SL-Mark: I like very much this story !

SL-Mark: Maybe in such a situation that we all pay tax there is NO point. Especially considering certain wealthy people avoid paying tax using off shore accounts.

"2. Business certainly lives up to its side of the bargain, it is called salary and corporation tax.

Like Kraft?

"Government, they have no use as far as I am concerned and is simply a pointless and very expensive cost for little value."

So, how would you replace democracy and as such overthrow the result of a civil war we had a way back?

"3. Your 'real events' are prattle and trifling.
As to Next, clearly you don't understand the significance."

That's not an explanation just "this is my stance" dribble.. explain yourself!!

I find it interesting to see people go on about income and corporate taxes. Having visited and lived in a few countries I can say that when it comes to taxes, people get what they pay for. If you pay little, you get little. If you pay a lot, you get a lot more.

Case 1: Guatemala
This is where I was born and lived during my childhood. Guatemala is considerd a "tax shelter" meaning that the taxation rate is so low that opening bank accounts and businesses in that country is an "advantage" against the higher taxation rates paid in North America and Europe. The average Guatemalan citizen pays about 6% income tax. Of course, the rich and powerful can exploit local corruption to avoid paying taxes at all. That is the case with most large foreign coprorations in the country. In exchange for the 6% income tax, people get next to no helath care and next to no education. As a result, about 70% of the population is illiterate (although the literacy rate has improved in recent years.) Publicly run hospitals are understaffed, underequipped and they don't have the money or medicines to take care of their patients. In Guatemala is you are rich you can pay for private schools and private universities. You can pay for private clinics and get top of the line health care. If you are poor you are desined to be illeterate and to die of some torpical disease that could have been prevented or cured with adequate medicines or vaccines.

Case 2: Austria
Not so differnt from Germany and other European countries. My ex and my son live there. Most Austrian citizens pay between 21% and 50% income tax. On the average, the rate runs about 41%. That means that 41 cents of every Euro people make is going into the government's hands. What do people get as a result? Free healthcare. I was there when my son had this minor nose operation. In most places he would have gone in and out of the hospital for a few hours. Instead they kept him 3 days. The hospital nurse came with a menu like in a restaurant. My ex had a bed assigned to her because they did not want my son to stay alone at night. The place was like a hotel more than a hospital, and this was the "shabby, old hospital" rather than the newer, more modern one. Education is free through gymnasium (roughly high school), and university is heavily subsidized, with people paying on the average 366 Euros per term (about US $500). Not only that, but if a student completes a degree on the alloted time, the fees are waived and university becomes free. Compare that with the thousands it costs to get an education in North America.

We can say that Austria and Guatemala sit in opposite sides of the coin. High and low taxes. A lot of services versus no services. People get what they pay for.

The interesting thing is perception. Many Austrians dislike the high taxes, and government and business are contantly at odds over taxation. Guatemalans hate having to pay even the 6%. Guatemalans also complain constantly about taxes. Very often it is not what people pay, but the perception they have of how the government spends taxes.

Guatemalans would be only too happy to get free education and free healthcare, but they would never accept reforming the taxation system and raising taxes steeply. Austrians would love to have their taxes reduced to 6%, but they would never accept losing the services they get.

Ultimately, who lives better? Austrians certainly do. So what is better? A more "socialist" or a more "capitalist" government? Up to a point, countries with low taxation rates seem generally worse off than those countries with higher taxation rates. Taxes have to be high enough to allow the government to operate and to invest in the economy, but not so high that the business sector get choked to death. It is a difficult balance to maintain.

Übergeek 바둑이: I must say that I would not be happy with Case #2 either! There is no reason for government to pay for a hotel like hospital stay with gourmet menus! And a 3 day stay sounds a bit extensive. Of course being pushed out too soon, is not appealing either. But that sounds a bit wasteful.

If someone can personally afford that sort of care, fine! Let them pay for it. But no, I would not like my tax money being wasted to that extent.

Less Govt. Less Govt. Less Govt!!!

rod03801:

> Less Govt!

What exactly does that mean? Less people employed by the government? If so, in what areas? Where is it more important to cut?

