's very smooth and streamlined as the tax code has gotten more and more complex.
    Post edited by George Patches on
  • edited September 2009
    The freedom to fail is different from a party attempting to hoarde everything for people who fall in lockstep with their beliefs and ensure a condition in which those who disagree and the middle and lower classes are put into a position to fail no matter what, jackass.
    Quoted for truth! Well, the real truth is that the bolded portion of your statement applies equally to both major parties in the US.

    Is it fair to look at a chart of taxes based on GDP when talking about the taxes on people?

    Yes Rym, redemption should always be available to those who are truly sorry for their mistakes. However repeat offenders do not deserve the same degree of aid a first time offender receives. If you remove the negative aspects of failure you also remove the learning experience that comes from failure.

    If you 'accidentally' cut off your thumb every Friday and have it sewn back on in the ER every Friday night what have you learned? You have learned that the ER will sew your thumb back on. If the ER only sews it on the first time and turns you away the second time than you learn to be more careful with your other thumb!
    Post edited by HMTKSteve on
  • Yes Rym, redemption should always be available to those who are truly sorry for their mistakes. However repeat offenders do not deserve the same degree of aid a first time offender receives. If you remove the negative aspects of failure you also remove the learning experience that comes from failure.
    If you 'accidentally' cut off your thumb every Friday and have it sewn back on in the ER every Friday night what have you learned? You have learned that the ER will sew your thumb back on. If the ER only sews it on the first time and turns you away the second time than you learn to be more careful with your other thumb!
    Yes, because the only deterrent to cutting your thumb off is losing the thumb... not the incredible pain, inconvenience, loss of motor function, disfigurement, etc.? People don't want to continue to cause themselves massive injury/illness (unless they are insane) and getting medical treatment isn't a "reward" akin to giving a child a cookie even if they have a tantrum. Your argument is completely irrational.
  • If you 'accidentally' cut off your thumb every Friday and have it sewn back on in the ER every Friday night what have you learned? You have learned that the ER will sew your thumb back on. If the ER only sews it on the first time and turns you away the second time than you learn to be more careful with your other thumb!
    ...So I should be more careful and not get hit by a drunk driver?

    Funny, because what I learned the first time without even having to go to the ER was that cutting yourself badly REALLY FUCKING HURTS!!! That's more than enough for me to make sure I sharpen my knives every time before I use them so they cut with little effort and won't slip because I have to force the issue.

    That logic is pretty fucked up dude.
  • That logic is pretty fucked up dude.
    Haven't you ever cut off your thumb so that the ER will sew it back on? That's something we can all relate to because I'm sure we've all done that multiple times in the past for the sheer joy of going to the ER to have a thumb sewn back on.
  • Haven't you ever cut off your thumb so that the ER will sew it back on? That's something we can all relate to because I'm sure we've all done that multiple times in the past for the sheer joy of going to the ER to have a thumb sewn back on.
    Sadly I failed to actually cut off my thumb, the thumbnail stopped the blade. All further attempts to chop off my thumb have only resulted in chopped vegetables.
  • All further attempts to chop off my thumb have only resulted in chopped vegetables.
    I guess you wouldn't have made those further attempts to cut off your thumb if the ER refused to treat you. That's the only way to learn not to cut off your thumb, you know.
  • Apparently, some celebrities oppose universal health care.
    I hope you were joking, because the video is in satire and there is a prop strong public option.
  • Apparently, some celebrities oppose universal health care.
    I hope you were joking, because the video is in satire and there is a prop strong public option.
    *facepalm*
  • Haven't you ever cut off your thumb so that the ER will sew it back on? That's something we can all relate to because I'm sure we've all done that multiple times in the past for the sheer joy of going to the ER to have a thumb sewn back on.
    Sadly I failed to actually cut off my thumb, the thumbnail stopped the blade. All further attempts to chop off my thumb have only resulted in chopped vegetables.
    I'm afraid that I and most people I know suffer from this as well. :(
  • Apparently, some celebrities oppose universal health care.
    Mmmm Olivia Wilde... my next wife. Oh, Lisa, I didn't see you there reading over my shoulder. You and me forever, baby. Right? Right?
  • The freedom to fail is different from aparty attempting to hoarde everything for people who fall in lockstep with their beliefsand ensure a condition in which those who disagree and the middle and lower classes are put into a position to fail no matter what, jackass.
    Quoted for truth! Well, the real truth is that the bolded portion of your statement applies equally to both major parties in the US.

    Is it fair to look at a chart of taxes based on GDP when talking about the taxes on people?

    Yes Rym, redemption should always be available to those who are truly sorry for their mistakes. However repeat offenders do not deserve the same degree of aid a first time offender receives. If you remove the negative aspects of failure you also remove the learning experience that comes from failure.

    If you 'accidentally' cut off your thumb every Friday and have it sewn back on in the ER every Friday night what have you learned? You have learned that the ER will sew your thumb back on. If the ER only sews it on the first time and turns you away the second time than you learn to be more careful with your other thumb!
    You can't possibly be so stupid as to assume that every person who is failing did it to themselves? How fucking naive are you?
  • Glenn Beck just threw a live frog into boiling water on live television to prove that Obama has "thrown us into boiling water" through his bills but that we'll "fight Obama's bills, we'll jump right out of the boiling water, just like frogs." Except frogs don't jump out of boiling water. They die. Clearly, Beck didn't check Wikipedia, as he was surprised when the frog didn't jump out.

    Not only did he not prove his point, Glenn Beck KILLED A FROG WITH BOILING WATER ON LIVE TELEVISION in a failed attempt to prove a backward point! This is officially fucked up. I can deal with childish, unfactual, and illogical arguments, but when you kill animals, you've crossed a line.

    He claimed after the break that it was a rubber frog, but given that there was a clip of him reaching into a box of live frogs to retrieve one, I am not inclined to believe him.
  • Come now, it's a frog, there's millions of them. They eat them in france.

    The correct response is, "OMG THE FROG DIED AND WE'RE THE FROG, WE'RE DOOMED!!!! IT'S TOO LATE TO CHANGE!!! AHHHHHHHHH!"
  • Come now, it's a frog, there's millions of them. They eat them in france.

    The correct response is, "OMG THE FROG DIED AND WE'RE THE FROG, WE'RE DOOMED!!!! IT'S TOO LATE TO CHANGE!!! AHHHHHHHHH!"
    Unless Beck opens his gullet and eats that frog, that's pointless animal cruelty in my book. >:(
  • edited September 2009
    Come now, it's a frog, there's millions of them. They eat them in france.

    The correct response is, "OMG THE FROG DIED AND WE'RE THE FROG, WE'RE DOOMED!!!! IT'S TOO LATE TO CHANGE!!! AHHHHHHHHH!"
    The issue is not the death of a frog, but rather the fact that this is a man who killed an animal to prove a point. Now, I realize that insects are animals, etc. etc. and I would not be as alarmed in a roach was squashed to prove something, but this man boiled something alive for a purpose other than eating or science, and a purpose that was misguided and based on illogical reasoning at that.

    This doesn't strike anyone as the slightest bit disturbing? If he started a cockfight to prove that we'd "fight our way out of this," I'm sure people would be a lot more alarmed, but it'd be the same principle. But it's cool, they're just roosters. People eat them, and there are millions of them.

    EDIT: Some video. You can watch him clearly grab a live frog, if you double-check the grabbing of said frog.

    Post edited by WindUpBird on
  • The look of surprise and his inept backpedaling were hilarious, though.

    I mean, really? They didn't think to test this off-the-air first? I know it's 7OX, but still... I guess they really DO hate science.
  • The look of surprise and his inept backpedaling were hilarious, though.

    I mean, really? They didn't think to test this off-the-air first? I know it's 7OX, but still... I guess they really DO hate science.
    I wish I had video of the immediate aftermath. They cut to commercial, and when they get back, the pot is gone, and there's a yellow solo cup. Beck goes, "Uh...just so you know, we knew a frog wouldn't survive. We used a rubber frog. Right, Ambassador Bolton?" to which Bolton, clearly not wanting involvement, peeks in the cup and goes, "...yup, rubber."

    Oh, 7OX. MST3K for politics.
Sign In or Register to comment.