Reader's Digest publishes these lists from time to time. Meaningless things really but always provocative. Are Danes and Norwegians happier because of their free stuff or because they have a more homogenous society.
These are the happiest countries in order of their happiness. With the exception of Switzerland they are all NATO countries. Maybe that's the ticket.
1) Denmark
2) Finland
3) Norway
4) The Netherlands
5) Canada
6) Switzerland
7) Sweden New Zealand
9) Austrailia
10) Ireland
11) The United States
HaHa an 8 followed by a ) gives you a smiley.
The Last of the World's Great Human Beings
Seek immediate medical attention if you suddenly go either deaf or blind.
If you put the Federal Government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in five years time there would be a shortage of sand.
Even though I previously stated that I believe our Health care system and our involvement in foreign wars are contributors to our national debt problems, I do not believe they are the only reasons.
It is a very complex and decades old problem in the making.
Another very powerful reason we find ourselves in a financial predicament is the Deregulation of our financial system. The regulations that were put into place after the Great Depression have largely been dismantled and have now become obsolete to deal with 21st century financial instruments which are nothing more that sophisticated Ponzi schemes. these schemes are stripping the wealth out of the hands of every hard working person in this and many other countries. They increase the cost of every product we consume.
I grew up in a military family and it has shaped my view of our health care system . The military model is far more efficient at delivering effective healthcare for a nominal cost. But most find it far to socialistic to be acceptable. I believe in a strong military just not an aggressive first option choice.
By the way least anyone doubt it , I am firmly a capitalist, and a Small business person. I have had employees. I do not believe that if I netted after deductions, more than 250k a year I would have any problem paying a little higher tax. Especially if it meant a better health care system and even helped to subsidize programs like medicare, unemployment , welfare for those most disadvantaged, and educational opportunities for more young people. 250k a year net is alot of money to me, more than I could ever need.
billyz wrote:Even though I previously stated that I believe our Health care system and our involvement in foreign wars are contributors to our national debt problems, I do not believe they are the only reasons.
It is a very complex and decades old problem in the making.
Another very powerful reason we find ourselves in a financial predicament is the Deregulation of our financial system. The regulations that were put into place after the Great Depression have largely been dismantled and have now become obsolete to deal with 21st century financial instruments which are nothing more that sophisticated Ponzi schemes. these schemes are stripping the wealth out of the hands of every hard working person in this and many other countries. They increase the cost of every product we consume.
I grew up in a military family and it has shaped my view of our health care system . The military model is far more efficient at delivering effective healthcare for a nominal cost. But most find it far to socialistic to be acceptable. I believe in a strong military just not an aggressive first option choice.
By the way least anyone doubt it , I am firmly a capitalist, and a Small business person. I have had employees. I do not believe that if I netted after deductions, more than 250k a year I would have any problem paying a little higher tax. Especially if it meant a better health care system and even helped to subsidize programs like medicare, unemployment , welfare for those most disadvantaged, and educational opportunities for more young people. 250k a year net is alot of money to me, more than I could ever need.
I hear you. The antitrust and related regulations made sense, but they weren't designed to deal with a handful of Princeton financial engineering majors who invented stuff that only a handful of their peers understand. A lot of current regulations were adopted BECAUSE we don't understand what we're regulating. They're overly broad and don't address the actual issues (because no on understands what those are). They hamper business and probably do nothing good-- like drug laws trying to prevent drug profits or Prohibition trying to prevent primitive capital formation for the Mob. We are own own worst enemies. It's charming that people with a little more are willing to pay a little more, but do the math: it's a drop in the ocean. Much bigger problems here and the solutions will be neither easy nor pleasant.
That is what I don't get about taxing the wealthier citizens.
They are a much smaller demographic.
Is it just the political thing to do so he can say, "See? I'm sticking it to those rich people."
Redistribute wealth?
What most politicians seem to believe is that we can tax or spend our way out of this mess.
Personally I think they need to give businesses some incentives to hire more people.
The more people working the broader the tax base, equals more revenue.
Structo wrote:That is what I don't get about taxing the wealthier citizens.
They are a much smaller demographic.
Is it just the political thing to do so he can say, "See? I'm sticking it to those rich people."
Redistribute wealth?
What most politicians seem to believe is that we can tax or spend our way out of this mess.
Personally I think they need to give businesses some incentives to hire more people.
The more people working the broader the tax base, equals more revenue.
The problem is that wealth is being redirected to a smaller and a smaller number persons. It is being concentrated.
I do not begrudge a wealthy person at all. But for a healthy economy the wealth needs to be more evenly distributed so that more products and services may be transferred thus creating more jobs for everyone. And more tax revenue can go into the coffers to provide more and better services, etc. The fairy tale of trickle down economics has been busted.
