18 minutes ago, dave2013 said:

OK.  Are you prepared to pay a 20-25% sales tax?

Are you also then prepared to pay a 15-20% income tax on your income below $25,000 with a small exemption of around $5-10K, then 30-40% on income above that?  Anything above around $50,000 would be taxed at 40+%.  Those are approximately the level of rates everyone would have to pay in order to live in a social democracy paradise where everyone gets "free" healthcare and subsidized housing abounds.

How about $8.00 a gallon for gasoline due to fuel taxes?

The top U.S. rate of 37% doesn't hit until $500,000.  U.S. Income tax for income below $40,000 for single and $80,000 for married is 10-12%.

Dave

you seem unaware that our US healthcare system is the most expensive in the world per person.

Instead of answering all those who answered me let's instead, talk of the good old days.  1946.  I was in the 7th grade and we were living in San Francisco, California.  

The median income 3,000 dollars a year.

The federal income tax rate on 3,000 dollars was 22%

The average cost for a new house was 5,150 dollars or 171% of your annual income

The average cost for a new car was 1,125 dollars or 38% of your annual income.

Fast forward to today.

The median income is 67,000 dollars a year.

The federal income tax rate for a married couple filing jointly is 12%  (In 1946 22% was for everybody)

The average price of a new car is 45,000 dollars or 67% of your annual income.

The average price of a new home is 355,000 dollars or 529% of your annual income.

Of course in 1946 we didn't have buy television sets or computers or pay for cable or satellite or internet.  And we didn't have credit cards.  The only thing you bought on credit then was a house.

And I would like to add that we had no health insurance.  When my brother had his appendix removed and my mom was treated at home for pneumonia and our routine medical costs as well as prescriptions and medicines were out of pocket and affordable.

BTW...the top marginal rate on millionaires (I don't think there were billionaires then) was 91%.  They certainly paid their fair share in 1946.  It was then when we could afford to start building the interstate highway system, pay for WW2 and the New Deal programs like Boulder and Grand Coulee Dams and a host of other New Deal infrastructure programs.  And the national debt was 241 billion dollars or 2.87 trillion dollars in todays dollars.

Oh yes, college tuition.  In 1945 the tuition at the University of California at Berkley was free.  I couldn't find the tuition costs of Stanford in 1946 but the began charging 40.00 a quarter in 1920.

Today tuition costs at UC Berkley is 14,150.00 and Stanford is 55,000.00 for undergrad students.

Society was different then too.  When I was 9 and my brother was 7 my brother and I routinely walked downtown alone.  We never saw anybody sleeping in Civic Center Park or pan handling on Market Street and the word homeless hadn't yet entered the vocabulary.  Would you turn your 9 and 7 year olds out alone on Market Street today?  Or even let them walk to school alone?

So Luke's statement, "The world is full of old people who figure that they have everything figured out and remark at how absurd and ridiculous the younger generations are. Over the last few millennia, the young have a much better track record,"  is really quite meaningless.  We old timers have walked and are walking in your shoes Luke, but you have never walked in ours. 

Noel

 

 

Edited November 8, 20214 yr by birdguy

3 hours ago, sightseer said:

you seem unaware that our US healthcare system is the most expensive in the world per person.

The incredible thing is that’s true just looking at public expenditures. Then we spend it all again in private money…

As for the net effect of those social democracies’ taxes: One of the reasons salaries are (often significantly) lower in developed European countries like Germany compared to the U.S. is that post-tax money goes much farther, because so many expenses we in the U.S. take for granted that we’ll pay for after-tax are either free or heavily subsidized.

To take one obvious example: childcare, which often single-handedly eats up the bulk of a working parent’s salary in the U.S. It’s considered a public good in most European countries and is both guaranteed to be available and very low in cost. And yes! It’s paid for out of your taxes, but if you have even one kid you’re coming out significantly ahead of where you’d be in a system like the U.S.