What would you rather have? Less health care? Less education? Less military? Less intelligence? Less of everything?

One thing is certain? Given the choice between less health care and less military, what is more important? Should tax dollars be used to build hospitals or military bases? Schools? Roads and railways?

I suppose perception is a big thing too. Propaganda and fear play a big factor in what people see as more or less important.

If the government is bad at running things, who should do it? The private sector? What guarantee is there that somebody running things for profit will do it better, or more cheaply? Historically, privatization has not always been the best solution. Sometimes privatization has only made running things more expensive, because those who do it for profit want more money rather than more efficiency.

Übergeek 바둑이: Yes! All of it! It is all done so inefficiently! I could deal with compromise!
I don't expect to not pay any taxes. I work hard (as do most people) and I don't want my money squandered.
There are SO many things that the US govt has their hands in, where it just doesn't belong. Some things could certainly be done on a more local level. (State/County/City)

Obviously that wouldn't include military. That NEEDS to be federal. It's one of the parts that bothers me least, personally.

I'm just disgusted by the waste. That infuriates me. If I waste my own money, I pay for it dearly. But that's just it. I personally wasted it. Someone else wasting my money? No thanks.

Personally, I'm fine with how healthcare always has been, for the most part. There are things that need looking at, of course! But for the government to basically take it over? No no! It's going to become a mess. And DEFINITELY if it means gourmet menus in hospitals, free room and board for relatives in there, and 3 day stays for relatively minor procedures!

And you say historically, privatization has not always been the best solution. Well, I'd say government bureaucracy has been the best solution even less. (Hmm, really bad sentence)

(V): You really believe you live in a democracy? Funniest thing I have heard all day

The point of capital flight is way above your head otherwise you would not have answered with some trifling prattle about business rates. You clearly have no understanding of the importance of FDI and the efforts of the nation in competing for this!

Übergeek 바둑이: Interesting choice of countries to use to demonstrate your point!

In Guatemala, if they raised the tax rate, do you think things would be any better. See Tax System Explained In Beer for the answer. You are also mixing corruption and taxation in you arguement. So is corruption to blame or taxation for the country's poverty?

Austria is not like Germany as you claim. Germany has perhaps the best health care in the world. It is privately run. The UK has one of the worst health care systems in the world. It is state run. It is expensive. It is wasteful. It is the single biggest employer in the world and consumes about 10% of the UK working population!!!

SL-Mark: No.. we live in a kinda democracy.. We have the right to protest, march and demonstrate which some countries don't allow. They also help keep big business from ripping off regular folk. More so if they stopped being wimpy under certain governments.

Please.. explain yourself about capital flight, as all I hear is prattle.

As to foreign investment.. I've seen how much we fight for it. Something the government has given subsidies and much help in encouraging. I've also seen trade embargo's, price fixing and other activities it seems are part and parcel of the mixed economy we live in.

... what is your point???

SL-Mark: Not as expensive as the USA system and that leaves 40 million uncovered. It costs, but no-one has to worry about paying for a life saving op or waking upto a big bill that the health company has rejected due to small print.

(V): A few minutes ago we lived in a democracy. Now we live in a "kinda democracy."
Not really a democracy then!

Fortunately you don't live in Scotland and face lunacy such as this: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/01/25/ignorance_of_scottish_pr0n_law_no_defence/

As to capital flight, the tax system explained in beer is a perfect example of this. Surprising you did not follow that!

(V): Life saving op? You are more likely to die from a life saving op in the UK than actually be saved. Either that or you catch MRSA on your way out!

SL-Mark: Not really, businesses and rich folk keep bribing and blackmailing MP's for it to be a true democracy.. but most know that so why spend 1000 words saying it.

Again.. on the beer... But seeing as that is not the only tax.... zzzzzz

Are you above explanation?

SL-Mark: So says the Daily Mail so it must be true. zzzzzzzzzzzz

(V): OMG are you saying our MPs are corrupt? That is libel and happens to be a criminal offence in this country, unless of course, you have evidence “beyond reasonable doubt.”

On the beer, I'm not going to spell it out for you. I think the point of capital flight was very clear.

