Omg

Status
Not open for further replies.
@charjohncarter - Perfect! Great weather, good friends, cameras, and beer! A winning combo if you ask me. I should set that up as summer gets closer. Keep in touch with me via PM or email as your trip gets closer and we can have the 1st RFF Party Convention at a brew pub. I can taste the summer ale now!
 
Last edited:
NickTrop said:
The Bush administration and republican congress should be tried for incompetence. Them - and only them, dereulated the financial services industry then failed to provide any oversight whatsoever. "The free market is self-regulating..." - failed and naive ideology.

Here's Greenspan admitting before congress "he was wrong..." regarding that whole "free market" thing:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PWen53eqmJo

Meanwhile, their other failed ideology "neoconservatism" was costing us 10's of thousands of lives and will cost trillions of dollars when all said and done in Iraq in their stupid desire to democratize the Middle East via the mysterious "domino effect"...

So, the economy is in the crapper thanks to them and their failed ideologies, and it's the average citizen who pays the high price. Opps... sorry, can't extend UE benefits - deficits donchya know...(But pointless wars? Always seems to be a blank check for that...) Shame, you can't afford to eat. Sorry to hear you don't have health care coverage... Worried about losing your home? Don't worry, be happy 🙂 Nah... doesn't look like we can extend those UE benefits... Haven't you heard of "rugged individualism"(tm) and "personal responsibility"(tm)... It's your fault, you made bad choices! What a load of crap.

They're disgusting, they're idiots. They should be collectively brought up on charges and sued as you would any other person who has the responsiblity of managing something and through their own gross negligence caused harm to you and others.
Click to expand...

well said. george bush is a criminal.

bob
 
charjohncarter said:
Right, but there is a provision passed this or last year that says every bill like this (all bills have to have some definable funding) have to be paid for. Our government is broke, it took from 1965 and from the start of SSI (1930s) to do it. But it is still costing too much to have the Sherwood Forest option. (rob from the 'rich' and give to the poor.)
Click to expand...

The rich wouldn't have to worry about being robbed of they paid their employees living wages. There is no defense for paying people wages that are in many cases less than 1/3 the actual cost of living for an individual, to say nothing of those with children. Other countries have this figured out, and poverty is lessened. The USA alone of the so-called wealthy nations is too stupid to do the right thing. You cannot systematically starve half the population for long without consequences, as Nicholas II learned to his peril. The US government is better organized than Russia's was and has a stronger military, equipped with technology that the people armed with rifles cannot match. When the breaking point comes, the bloodshed is going to be a holocaust unmatched in history. I fear for my son and his friends, what future will they have?
 
Last edited:
digitalintrigue said:
Washington doesn't create jobs, entrepreneurs and small business do. Business sucks and employers aren't hiring because they are getting NOTHING out of Washington that gives them any sort of confidence. Washington does not understand business; Washington is in fact anti-business. THIS is the problem.
Click to expand...

This time over government better produce jobs because there is no gold rush in sight that will make it possible for 'small businesses' to create any either. What any 'economy' needs, American or European, are some large locomotives that pull the rest of the economy. Such locomotives are most often started by governmental initiatives. The legendary US Apollo Program, landing men on the moon was such a locomotive. Even Microsoft could be considered a spin-off from the US space programs.
 
If the government gets out of the way, jobs will come. The vast majority of jobs did not come from US initiatives but from entrepreneurial initiatives, and that is driven by incentive (i.e., profit-motive.)

If the government would do two things: lower tax rates on corporations, and lower tax rates in general (cap gains specifically) money that is not doing anything (i.e., not at risk currently) would enter the market and jobs would be the end result.
 
digitalintrigue said:
If the government gets out of the way, jobs will come. The vast majority of jobs did not come from US initiatives but from entrepreneurial initiatives, and that is driven by incentive (i.e., profit-motive.)

If the government would do two things: lower tax rates on corporations, and lower tax rates in general (cap gains specifically) money that is not doing anything (i.e., not at risk currently) would enter the market and jobs would be the end result.
Click to expand...

JFK did it and it worked, Ronald Reagan did it and it worked, even Bill Clinton did it and it worked (after he read the political wind). Now when we really need it there is no talk of doing it.

EDIT: I forgot George W. Bush did it and it worked.
 
Last edited:
Like Dave and Al, I am unemployed. I have been laid off since the beginning of November last year. so, what is my situation, living in Norway, on the other side of the Atlantic?

