Interesting tax tables. These are the maximum federal tax rates. VAT rates, can vary depending on the country, what is being bought and time of year. These are NOT the total tax burdens. Still have to add sales tax, provincial/regional income taxes, etc.
Austria.......50%...VAT-20%
Belgium.......50%...VAT-21%
Croatia.......45%...VAT-23%
Denmark.......51.5%...VAT-25%
Finland.......53%...VAT-23%
France........41%...VAT-19.6%
Germany.......45%...VAT-19%
Greece........45%...VAT-23%
Iceland.......46.3%...VAT-25.5%
Ireland.......41%...VAT-21%
Italy.........45%...VAT-21%
Netherlands...52%...VAT-19%
Norway........54.3%...VAT-25%
Poland........32%...VAT-23%
Spain.........45%...VAT-18%
Sweden........56.6%...VAT-25%
Switzerland...45.5%...VAT-8%
UK............50%...VAT-20%
I've been to every country on this list and none of them are a 'cheap' place to live. With cradle to grave government paid benefits, (with these taxes), no surprise the Greeks, Spaniards, Irish, etc., are upset that benefits will need to be cut. Don't count on the tax rates being cut though. Damn VAT is a killer on top of everything else.
Surprised willy hasn't packed his bags, and on the next flight to Europe.
Certainly these rates are interesting and on the surface appear to be very high. But a little history, Europe in general has always had tax rates higher than the US. Their theory is to enjoy life and in support of that principle, rates establish a gratious retirement/medical apparatus. It worked for quite a long time. But as any liberal approach to social welfare will do, the plan became quietly sabatoged. It's starts out simple and honest enough. Gee, we should protect the poor who cannot afford food. Gee, we need to take care of the kids. Gee, we need to subsidize fuel for those who cannot afford it. Now these are all well intentioned things. Any god fearing person would blindly say, ya, we should be merciful. Well, before you know it, they began spending most of their yearly revenues never suspecting that one day those revenue levels would possibly come crashing down, thus making them unable to pay the "fixed" expenses for which those high revenues were there in the first place. Well, now we see what happens when government tries to be the salvation army. It just doesn't work. Sorry, but the bitter pill is that life is not fair for all. And, just like any other species on the planet, if you expect to survive, you take care of yourself. Lest anyone thinks otherwise, the US is headed for precisely where Europe now finds itself. I for one advocate that if you as a person are not capable of at least feeding yourself, then you will just have to go off into the woods, just like a dog, and bid life farewell. Harsh I know, and I genuinely wish it was different. But, there is only a finite amount of resources and using the US as the example, when half the people don't contribute, it's just pure stupidity to think that the other half "can" support them. And even if they technically could, it should not be that way.
You have come out of the closet as a full-fledged Social Darwinist. I can almost hear you ranting like Scrooge did, "Are there no prisons? Are there no work-houses?" People should just go off into the forest and die? I've never heard even the most rock-ribbed Republican say that (though maybe they thought it.)
Then you go on to create a completely false choice: abrogate the social contract or end up like the Europeans. Besides, it's not simply about tax rates and not all European economies are in the same boat; Germany and Switzerland, for example.
Have a nice, warm holiday season.
Interesting that you chose to use Germany/Switzerland as examples of successful economies. Having lived in both of those countries myself, I can assure you that if you don't work, you are not gonna eat very long. If you're hungry, there are plenty of opportunities made available to you to work, but "free handouts" just because you are human, not so much. And oh, by the way, neither country allocates much for National defense.
I don't know what country you thought you were living in but it must not have been Germany. Or maybe you just never took the time to learn anything on this subject. And what does national defense spending have to do with this discussion? Nothing. But the fact is Germany has the seventh largest defense budget in the world. Regarding Germany's extensive social welfare system, here is an excerpt on it from the countrystudies web site.
"THE DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIAL POLICY in Germany has followed a unique historical path. During a long process of growth and social experimentation, Germany combined a vigorous and highly competitive capitalist economy with a social welfare system that, with some exceptions, has provided its citizens cradle-to-grave security. The system's benefits are so extensive that by the 1990s annual total spending by the state, employers, and private households on health care, pensions, and other aspects of what Germans call the social safety net amounted to roughly DM1 trillion (for value of the deutsche mark--see Glossary) and accounted for about one-third of the country's gross national product (GNP--see Glossary). Unlike many of the world's advanced countries, however, Germany does not provide its citizens with health care, pensions, and other social welfare benefits through a centralized state-run system. Rather, it provides these benefits via a complex network of national agencies and a large number of independent regional and local entities--some public, some quasi-public, and many private and voluntary. Many of these structures date from the nineteenth century, and some from much earlier."