" In the United States, wealth is highly concentrated in a relatively few hands. As of 2010, the top 1% of households (the upper class) owned 35.4% of all privately held wealth, and the next 19% (the managerial, professional, ) had 53.5%, which means that just 20% of the people owned a remarkable 89%, leaving only 11% of the wealth for the bottom 80% (wage and salary workers). In terms of financial wealth (total net worth minus the value of one's home), the top 1% of households had an even greater share: 42.1%."
billyz wrote:The problem is that wealth is being redirected to a smaller and a smaller number persons. It is being concentrated.
I do not begrudge a wealthy person at all. But for a healthy economy the wealth needs to be more evenly distributed so that more products and services may be transferred thus creating more jobs for everyone. And more tax revenue can go into the coffers to provide more and better services, etc. The fairy tale of trickle down economics has been busted.
" In the United States, wealth is highly concentrated in a relatively few hands. As of 2010, the top 1% of households (the upper class) owned 35.4% of all privately held wealth, and the next 19% (the managerial, professional, ) had 53.5%, which means that just 20% of the people owned a remarkable 89%, leaving only 11% of the wealth for the bottom 80% (wage and salary workers). In terms of financial wealth (total net worth minus the value of one's home), the top 1% of households had an even greater share: 42.1%."
This is the unfortunate consequence of gains in productivity. It's "good" economically to produce things at lower cost; products are cheaper for consumers so they buy more; but because fewer labor hours are needed for manufacture, the workers earn less (per product manufactured). This will always concentrate wealth in the hands of those who control the means of production.
I should say that I am a staunch conservative and a staunch capitalist, but it's pretty clear why empires fail.
We danish conservaties (no, we aren't extinct yet!) have a saying:
"We want the stat to be as weak as not to crush the individual, but at the same time strong enough to help those in dire need".
Personally I feel this is very true indeed. I hate paying taxes, because I see what the results are. The poor may have gotten iPads and Playstations, but they are still poor, and worst of all, dependent on the state.
greekie wrote:We danish conservaties (no, we aren't extinct yet!) have a saying:
"We want the stat to be as weak as not to crush the individual, but at the same time strong enough to help those in dire need".
Personally I feel this is very true indeed. I hate paying taxes, because I see what the results are. The poor may have gotten iPads and Playstations, but they are still poor, and worst of all, dependent on the state.
Bravo greekie.
The Last of the World's Great Human Beings
Seek immediate medical attention if you suddenly go either deaf or blind.
If you put the Federal Government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in five years time there would be a shortage of sand.
greekie wrote:"We want the state to be as weak as not to crush the individual, but at the same time strong enough to help those in dire need".
Personally I feel this is very true indeed. I hate paying taxes, because I see what the results are. The poor may have gotten iPads and Playstations, but they are still poor, and worst of all, dependent on the state.
+1000!
Wife: How many amps do you need?
Me: Just one more...
Everyone hates paying taxes, but no one minds garbage pickup.
It seems unfair to some that they have to pay for education, when they don't have kids in school. I don't know if this is still true, but at one point in the eighties it was cheaper to send a man to Harvard for four years than it was to keep him in jail for four years.
There's a tendency to blame poor welfare recipients, while ignoring that the most profitable corporation in the world, Exxon, paid about 17 percent taxes on income, while receiving a great deal of corporate welfare.
Meanwhile the tax payer funds endless wars that mostly benefit companies like Exxon, and send their children to die or be maimed in those wars, and those American sons and daughters that make it back are fifty percent more likely to become homeless than the regular population.
When I was working two jobs to put myself and my wife through college, we qualified for food stamps. I'll never forget the first time in the grocery store paying in food stamps for the meager pile of groceries we had. There was one package of two scrawny new york strips about to expire in the pile. The look of disgust on the guys face behind me was withering. What he didn't realizee was that we'd cut those steaks into thin strips for a stir fry that would be the only meat we would eat for a month.
But because of those food stamps, my wife and I were able to eventually join the workforce, making decent salaries, and paying far more in taxes than we would have had without the opportunity. I think we paid the tax payers back in the long run.
I don't believe in a welfare state, for corporations or for those too lazy to make something of themselves. But don't be too quick to throw the baby out with the bathwater. There are cases where a government investing in the success of it's citizens does pay off in higher tax revenue.
Since the privatization of the prison system, I think it costs much more to house a prisoner now than it did in the 80s (even with inflation factored in).
Since the privatization of the prison system, I think it costs much more to house a prisoner now than it did in the 80s (even with inflation factored in).
The really sad part is most of the contracts various local governments have signed have quotas that will cost them more if they don't keep the prisons filled.
My father (RIP) always said you could solve all the problems of the world by requiring politicians who wanted to pass a new law first to repeal two laws. He wasn't wrong. We are drowning in legislation and gasping for ideas.
Firestorm wrote:My father (RIP) always said you could solve all the problems of the world by requiring politicians who wanted to pass a new law first to repeal two laws. He wasn't wrong. We are drowning in legislation and gasping for ideas.
New Zealand