The grass isn’t always greener, but these debates often seem to be based on a deeply mistaken understanding of both systems driven by ideological preconceptions (eg everyone’s always surprised at how much government spends on healthcare in the U.S.). It helps to look at the actual numbers. Someone recently did a comparison of actual daily living costs in Germany vs the U.S. to try to figure out where you come out ahead, even in light of much lower average salaries and higher taxes in Germany. I really wish I could find it but I can’t…

9 hours ago, dave2013 said:

Moreover, if everyone has a college degree, then those degrees will not be as meaningful and will have less value.  In fact, many now are finding that a 4-year degree isn't enough so they need to get a graduate degree.

When I graduated high school in the late 80s, attending college was more difficult than it is now.  One had to have good grades and loans weren't as easy to get.  I had several friends who worked part-time jobs during school and full time in the Summer in order to get by.  Now all you have to do is have a passing grade to get in, and loans are easy to get because now they are provided directly by the federal govt. 

Dave

This is an important point that is often overlooked (and which brings us to the inevitable laws of supply and demand). Those arguing that we need "free" education for everyone forget that there is already free education available in form of middle/high school, where students ought to acquire basic knowledge in most subjects. Whether public schools do a decent job of teaching is a separate topic (and it is unfortunate that rigor has been watered down over the years in the pursuit of accommodating every group of people), but unlike in some 3rd world countries where attending school is considered a privilege or luxury, there aren't any significant barriers in the western world for parents to send their kids to schools.

College used to be a place reserved for a few talented people where you developed critical, analytical out-of-the-box thinking skills. These days, a college degree is required for most jobs that don't really demand any special academic abilities. As you stated, if more and more people get a bachelor's degree, its value will be degraded, so that employers raise their requirements to filter out candidates to a manageable number. In response, there are calls to make college accessible to everyone to be able to meet these requirements, which raises the number of graduates - and so the vicious cycle continues...  Many people say that a bachelor's degree today is equivalent to a high school degree some decades ago. But at what cost!

It is actually astonishing to me that college is becoming more expensive at a time when access to information and knowledge has never been so easy and inexpensive thanks to the internet, thus creating a substitute for university education. Before internet, the resources of knowledge were confined and exclusive to universities and libraries. These days, the internet offers an avalanche of information for free (well, if you exclude the cost of internet access). Of course, that information is not subject to the same quality control as textbooks, and there are many rotten apples, but good quality information is still possible to find. If anyone is passionately interested in the history of a country, just look up in the internet or go to the library - it costs you almost nothing!  There is no need to get indebted into a five- or six figure amount for a degree in that subject. Things are different of course if you want to become an engineer or programmer, where going to college is much more advantageous.

6 hours ago, Afterburner said:

Before internet, the resources of knowledge were confined and exclusive to universities and libraries.

Growing up we had a set of the Encyclopedia Britannica in our house.  Whenever Leon or I had asked a question the standard answer was, "Look it up."  I had a library card as far back as I can remember.  Monthly magazines for Leon and I began with Children's Activities and graduated to Popular Mechanics and Popular Science.  And Colliers and The Saturday Evening Post being Mom and Dad's magazine of choice.

Mom and Dad were avid readers and encourage my brother and I to read also.  We had books stacked on the floor.  Mom and Dad each belonged to the Book of the Month Club so they had two new books a month to read.  It rubbed off on us.  I still spend part of my day reading.  It's hard for me to read the printed page anymore but I can set the large type in both my Kindle and Nook.  I'm currently reading Peril by Woodward.  And I re-read books by Michener and James Clavell (Shogun) and McMurtry (The Berrybender Narrative and Lonesome Dove).

Noel

Noel - I grew up in a similar fashion.  We had a set of 'Funk & Wagnall's' encyclopedias and I used to just pick a volume and start flipping through to find something of interest.  At one point my mom bought a set of 'How It Works' books and I loved reading those.  We also had Popular Mechanics.  My mom mainly read Guidepost and Reader's Digest.  My dad either read the newspaper or corrected math textbooks for fun.  He was a mathematician and routinely quizzed me on various topics.

I'm currently amazed at the information you can get on youtube.  I've got a number of channel subscriptions.  

1 hour ago, birdguy said:

Growing up we had a set of the Encyclopedia Britannica in our house.  Whenever Leon or I had asked a question the standard answer was, "Look it up."  I had a library card as far back as I can remember.  Monthly magazines for Leon and I began with Children's Activities and graduated to Popular Mechanics and Popular Science.  And Colliers and The Saturday Evening Post being Mom and Dad's magazine of choice.

Mom and Dad were avid readers and encourage my brother and I to read also.  We had books stacked on the floor.  Mom and Dad each belonged to the Book of the Month Club so they had two new books a month to read.  It rubbed off on us.  I still spend part of my day reading.  It's hard for me to read the printed page anymore but I can set the large type in both my Kindle and Nook.  I'm currently reading Peril by Woodward.  And I re-read books by Michener and James Clavell (Shogun) and McMurtry (The Berrybender Narrative and Lonesome Dove).

We had an old set of the World Book Encyclopedia when I was a kid, as well as "The Way It Works".  I used to read them when I got bored, just for fun.  My Dad was the textbook manager at a couple college bookstores, and he'd bring home textbooks that students discarded when they couldn't sell them back (e.g. obsolete edition, bad condition) during the buyback.  As a result I could explain the supply and demand curve and price elasticity before I started junior high school.

When we went to the library for the first time in Kindergarten, they took us to the picture book section.  I wandered out of the group and the teacher caught me looking at a copy of Robinson Crusoe.  I told her I could read it and she didn't believe me...so I opened it and started reading from it.  That's the sort of advantage you have when you are raised in a book culture.

My favorite quote from the movie Good Will Hunting was Will telling a showboating know-it-all Harvard grad student "you just spent 150 grand on an education you could have gotten for $1.50 in late fees at the public library"

I also had a set of World Book Encyclopedia and read them cover to cover!  Heck, I'm smarter than I thought I was??👨🏻‍🎓

11 hours ago, sightseer said:

you seem unaware that our US healthcare system is the most expensive in the world per person.

I am very aware that our healthcare is exorbitantly expensive and I have been very critical of this fact.  The only solution is to have a single-payer system or socialized medicine whereby the govt. could control the cost.  Personally, I am for a single-payer system.

However, bear in mind that about 35% of the population is on Medicaid or Medicare, over 50% have employer-based health insurance, and the rest have Obamacare, VA coverage, or are uninsured.  So despite the high cost, the vast majority of folks are covered and have access to affordable healthcare.

Dave

9 hours ago, birdguy said:

And I would like to add that we had no health insurance.  When my brother had his appendix removed and my mom was treated at home for pneumonia and our routine medical costs as well as prescriptions and medicines were out of pocket and affordable.

BTW...the top marginal rate on millionaires (I don't think there were billionaires then) was 91%.  They certainly paid their fair share in 1946.  It was then when we could afford to start building the interstate highway system, pay for WW2 and the New Deal programs like Boulder and Grand Coulee Dams and a host of other New Deal infrastructure programs.  And the national debt was 241 billion dollars or 2.87 trillion dollars in todays dollars.

The good old days - and I'm not being sarcastic.

People back then actually had good values, more common sense, and IMO were more dignified.  Those high tax rates were put in place because we needed to pay off the huge debt incurred during the Depression and WW2, and we nearly paid it all off.  For most of history debt was a bad thing, but now it is encouraged and rewarded.  Forget about those old-fashioned sentiments nowadays where high debt is worn as a badge of honor.    And if you dig yourself into a deep debt hole, whether it be an individual or a large company, you just ask for a bailout or declare bankruptcy and in many cases your debts are forgiven or at a minimum greatly reduced by writing off much of it.

Nowadays everyone wants free this and free that, but they also want somebody else to pay for it.  Pretty sad.

Dave

Edited November 8, 20214 yr by dave2013

30 minutes ago, w6kd said:

That's the sort of advantage you have when you are raised in a book culture.

Kids who grow up in a book culture have a head start when they get to school.  The downside is they later might find school boring.

Noel

27 minutes ago, charliearon said:

Heck, I'm smarter than I thought I was??👨🏻‍🎓

You're a moderator aren't you Charlie?