Pwilley, you really should do some boning up before you start making claims about how much you know.
-- Modified on 11/11/2011 8:47:03 PM
Not again? When will you folks who are brainwashed with the reliance on some article as a lame attempt to prove some point you may wish to make and in doing so, completely ignore the actual reliability? Haven't you figured out that you can pick whatever argument you want to make and with enough searching, you will find some write up somewhere to agree with you? Haven't you figured out yet that just because somebody says it, doesn't make it so. Try speaking with those who have been there. Try talking to those who have seen it. You'll get a much more accurate look at truth.
Have you forgotten all the "facts" to support WMD in Iraq? Have you forgotten all the write ups about how Congressional committee meetings would be televised? Have you forgotten how all proposed legislation would be posted on the web two weeks before any votes? Have you forgotten that cigarette smoking is not a health hazard?
And, if you really don't know what national defense has to do with the topic of social welfare spending, you're clearly missing out on economics 101. Guess Herman Cain was right when he said the media doesn't have a clue about how economies work, and since you appear to get your insights from media, you at least have an excuse.
I find an extract that makes a point and you simply assume it must be wrong. Did you look into it further? Apparently not. Did you even bother to find an article disputing it? Nope. If you're right that anyone can find anything on the Internet to support any side of an argument then...Prove it! Find an article describing the social welfare system in Germany that supports your claim. I bet you can't.
And are you also disputing the size of Germany's military budget? Guess not.
So then you descend into a smoke screen of things on different issues as if they prove a point about what I posted. I declare you intellectually bankrupt.
Maybe you should check out the book, "How to lie with statistics". What is missing in your theory and not referenced in your quoted article, is the simple "fact" that the social welfare spending amounts are being paid to "workers and retired workers". It is "not" being paid to 48 percent of a population that has not contributed. Yes, there are very temporary exceptions particularly with regard to emergency healthcare for non working, non contributing, down trodden folks. But the focus in Germany, owing to a culture far different than most countries is that Germans are truly hard working folks. It's in their DNA, I guess.
Despite what you appear to want to present with your article reference, we do not have half the German population sitting around watching TV and collecting government handouts for their basic survival. Their system is based on the fundamental belief that healthcare, retirement, and basic standards of living are an "earned" right for contributing to the benefit of the State through their years of working. They do not have a system that allows only half the people to work while the other half collects the fruits of their labor. In Germany, it is expected that you contribute and they generally do. And Oh, by the way, if Germany ever lost their manufacturing industry, even their system would fall as it has in most European countries.
Now, just for fun, contrast their approach to that of the liberal approach where there is no focus on requiring folks to work and earn their way, only a belief that we should have pity and take from those who do work and give it to them. Not !!!
You asserted there was no social welfare system in Germany. None. That is simply incorrect, yet you continue to defend it. End of story. I agree Germans are hard working, but then you go off the deep end (again) and assert that in the US half of the people don't work and the other half "collects the fruit of their labor." That is false on its face. Please back that up. Oops! You can't.
-- Modified on 11/12/2011 9:55:28 AM
I guess you must have missed one of Pri's charts that showed 48% of the US population pays no income tax?
I actually did not contradict my views at all. What is muddying the water is the concept of social welfare as implemented in Germany vs how it is being implemented in the US. Same words, but entirely different meaning. In Germany, it's a right you have paid into and a right that they believe you have earned through work. In the US, it's believed, at least by the liberals, that it's a right just because you were fricken born here, regardless of your contributions through work. In deed, in the US, the libs don't seem to think work is a requirement.
Don't believe it, try contemplating this .... what if the right to vote required that you must have paid tax? How many libs do you think would get elected?
You have mixed up the question of people who work with people who pay taxes. The latter is an issue not of who is working but how they are treated by the tax code. There are lots of people who make so little they pay no income tax. But they do pay a payroll tax. Whatever tax they do pay, if they have a job and a salary then they are workers, not freeloaders.
OK, you have a point. I'll substitute my requirement to "pay tax" with your approach. Let's just say if you don't have a job rather than you don't pay tax.
Probably a topic for a separate thread, but now you've got me wondering why I just agreed to this change. Why should it not be the case that "every single person" MUST pay something for the privilege of being in this country?
There are about 15 million potential voters who are unemployed or have given up hope of finding a job because of the lousy economy. Are we supposed to penalize them by disenfranching them like convicted felons? I say "no."
I'm not sure if these are income taxes or what. VAT taxes are paid by consumers, but they're also paid by corporations, which is why corporate income tax rates are pretty low in Europe.
pwilley, of course, is an idiot as usual. We had higher tax rates than Europe until the 80's. You'll also notice that the nations that followed a more American economic approach such as Iceland and Ireland were the first ones who's economy crashed. They weren't alone. Remember 2008? The US economy crashed too.
Strangely, it's those horrible socialist nations like Germany that's bailing out Greece. Meanwhile Germany has lower unemployment rates than us, while still have a social safety net to "encourage" people not to work.
But what else would you expect from pwilley? He listens to a nutcase named Michael Savage, a guy who just can't get over the fact that a queer Beatnik poet named Allen Ginsberg cornholed his ass.
Who in the heck is Savage? Are you referring to that radio show dude that nobody, including me, listens to?
Have a great holiday weekend.
Really? Is that why you repeat his talking points?
http://classic.theeroticreview.com/discussion_boards/viewmsg.asp?MessageID=160200&boardID=39&page=
Willy, that's just pure coincidence. I've heard of Savage a time or two where somebody was claiming that Fox network would not allow him on their airwaves. Beyond that, I don't know a damn thing about him.
But, my statement still stands because it proscribes a reasonable and socially accepted excuse for the illogical conclusions reached by liberals. In essence, I'm just trying to be a little politically correct by offering them an easy out for just being dumb ass stupid "sometimes".
you had to write that sentence that starts "I for one advocate". You do know the Progressives on this board will only focus on that one sentence.
On the occasion of veteran's day I'm reminded of all the bullets that have been fired in the history of our nation and thought I'd mark the day by firing off a few just to see the reaction... LOL ... Never miss an opportunity for a little fun on a holiday.
which is why our standard of living has traditionally been higher...
Funny how as the tax gap closes, so does the standard of living gap...
If you take some time to scroll through this list, you may find a few surprises.
Piece of schrapnel between my 4th and 5th rib, and the pieces in my right leg usually sets off the airport metal detectors. Then it's, "Would you mind stepping over here and removing your trousers"? Followed by, "Yes, I fucking do mind", lol.
-- Modified on 11/11/2011 10:32:02 PM
I Never saw a sales tax in Europe!
By your own admission this is the Maximum tax rates.
Also most (is not all) fully cover health care for all residents.
You never saw a sales tax in Europe? You either weren't paying attention, or you didn't buy anything. Ever hear of their "goods and services tax"? Apparently not. VAT is in addition to the sales tax.
Lets take the UK, for example. Last time I was there....Tax on each TV in the house...50 pounds for color, 10 pounds for black/white. 10 pounds tax on the 'wireless' radio in your vehicle, 5 pounds for the radios in your house, all TV and radio licenses go to the BBC. 5 pounds tax on outside faucets, called a "license to transport water". 5 pounds tax for each window in your house, commonly called the "Sunshine Tax". You'll see many windows bricked over. Tax on a bottle of booze runs around 15 pounds, add the VAT onto that, and you've got to really love alcohol. And this is just the tip of the iceberg. Tack on vehicle registration, MOT inspections, petrol tax, property tax, cigarette tax, et al.
Really no surprise where the UK gets the money for all that 'free' health care. Hope you don't mind waiting in line eight plus weeks for an MRI.
I repeat I never saw a sales tax on my sales slip!
I lived in the UK/Europe for a total of 12 years. I repeat, you weren't paying attention. I suppose you never saw VAT on your sales receipts either?
I never paid a single sales tax while I was over in Greece for two weeks recently. I paid cash for everything, and the receipts I did get were just some scribbles on blank paper.
Nobody pays taxes in their cash economy. So how are they supposed to provide for the huge, bloated bureaucracy with glorious benefits to government employees and pensioners?