Regarding your "zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz," I didn't realise you suffered from somnipathy. Hopefully you don't also experience the related disorders of nocturia or worse still enuresis. Hopefully the “death squad” that we have in the UK will be able to provide you with the most effective prescriptions. Sadly, for many, the “death squad” leaves many little alternative, other than just dying. And you want to defend this!

Please explain to me what rabbits and the "5 Pillars of Islam" have to do with the state of the union address last night.

SL-Mark:
> Austria is not like Germany as you claim. Germany has perhaps the best health care in the world. It is privately run

There is one aspect of the health care system in Germany thqt is different from Austria:

"All salaried employees must have a public health insurance. Only public officers, self-employed people and employees with a large income above c. €50,000 (adjusted yearly) may join the private system."

"A person that opts out of the public health insurance system and gets private health insurance can not go back later to the public system, even if income drops below the level required for private selection. Since private health insurance is usually more expensive than public health insurance one will be required to pay the higher premiums with less income."

The Germans have done it right. If you think you are rich enough to pay for private insurance, then there is no going back later. If you are rich and you lose your money, you are screwed because you cannot go back to the public system. If you are rich, you better stay rich!

rod03801:

> I'm just disgusted by the waste. That infuriates me. If I waste my own money, I pay
> for it dearly. But that's just it. I personally wasted it. Someone else wasting my
> money? No thanks.

I entirely agree with this. All governments, big and small, are inefficient and wasteful. I chose two examples at the extremes because in both casers there is inefficiency and waste. Guatemlans pay little taxes, and they get little for it. Austrians pay a lot, and get a lot for it. Both cases at the extremes work inefficiently. In a perfect world governments would operate in balance but in reality petty corruption and poor management lead to either money being wasted or in worst cases simply stolen or given to private companies run by friends.

> Personally, I'm fine with how healthcare always has been, for the most part. There
> are things that need looking at, of course! But for the government to basically take it > over? No no! It's going to become a mess. And DEFINITELY if it means gourmet
> menus in hospitals, free room and board for relatives in there, and 3 day stays for
> relatively minor procedures!

Again, my examples are extremes. My cousin in Guatemala is a doctor. He gave me a tour of a publicly run hospital there. They had no disinfectant, and they couldn't afford to repair the windows. So the operating theater had an open window and I could see plain old house flies flying around the room. Outside there were natives mostly, peasants who were too poor to go anywhere else. Then when my brother had his twin boys they ended up in a private hospital for 5 weeks. My brother paid about US$10,000 per week so they could stay in the intensive care unit. They were born prematurely. The clinic was the best money could buy, even better than you would see here in Canada. If you have the money, private is the way to go. If you are poor, you get insects flying around you as you get operated. That is what you get with next to no state involvement in healthcare.

Austrians of course sit on the opposite side. The state absorbed the cost and paid for it with high taxes. Austrians can also pay for private insurance. However, why would anyone? You already pay taxes, so why give even more hard-earned money to a private company.


> And you say historically, privatization has not always been the best solution. Well,
> I'd say government bureaucracy has been the best solution even less.

I think the worst thing is this. Privatization does not eliminate bureacracy. It merely transfers it from the public to the private sector. Privatization does not really save money to the state. It merely transfers tax dollars from the state into the hands of a private (or publicly traded) company. There is no guarantee that having a private company do things for the government will necessarily lead to tax savings.

The theory has always been like this. The state is bureacratic and inefficient at running things. If the state instead tenders contracts to private companies, then those companies have to compete for the contracts and only those that can do things at a better price will get the contracts. That leads to savings because the government has to pay less as companies compete by offering lower prices.

In reality things are completely different. Contracts are no always granted according to price efficiency, but rather based on other factors such as lobbying and other relationships between government and company employees.

Bureaucrats grant contracts according to friendships, campaign donations, political affiliations, sometimes even religious affiliations. That means that pricing is often inefficient. Large companies with more capital can use that capital to influence the outcome of the contract tendering process. More often than not, large companies will win over smaller companies. The state then becomes a sustainer of monopolies and large corporations.

So bureacracy and petty corruption mean that privatization is not always the best solution to state inefficiency, and very often it can exhacerbate the problem. Privatization would work in a system free of corruption, influence meddling, lobbying and special interest groups. There is also no guarantee that a private company can do things at a lower price. A company would if it could lower employee salaries and use cheaper materials and resources. However, that is not necessarily the case. Now we just took tax dollars, and made somebody rich with them, with no guarantee of savings for the state. As always, theory and practice don't always go together.

SL-Mark: Yeah right... They'd have to prove they are all squeaky clean first.

The beer explains some of how our system of taxation works, but not all. Or how some wealth creators are not rich but just have a good idea.

"Hopefully the “death squad” that we have in the UK will be able to provide you with the most effective prescriptions."

Your not that MEP working for Fox are you?
No system is perfect, yet the claims of "death squads" is more descriptive of USA health companies. As to MRSA.. I'll let you into a little secret... The NHS trusts cut down on cleaning staff on wards, they were (well in the instances I know of) having 2 cleaners per ward and cut to one. That loss of one 'unskilled worker' led to less time to do the job properly with shortfalls in staffing (as the remaining staff went elsewhere) leaving the jobs being filled by agency staff who often were recent immigrants and could not half the time communicate let alone have the passion to do the job properly. In the end any organisation is reliant on efficient and good quality staffing. ..... plus how a private company hired by the NHS to prepare surgery kits kept making mistakes causing the cancellation of operations. Costing the NHS time and money.

If you wanna concentrate on the 0.1% then by all means. But over simplification of problems seems to be a thing of yours. Be careful you don't miss the rest of the wood in the process!!

"Bureaucrats grant contracts according to friendships, campaign donations, political affiliations, sometimes even religious affiliations. That means that pricing is often inefficient. Large companies with more capital can use that capital to influence the outcome of the contract tendering process."

In a recent example of this most if not all of the companies doing public sector builds were found to be fixing prices.. unfortunately the police and courts were only allowed to investigate and prosecute a few of the defrauding companies. Something those prosecuted objected to as those just as guilty got away with it.

I think the time of investigating thousands of companies accounts would have impacted on investigations into other crimes.

(V): >"They'd have to prove they are all squeaky clean first."
That will be pretty hard to do! Guess you are safe from a libel charge then

Yes, like Einstein, I believe it leads to a deeper understanding to "make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler."

SL-Mark: And as such then you'll know it's not just about dirty hospitals re MRSA, the overuse of antibiotics is part to blame, the lack of investment and research into new antibiotics for decades has a part in the problem. There maybe a link to a certain stomach worm that was eradicated (it was harmless) that may have had given for it's food certain health benefits linking to the overuse of antibiotics nowadays.

You'll also know that rates of deaths from the likes of MRSA are dropping. That simple things like visitors using alcohol cleaner on their hands...

... and yes.. the cuts to fully employed long term cleaning staff... "unskilled" workers who's work saves lives.

Now do you think they don't deserve a decent pay?

(V): They save lives, true, but so do doctors, nurses, paramedics, firemen etc, etc. Are you suggesting they should all be paid the same because they save lives?

It is your beloved socialist leaders that got us in to this mess. The health service is overflowing with bureaucrats, making these life saving services unafforable. Idea, what about raising taxes even more?

You are no doubt aware, that only 40% of the UK working population are wealth creators (private sector) who provide for the other 60% (public sector) as well as the infirm, elderly, unemployed and young. How is this funded? Ah tax (and only tax from the private sector can be counted), and our budget deficit, increasing to the trillions we already owe. This at the expense of future generations, just so you can live up to your socialist ideals today.

And when those #10 beer drinkers leave, then what are you going to do? Borrow more, well the bond yield curve is already rising. The BoE will no longer have control over interest rates, the market is already adjusting the rates.

SL-Mark: It seems you like talking to a brick wall…

Pedro Martínez: My dad once told me when I had a headache as a child, that I should bang my head against a wall. He added, that when you stop, you will then feel much better!

I'm sure he was trying to tell me something too

SL-Mark: Is that like essential services such as road maintenance, bin collections (both often tendered out to private companies) ... or straight forward council and government workers.

"It is your beloved socialist leaders that got us in to this mess. The health service is overflowing with bureaucrats, making these life saving services unaffordable"

I think you'll find that the current bureaucratic mess dates back to the Thatcher years. I hardly call her socialist

"40% of the UK working population are wealth creators (private sector) who provide for the other 60% (public sector) as well as the infirm, elderly, unemployed and young."

40%+60%+ how much do the infirm and unemployed working age people account for?

"Ah tax (and only tax from the private sector can be counted),"

Nope. Taxes come from many sources... even your council workers pay taxes as do all government workers. Plus in the case of the NHS much of the budget goes on buying equipment from private companies. I know... I've worked for a company providing hospitals with artificial joint kits.

Pedro Martínez: Whose? Many here!!

(V): Libel would be a civil offence not a criminal offence.

(V): The 60% (actually I think it is nearer 65%) includes all those who are funded from the public purse. So yes, it includes many other services, all of whom consume wealth.

Oh dear, you are trying to find some fault, which is irrelevant to the point, just for some cheap point scoring. Let me spell it out, as I guess you missed that class in primary school.
40% of the UK working population is not 40% of the total population.
Indeed the total working population is about 62% of the total population, which leaves 38% for the rest.

No, you can only include tax from the private sector in the determination. Tax generated from the public sector is simply money being recycled back to government, its original source being the private sector. In your example of a company providing artificial joints, only tax on export revenues can be considered as wealth creation.

(V): "40%+60%+ how much do the infirm and unemployed working age people account for?"

I might have missed a class or two as well
The current unemployment rate is about 8% (we'll assume it includes the infirm), so we now have a worse situation where 32% of the working population provide for the 60% in public sector and services + 8% unemployed.

In other words, only about 11% of the total population are wealth creators!

Justaminute: I'd say about 95% of the time you'd be right. In some cases it might start as a libel act and through such as perjury goto to a criminal case.

It's a bit like trespassing, you cannot be prosecuted for it unless other factors come into play, but they are the likes of criminal damage and maybe loss of earnings. Then it gets to get complicated.

SL-Mark:

"): The 60% (actually I think it is nearer 65%) includes all those who are funded from the public purse. So yes, it includes many other services, all of whom consume wealth."

Well.. the office for national statistics says the figure of public v private employment is 20% working in the public sector and 80% working in the private.

... ie at the moment your whole argument seems to based bad data and therefore your whole point is pointless.

Sorry I took time to check your data.. saved you alot of pointless defending of untrue statements.

As to "No, you can only include tax from the private sector in the determination"

Are you God personified??

Artful Dodger: ... what a MIRV...multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle.

... that's been around for years and the USA has had (such as the peacekeeper MX W87 missile) them just as long about as the former USSR, if not a bit earlier.

Just the USSR got a bit better at it than the USA.

The US government had been planning to topple the Egyptian President for the past three years – that is according to diplomatic cables released by WikiLeaks. The files show Washington had secretly been backing leading figures behind the uprising.

Earlier on Saturday, in a televised address to the nation, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak has dismissed his government and promised formation of a new Cabinet would be announced soon.

“I have requested the government to step down today, and I will designate a new government as of tomorrow to carry out new duties and to account for the priorities of the coming era,” Mubarak said in his speech, which is the first time he has appeared in public since protests broke out Tuesday in Egypt.

Tens of thousands have taken to the streets across Egypt in protest of Mubarak's regime and calling for his ouster. Troops have been trying to enforce a curfew in the capital, Cairo, where the ruling party's headquarters has been set afire by demonstrators.

Analysts have pointed fingers at the US, accusing them of trying to change the politics of this regime. Webster Tarpley, an investigative journalist, thinks that the CIA is fuelling “mob rule” across the Arab world to change the power structure.

http://rt.com/news/egyptian-president-dismisses-cabinet/

Artful Dodger: maybe he meant "root"

Artful Dodger: lol

"But obviously, we've got to stand with our North Korean allies." -- Sarah Palin, after being asked how she would handle the current hostilities between the two Koreas, interview on Glenn Beck's radio show, Nov. 24, 2010

North, south, what's the dif?!