My unemployment compensation is NOK 5245 ($ 890) per week, from which they deduct tax, so my net weekly income after taxes is NOK 3305 ($ 560) per week. That should be gross NOK 272740 (46,230 $) per year, but only net NOK 171860 (29,128 $) after taxes. When I do my tax statement for this year I might get some of the pre paid tax back. Most likely, my net income in 2010 will be slightly above 30,000 $.

I can get this compensation for up to 104 weeks/two years. If I do not show interest in finding a new job, participate in courses etc. I could loose the unemployment compensation before this. But since I am laid off, not sacked, I am not in a situation, yet, where they will start pushing me. - That said; I need no pushing! I am looking for work!

My wife works only part time due to a health problem. She and I carry no extra cost for this, except for up to NOK 2500 in medicines per year. If she has to go to hospital it will not cost us a thing. Most likely; we are obliged to have the taxi bill home covered by the government, because we now are so poor. Every cost above this roof of NOK 2500 ($ 425) is covered in our 'health care for all' system. - Which isn't exactly free. When I was working I paid NOK 250000 ($ 42372) off my NOK 650000 ($ 110,170) salary in taxes per year. In addition to 20% sales tax etc etc. Health care is a huge post on our governmental budget. The largest!

So, how do we get along with me earning only $ 560 a week combined with my wife making about $ 830/week? It's tough in a country where a cup of coffee costs $ 3 and where just about everything is 20 - 30% more expensive than in the US - much due to taxes!.

Our car is very modest one and we use it very little. But we need it. We are thinking of selling the house and move into a cheaper apartment to free up some money. - Quite a few we know of have started this process. If this gains momentum it could well start a crash of the real estate market, something we have not seen in Norway yet. So, we are now actively looking around for a suitable apartment.

As late as a few months ago I was planning to buy Olsen's M8. That is now only a wet dream.
 
Last edited:
Spoks, so you were basically close to 50% tax. We are pushing that in California, but really only being paid by the working middle class and the high earners (almost 50% of the people pay almost 100% of the taxes). Fortunately, we have some deductions that keep it almost reasonable. Still, our state is broke and they are trying to create more fees and use taxes. One problem: California has 11.9% of the population in the USA and it has 32% of the welfare because of the generous payouts.
 
charjohncarter said:
Spoks, so you were basically close to 50% tax. We are pushing that in California, but really only being paid by the working middle class and the high earners (almost 50% of the people pay almost 100% of the taxes). Fortunately, we have some deductions that keep it almost reasonable. Still, our state is broke and they are trying to create more fees and use taxes. One problem: California has 11.9% of the population in the USA and it has 32% of the welfare because of the generous payouts.
Click to expand...

According to this page: http://www.regjeringen.no/en/dep/fi...mic-policy/topics/Taxes-on-GDP.html?id=418093

Tax as a fraction of GDP is:

OECD countries ('The Western World'): 36,3% average
USA: 25,6%
Norway: 43,4%
EU countries: 40,5% average
Sweden: 50,6%
Denmark: 48%

Regarding Sweden: I think this figure is wrong. This 50,6% figure is rather 'public sector' as a % of the total GDP. It is very common to issue this figure for Sweden and say it is part of the 'taxes paid' in Sweden. It is not! LKAB - one of the largest iron ore mines in the world is owned by the Swedish state and is often included in the public sector. I am pritty sure: Sweden's 'tax share of GDP' is somewhere in between Norway's and Denmark's.

Worth noting is that through the sitting conservative government of Sweden that 'tax share of GDP' has fallen, while services has been kept at the same level. - The balance has been borrowed. - just like in USA! In less than 4 years the Swedish governmental debt has increased with 200 Billion SEK (about 20%) and governmental properties have been sold off (to friends of the party bosses). So, the Swedes are far poorer now than they were 4 years ago. New elections is set for later this year.

But don't forget that included in our taxes we get 'free health care', 'lavish pensions' and 'education for our kids through University'. Instead of buying these services on a private market we buy them together in a sort of coop - over the tax bill. Which I am convinced is far - far better - and cheaper than the US version.
 
I for one appreciate and prefer the competition which comes from suppliers (including universities) competing for business. This competition brings higher quality at lower cost. The same thing should be done with health, as opposed to the current proposals by the administration which will reduce quality and increase cost, and add to our already staggering debt.
 
digitalintrigue said:
I for one appreciate and prefer the competition which comes from suppliers (including universities) competing for business. This competition brings higher quality at lower cost. The same thing should be done with health, as opposed to the current proposals by the administration which will reduce quality and increase cost, and add to our already staggering debt.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but I don't agree. By far.