Noel

41 minutes ago, dave2013 said:

I am very aware that our healthcare is exorbitantly expensive and I have been very critical of this fact.  The only solution is to have a single-payer system or socialized medicine whereby the govt. could control the cost.  Personally, I am for a single-payer system.

I have no idea why you spewed out a bunch of non sensical taxation figures if you understand that shifting to a single payer system both lowers costs and produces better outcomes (if the entire rest of the civilized world is anything to go by).

The Affordable Care Act may exist right now but it is under constant threat and it wasn't that long ago that there simply were no good affordable options for a working poor person with multiple (expensive) health issues.   The ACA was apparently the best that could be done at the time but we could do so much better.

 

Edited November 8, 20214 yr by sightseer

40 minutes ago, sightseer said:

I have no idea why you spewed out a bunch of non sensical taxation figures if you understand that shifting to a single payer system both lowers costs and produces better outcomes (if the entire rest of the civilized world is anything to go by).

The Affordable Care Act may exist right now but it is under constant threat and it wasn't that long ago that there simply were no good affordable options for a working poor person with multiple (expensive) health issues.   The ACA was apparently the best that could be done at the time but we could do so much better.

 

I've been studying these issues for many years, and I know a lot about them.  Moreover, I lived in Europe for nearly 10 years, and I know a little bit about their healthcare.  Their healthcare costs less because in most cases the govt. either runs it and actually owns the hospitals, or the govt. tightly regulates the cost via a universal insurance system.  I don't "spew out" anything.

The Affordable Care Act was step in the right direction, but the mostly bought-off politicians corrupted the process.  The law essentially subsidizes the existing expensive system and the high private insurance rates, when what they should have done is give everyone access to Medicare coverage.

Taxes would not have to go up much at all in order to switch to a single payer system.. Employers and individuals would simply take the money they're paying to the insurance companies right now and instead use it to pay for Medicare.

The average worker in Italy takes home app. $1,600 a month because of the high taxes both on the employer and employee side.  Add to this the 20+% sales taxes, very high gasoline taxes, tolls to use the interstate highway system, and a myriad of other taxes and fees that nickel and dime people to death.  Despite all the taxes, healthcare is not free as one must pay copays, which can amount to hundreds of Euros if there are also lab tests in addition to a doctor visit.  As I mentioned before, the govt. in Italy passed pension reform which raised the retirement age from mid-late 50s to 67 years of age.  And yet, despite the high levels of taxation, the public debt is one of the highest in the Western world.

My point is that centrally managed, high-tax social welfare states don't usually fare very well.  There are a few exceptions, such as the Scandinavian countries, but most are heavily in debt and their citizens make meager incomes.

Dave

Edited November 8, 20214 yr by dave2013

Dave or anyone, what's the secret to the Scandinavian country's handing of healthcare?

I would like to see everyone get the healthcare system I have.  It's a combination of Medicare and the military Tricare for Life programs.  What Medicare doesn't pay, Tricare for Life pays (copays).  I haven't paid a cent to a doctor or hospital or clinic in the past 20 years.  For just about any prescription I pay $12.00 for a three month supply.  If I lived near a military facility I could go to their hospital pharmacy and pick up the prescriptions for nothing.

My wife and I each have $148.00 deducted each month from our Social Security checks for Part B which covers just about everything except dental, glasses, and hearing aids.

Retired military have the option to buy government employee dental insurance.  We have the highest coverage for $78.00 a month deducted from my military retirement check.

So it's not free.  But it is affordable.

Last Spring I went to the emergency room for sharp pains in my abdomen.  They did tests and determined my gall bladder should be removed.  They wheeled me back to the emergency room and I fell asleep.  The next thing I know I'm being jostled around.  I look up and see I'm being loaded into a helicopter.  They flew me 200 miles to a hospital in Las Cruces to have the operation done.  I was there for four days.  They provided a van to transport me back to Roswell.  It didn't cost a cent out of my pocket.

A civilized country should be able to provide this for all it's citizens.  The next sentence on my mind will remain there because I don't want to be the one responsible for having Charlie close down this thread.

Noel