"They are also building schools for the Afghan children so that there is hope and opportunity in our neighboring country of Afghanistan." -- Sarah Palin, speaking at a fundraiser in San Francisco, Oct. 5, 2008

And to think we never knew that Afghanistan is sandwitched somewhere between Mexico and New Mexico!

The day after Barack Obama won the 2008 presidential election, FOX News reported that the McCain campaign had been greatly concerned with Sarah Palin's lack of "knowledgeability [sic] necessary to be a running mate, a vice president, a heartbeat away from the presidency," and specifically that she "didn't understand that Africa was a continent, rather than a series, a country just in itself."

Africa is a country. Is Asia a country too?

Once in a while everyone puts their foot in it!

I am sure we could come up with similar ones from just about every prominent politican out there.

Artful Dodger:

I picked on Palin's gaffes simply because they are the most talked about. However, I think all politicians say things that they later wish they could take back.

Here is a funny one from Barrack Obama during the electoral campaign in 2008:

"Over the last 15 months, we've traveled to every corner of the United States. I've now been in 57 states? I think one left to go."

I suppose if Americans divide California and Texas into smaller states then the US might make it to 58 States!


Here is a funny one from Canadian Defense Minister Peter MacKay:

"... he suggested British Columbia and California shared a border in front of the state's former governor Arnold Schwarzenegger during a stop in Winnipeg, MacKay sought to reassure Canadians that his grasp of geography actually isn't that bad."

That's almost as bad as saying that Alska and California share a border!


Here is one from French President Nicolas Sarkozy:

"I can accept distortions of competition from China or India, but not from Germany. I'm not saying that simply because I'm in Germany. "

The problem is that he was in France at the time, in the border region of Alsace. No wonder all the farmers in the crowd booed him!

One from George W. Bush:
"Africa is a nation that suffers from incredible disease"

Sarah Palin:
"You can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska"

George W. Bush
"Africa is a nation that suffers from incredible disease"

Sarah Palin
"You can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska"

John McCain
"We have a lot of work to do and I'm afraid that it's a very hard struggle, particularly given the situation on the Iraq/Pakistan border." (Did Iran just disappear off the map?)

Rep. Hank Jonhson (Dem.) speaking about the island of Guam:
"My fear is that the whole island will become so overly populated that it will tip over and capsize." (I guess Guam must be made of styrofoam!)

Dan Quayle during a speech as vice-president:
"I love California, I practically grew up in Phoenix."

Dick Cheney, in a TV interview speaking of Hugo Chavez, the president of Venezuela:
"The people of Peru, I think, deserve better."

Here is a classic:
Tim Kayne (Dem.), former Governor of Virginia:
"Well, first, Joe [Biden] comes from a state, Delaware, that borders Virginia."
The problem is, Delaware and Virginia share no borders. One supposes the governor of the state would know that.

We could go on and on. That is the problem with unscripted public appearances. Anything can happen, and once it happens, there is no way to take it back.

ie.. if politicians were perfect.. they'd not be human and therefore aliens.. or androids, cyborgs, etc.

Its a shame, politicians, like others get judged by what they say ,rather than what they do. I was raised to believe that actions speak louder than words.Who cares if they speak with marbles in their mouths as long as they do the right stuff!

GT: the reason is....they only talk...they actually do very little else!

..........."Revolutions!? Again, what is your point?"

.................""People need to live happily" Agreed, but it is not the responsibility of government or the rich to ensure this, but the individual."

* Most populous Arab nation, with 84.5 million inhabitants
* Authoritarian President Hosni Mubarak has ruled for 30 years
* Protests against corruption, lack of democracy, inflation, unemployment
* Unrest triggered by overthrow of President Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali of Tunisia

Domino's anyone??

(V): I,ll place you my 6 and 5 giving me 3 3s and 2 5s

Mousetrap: Ouch!! Sneaky

it just goes to show....somebody thinks he is OK..

http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/national/christine-assange-demands-apology-from-prime-minister/story-e6frfku9-1226000709853

(V): I know