"The government has paid every bill you've had since you joined the military."

Yup.

And in return, I actually had to show up and do stuff.

That's very different from what you expect to get paid for, which may not be nothing, but is nothing that society deems to be of value. Otherwise, you wouldn't need the government to force people to support you.

I'm retired now, BTW. Today is my first day of retirement. I also started my new job today. Basically, the same as my old job, but for far more money.

#52

Not sure where you are going with this. First. I think you made up the 8% number. Or somebody did. I posted the tax rates for the top 1 an.1% of income earners...it seems like that may just be an inconvenient truth for you.

But I'm curious, would you support a Bernie plan, where billionaires are taxed out of existence?

Bernie used to have a thing against millionaires too. Until he became one.

"You're just a bitch."

Define bitch?

You're the one who is desperate for the government to make someone else pay your bills.

I mean, the generally accepted definition of 'bitch' is a female canine. I am neither a female nor a canine.

Another definition, particularly when referring to men, is someone who is a '------.' Someone who, because of their behavior and their attitude, is a loser. Someone people would rather not be around.

And I think that is a better description of you than me. I'm not the one demanding that government give me free stuff because I don't want to make the effort to get there on my own. It's you doing that.

If you can point me to something that would indicate --------- qualities, I'm all ears.

"The average American pays 13.6 percent in taxes on their much lower income, which last time I checked was a much larger percentage of their income than Billionaires and many corporations pay."

Well sir, it's a good thing I am here to edumacute your silly ass.

The numbers are a bit dated, and there is no way to filter corporations and billionaires, but the top 1% has an effective tax rate of ~28%. The top .1% has an effective tax rate of ~27%. Average is, as you pointed out, somewhere around 14%.

You're welcome.

"You're a piece of ---- liar. And you can't stop being a piece of ---- liar. Because you are and always will be a piece of ----."

Blah blah blah blah balldudhy blah.

This is how I know you are either pissed because you know you are wrong, or already drunk. And it's still morning in the US right now.

"Perhaps a combination of private and public care is the answer."

That is the answer. At least in Europe.

And it seems to work well enough.

"It seems like your largest objection is that you don't want to see higher taxes on wealthier people. Pretty funny, coming from a person whose life has probably been significantly subsidized by democratic socialism."

Why not just follow one of the western European models? It seems to me that your largest objection is that you don't want to see higher taxes on lower income earners, even if they are the biggest beneficiaries.

Why is that?

"What is your basis for insisting tax revenues aren't fungible, and that any sort of Western European welfare system must be paid for with a VAT?"

I'm not insisting on anything. Just curious why the whole of Europe chose to go with a VAT, when you seem to be insisting it is the wrong move.

"It's precisely this kind of relentless wrong-headedness that makes you such a whiny little bitch who refuses to learn anything."

Sorry, lil homey. I live in Europe. I've been all over this place, and most things seem to work OK. My 'wrong-headedness' is really just a reflection of their 'wrong-headedness.' At least in your mind's eye.

Bottom line, I think most of your motivation doesn't come from trying to improve people's lives, it comes from a dislike of the US and how the behavior of US citizens rewards some and fails to reward others. Marx was like that too. He saw himself as being a shepherd amongst sheep. I think you're the same. And sometimes the sheep disagree. Between us gals, that's what pisses you off the most.

"Does your employer offer a choice? Does your employer cover abortions?"

I don't know that it matters. I live in Germany. Abortion is illegal here.

My daughter has done it several times since she has been back there.

"Why not? Currently, Americans get told that by their insurance company and provider, respectively."

100% falsch.

In the US, I can go to any doctor I want to. I don't need the government to approve my choice.

"Because a VAT doesn't generally place equal burden upon those who hoard wealth. It places the most burden upon those who must spend their money to live."

Cool. Stop saying you want some sort of western-European style system. You don't.

You're looking for something a bit more 'Marxist.'

"Other than change it to the average American not just the American left I think most people agree."

I don't think the average American wants to be told what healthcare they are going to get and when they are going to get it. They want choice.

I'm not sure why the US left wants to go high and right and ban private healthcare (the Bernie model) when there are a myraid of different options employed in western Europe that seem to accommodate most healthcare needs.

I am also not sure why the US left is so against a VAT. Not that the right wouldn't be, but VATs provide significant funding for many of the European services the US left claims to want.

"The Left should just shut up about them, and about major corporations who pay little or no tax at all."

Why not? You stay quiet about the bottom 50% of income earners, whose effective tax rate is what? 2%?

Also, it's important to note that both healthcare and pension investment are provided by employers. Half of employees in the US receive healthcare through their employer, so a shift to universal healthcare would not provide any monetary benefit, it may actually hurt them if quality declines as a result of the change.

Additionally, 67% of USans had access to a pension plan through their employer in 2021. The smart ones are probably investing on their own as well.

#38

I'm not saying that high tax rtates are better or worse than low tax rates. What I am saying is that the US left is generally not going to be supportive of a western European tax structure. The somewhat Marxist approach to taxation by the US left is uniquely American in that it supports a very small number of taxpayers paying virtually all of the budgetary requirements.

It's a good way to buy votes.

"I know: You must be ignoring payroll taxes, as usual!"

Comparing Federal INcome Tax rates with Federal Income Tax rates. I know you hate an honest comparison.

"Tell me you don't know the difference between "effective" and "marginal" without using those words."

This is marginal rates. Here is a link to the original article:

"America will never have a European-style welfare state without a VAT"

Grinding poverty???

I don't think you know what poverty is. (Hint: not being able to buy the newest iphone every year is NOT poverty.)

#65

So, based on what you provided, there are few, if any, true social democracies.

What you're really describing is corporatism. which may be the term for that third-way that everyone has been searching for.

I think it must be either A) the concept of "socialism" is still to sacrosanct to criticize, even if it has proved to provide a substandard output, or B) It would be wrong to credit capitalism with providing the outputs that socialism cannot.

But I'll let you give me the real answer. I don't want to put words in your mouth.

#61

So let me pitch this question to you and the other clowns.

If you no-kidding know what socialism is, why you do you continue to refer to something that isn't socialism with the same term.

I don't understand it. Social Democracies are 100% funded by capitalism, both internally and externally. I would argue that socialism was also funded by capitalism, but only externally. Socialist countries produced inexpensive products that were purchased by the west, providing socialist economies the hard currency needed to keep food on the table.

"Conflating Socialism with social democracy is just about all that Myth B has ever had."

You're funny. Because conflating the two is EXACTLY what you do. I try and point out that A) they are different, and B) you already live in a social democracy, if you live in the US or western europe.

#50

If it were Bernie Sanders looking to consolidate power in order to impliment his vision of what the US should look like, wouldn't you be supportive?

#48

The reason I asked the question about corporatism, it's because you don't know that corporatism is an actual thing, and it has nothing to do with corporations.

"Corporatism is a collectivist political ideology which advocates the organization of society by corporate groups, such as agricultural, labour, military, business, scientific, or guild associations, on the basis of their common interests.

As originally conceived, and as enacted in fascist states in mid-20th century Europe, corporatism was meant to be an alternative to both free market economies and socialist economies.[1] The hypothesis that society will reach a peak of harmonious functioning when each of its divisions efficiently performs its designated function, as a body's organs individually contribute to its general health and functionality, lies at the center of corporatist theory. Corporatism, socioeconomically, is based on an organization called a corporation, whence it gets its name."

#33

Thanks!