I think it is unwise that a relation between a doctor and patient is based on business. A business is there to 'make a profit'. Not to serve the patient. Comparing Scandinavian (at least) public health care systems, they are cheaper, more efficient and better than the private US model. They are even public. Which gives the media insight. While a private company can hide it's mishaps as 'company secrets'.

Anyway.

With the coming gridlock situation in the US Senate you will not have a modernised health care system for all this time either. I think that is tragic. It will have far reaching consequences. Not the least for Americans to compete as exporters: Your health care system is all too expensive, - and does not even cover all Americans.

So much for 'privatisation' and 'competition'.

But this is the way Americans wants it....

Now I hear that the Americans will not afford to have a decent educational system either. Due to that all taxes goes to pay interest on state debt California shall sack 100.000 teachers....

What's easier than to rule a ignorant people...?
 
Spoks said:
According to this page: http://www.regjeringen.no/en/dep/fi...mic-policy/topics/Taxes-on-GDP.html?id=418093

Tax as a fraction of GDP is:

OECD countries ('The Western World'): 36,3% average
USA: 25,6%
Norway: 43,4%
EU countries: 40,5% average
Sweden: 50,6%
Denmark: 48%

Regarding Sweden: I think this figure is wrong. This 50,6% figure is rather 'public sector' as a % of the total GDP. It is very common to issue this figure for Sweden and say it is part of the 'taxes paid' in Sweden. It is not! LKAB - one of the largest iron ore mines in the world is owned by the Swedish state and is often included in the public sector. I am pritty sure: Sweden's 'tax share of GDP' is somewhere in between Norway's and Denmark's.

Worth noting is that through the sitting conservative government of Sweden that 'tax share of GDP' has fallen, while services has been kept at the same level. - The balance has been borrowed. - just like in USA! In less than 4 years the Swedish governmental debt has increased with 200 Billion SEK (about 20%) and governmental properties have been sold off (to friends of the party bosses). So, the Swedes are far poorer now than they were 4 years ago. New elections is set for later this year.

But don't forget that included in our taxes we get 'free health care', 'lavish pensions' and 'education for our kids through University'. Instead of buying these services on a private market we buy them together in a sort of coop - over the tax bill. Which I am convinced is far - far better - and cheaper than the US version.
Click to expand...

I'll bet our 'lavish pensions' beat yours. The ex- fire chief in our county gets $241,000 a year. We do have some higher education funded by the state, but like everything else in the US the government picks the winners and losers. Therefore, if you work, none of these benefits are available. We also have publically funded health care; all you have to do is be in the right crowd. The working poor are the ones that slip through the cracks.

My mother was from Norway but left very early: Mulda (Spelled wrong). Both my Grandparents did well in the US, even with their limited English.
 
Last edited:
competition?
in the USA?

sigh! this is a tantalising debate;-)

Respective erecting trade barriers, the USSR was more free-enterprise system than USA. Just one example -- let's talk about agriculture -- is it highly state-subsidised in USA or not?
(BTW, who repeats over and over INCOME tax comparisons and forgets about other duties, e.g. real estate tax or VAT, either seems to be misguided or to try to manipulate...)

As Spoks mentioned, in Good OLD Europe (even in those countries, which are allied with the USA) we have a different model of health care, pensions and education.

Even US-Government provided data (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/index.html, https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/au.html, https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/us.html) assure me that our European way is far far better -- and cheaper -- than the US version.



Austria:
Unemployment rate: 4.7% (2009 est.)
Population below poverty line: 5.9% (2004)


The "Land of the Free":
Unemployment rate: 9.4% (2009 est.)
Population below poverty line: 12% (2004 est.)
 
digitalintrigue said:
Yes. Keep your Euro nanny states on the other side of the pond, please. 🙂

Dave, good luck on your search.
Click to expand...

But you Americans still want to borrow more money from us, he?

The Norwegian pension fund has some 28 billion US dollars in US Treasury Bills. The US president was here recently. In 'the mother of all business jets'; Air Force One, and with an entourage of more than 700 people, - to ask us to buy more US Treasury Bills.

No wonder we were wide-eyed. Ha, ha!

Still, the real nanny for USA and it's citizens are China and Russia. You are in good hands, let's hope.
 
I think I made it quite clear in early posts that I do not support the continuing over-spending mantra that our leaders promote. That said, borrowing funds is quite a different subject from the Euro nanny state.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom