Putin calls USA a parasite on the world economy!

[TheTraveler]

FICA payments paid by the individual are capped because SS pensions are capped.  The more income one makes, the lower the percentage.  For sure the top one percent will receive only a small percentage of their FICA payments returned as pension.

Good point... and employer-class individuals usually contribute to FICA at a 15% rate and almost always max out their contribution, rather than the 7.5% rate that an employee pays.  And then add in the fact that employers are required to match every one of their employees' 7.5% contribution into FICA (and that's above and beyond their typical 31% taxes, since it's part of their business' tax return.)
 

[Gator]

I see in your post above  ["  "] that you are asking for enlightened quantitative explanation.   
 

We managed to balance our budget when faced with a debt problem, run healthy surpluses for a decade and now benefit from a low debt-to-GDP ratio.

To your credit Canada manages to do this even though your government is perhaps larger than America's, relatively speaking.   
 

And what is your unemployment rate?  If our economy were humming on all 8 cylinders, we too would have a balanced budget.  The problem is that for decades government grew faster than the economy, and when the economy entered into a recession, government did not recede.
 
And possibly the main reason explaining your good economy is your oil and other natural resources.  America too has natural resources.  Why are the oil reserves not being produced?  Environmental concerns (e. g., fracking, etc.).  Such is not stopping production of Canada's tar sands. 
 
We particularly have a surplus of natural gas, and we even export it.  Why is it not being used in automobiles?  I suppose the oil lobby.  Many Ukrainian cars use natural gas for fuel, and we can not.  Where is the leadership?  I blame this on our politicians from both parties.  And Obama's administration is impeding this even more than the previous administration. 
 
The Tea Party is not just about balancing the budget.  They are unhappy with all incumbents for such reasons. 
 
Meanwhile during this one week+ fiasco about debt, the stock market is breaking down, suggesting the probability of a double dip recession has increased significantly.   Depressing. 

[Gator]

I think people in the US should start to realize that the golden age of cheap and inexpensive everything is coming to an end and that perhaps there is more to life than unfettered consumerism based off large amounts of discretionary income. A high QoL costs and there's no getting away from  it.

I do not feel this is the issue.  However, I will agree that the Baby Boomer era in which I was born is perhaps the golden era for economic opportunity and stability, and the generations after us face more challenges.
 
Many parameters of our QoL are in decline.  This is due in part to global competition, yet many feel it is because of our political leadership and the decisions they made and continue to make.   
 
For some reason, as exemplified in your post, Europeans welcome big government.  We too have a big and growing government in America, and it seems that more and more Americans do not want it. 
 
Someone upstream asked why is the middle class against taxing the wealthy.  The  middle class realizes that such added revenues do not help them and instead pass them and go to the bottom.  All it does is perpetuate big government.  And if that it is not curtailed, the government will next ask the middle class to pay more.  The middle class is in debt and trying to get back to even in a slow economy.  It does not need to spend its income on more taxes. 

[Ade]

But, this is where you miss the boat. We don't really care what you think. You don't live here, you don't pay taxes here and you don't live within our system. What makes you think that your opinion is a credible one? Because you've read about it in books? Many Americans do not see your system as Utopia. Can you understand that what you believe is fair and equitable for your country, an ideal situation for you, we do not want any part of? 




We have a bevy of other taxes besides income tax too. But, let me see if I understand you correctly, you are being heavily taxed, so you believe it mandatory that "everyone" be heavily taxed? Quite frankly, you are paying $10 bucks a gallon for petrol, paying 50%  in income tax, on top of all the other taxes you pay and you defend that? You are the perfect sheeple. I am sure your government appreciates you as a spokesperson.


The majority taxpaying  America does not envy or desire your quality of life. I know that seems to be a difficult concept for you to grasp but, is the fact nonetheless. We see it as a ponzi scheme that will eventually tumble. You have ample examples of it now as well as throughout history. Europeon socialism perhaps is a step better than communism but, not much.
 


Perhaps you don't know as much about the American way of life as you claim. The American dream has always been based on encouraging hard work, invention and personal responsibility. Not the socialist ideas popular in Europe. It has nothing to do with duplicating the quality of life you enjoy in Norway or any of the other reaches of Europe. It is quite arrogant of you to think so. 

Says the man living in the country with how much debt again? And how much deficit? With how much violent crime, poverty, illiteracy and how many people without health care?

The only reason most give a damn is because the US has such an influence on the markets and hence, the rest of us. Lucky for me that I live in Norway which basically saw next to nothing of the problems the rest of the world has seen over the past few years.

But whatever, I think I'll see the inevitable decline of the US to a 2nd rate has-been world power in my life time. Oh wait, I guess we're already there. Perhaps I'll get to see it reach 3rd rate. 

And talking of sheeple; http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/aug/01/us-debt-deal-tea-party

[Gator]

But whatever, I think I'll see the inevitable decline of the US to a 2nd rate has-been world power in my life time. Oh wait, I guess we're already there. Perhaps I'll get to see it reach 3rd rate. 

Ade, I am  amazed by how you can start a discussion as a reasonable albeit arrogant thinker, yet have a trigger to overreact  with emotional distortions. 

[Gator]

And talking of sheeple; http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/aug/01/us-debt-deal-tea-party

 
For those who believe that American democracy is the same as European democracies, recognize that this was just the beginning.  I very much doubt that any substantive initiatives (e. g., tax reform, enduring spending cuts) are taken before 2013.
 
What just happened?  We came to an intersection on a bumpy road.  The traffic light turned red.  As we wait for the light to turn green, we will decide what road to take.  It is hopefully a watershed event.     
 
BTW, I am happy to know that the European community is free of economic problems.   You will be able to help us in our time of need, to repay what we did 70 years ago. 

[Misha]

If our economy were humming on all 8 cylinders, we too would have a balanced budget.

That is the problem: the time to balance the budget was before the unending recession.

The problem is that for decades government grew faster than the economy, and when the economy entered into a recession, government did not recede.

That and fighting two wars while cutting taxes did not help either IMHO.
 

And possibly the main reason explaining your good economy is your oil and other natural resources.

Nope, most of the measures to cut the deficit occurred before resource prices went through the roof. They even started when oil prices were bottoming out in the 80s.


Though we hated it (and still do), I would say one important measure was introducing the reviled Goods and Services Tax in the 1980s and then the cost cutting in government expenses and the raising of taxes in the 1990s. During the good years, this allowed massive surpluses that paid down the debt as the economy grew and allowed investments in infrastructure. This allowed Canada to weather the recession quite nicely.

[Ade]

BTW, I am happy to know that the European community is free of economic problems.   You will be able to help us in our time of need, to repay what we did 70 years ago.

Ha, yes, we will give you Greece.

As for the war - Britain just finished paying for the lend/lease... perhaps we can sell you Greece instead.

[Faux Pas]

Says the man living in the country with how much debt again? And how much deficit? With how much violent crime, poverty, illiteracy and how many people without health care?

The only reason most give a damn is because the US has such an influence on the markets and hence, the rest of us. Lucky for me that I live in Norway which basically saw next to nothing of the problems the rest of the world has seen over the past few years.

But whatever, I think I'll see the inevitable decline of the US to a 2nd rate has-been world power in my life time. Oh wait, I guess we're already there. Perhaps I'll get to see it reach 3rd rate. 

And talking of sheeple; http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/aug/01/us-debt-deal-tea-party

All that debt, violent crime and a healthcare system in a mess and I still wouldn't trade my quality of life for yours.


If your life and system of government is so wonderful why is it so influenced by a (2nd rate?) country oceans away? Really, how independent is that? It has to suck for you to pay those enormous taxes and know what really matters for your way of life to continue, depends on the laws they pass in America.


What I find really bizarre is the fact that you praise such a system that taxes you at such a rate and you do not question. That my friend is sheep. "Thank you all wonderful Norwegian government for that fine shyt sandwich. May I have another"


 

[oldernotwiser]

I am not sure what you mean.  Keep in mind that our tax sysytem is very complicated.   You should perhaps refer to the CBO reprt.
 
I assume the 10% corporate tax paid refelects the fact that the top one percent do not have an 8-5 job in a cubicle.  Many own assets which produce income (e. g., rental units).  If the income from such is part of the $1,558,500, the taxes paid should also be included.
 
If these income producing assets are set up as privately held corporations, the corporation must pay taxes on income derived from these assets using corporate tax rates, not personal.   This becomes rather complicated because of sub-S, partnerships, depreciation, carryover losses, etc.   
 
FICA payments paid by the individual are capped because SS pensions are capped.  The more income one makes, the lower the percentage.  For sure the top one percent will receive only a small percentage of their FICA payments returned as pension.

A corporation is taxed as it's own entity, to claim that as individual tax is incorrect in my opinion. 
I also understand that individuals are capped in their FICA payment, (that was my point) but in my opinion again they do not need to be even though benefits are capped.  I think it is unfair for say a student, or the working poor to pay a higher percentage of their much smaller income for this benefit.  That is why I said to pay at something like 1.7% would seem like an embarassing thing to complain about.

[Gator]

A corporation is taxed as it's own entity, to claim that as individual tax is incorrect in my opinion. 

I also found it a little fuzzy.  Such "corporate income" seemingly was added to their earned income to produce a total income.  Thus, "corporate taxes"  should also be added, yes? 
 
I don't want to debate this as I was trying to answer someone who thought I was using FoxNews soundbytes when stating that supertaxing the superrich would not solve our budget deficit.  This was the best data I could find quickly.   You are welcome to post other data.  BTW, do you agree with my basic premise (taxing the rich is not the answer)?
 
 

I think it is unfair for say a student, or the working poor to pay a higher percentage of their much smaller income for this benefit.  That is why I said to pay at something like 1.7% would seem like an embarassing thing to complain about.

I think it unfair to have Social Security PERIOD, considering how it is mismanaged.  Yet, I am not complaining and neither are the wealthy.   because there needs to be some safety net for the lower class who would probably never save a dime. 
 
What is fair?  Is it fair for a low income person to consume a disproportionate share of Medicare simply because they have abused their bodies all their life and their prognosis is  bad?  Too many people are not doing their best yet want the government to save them.  At least they will not live long enough to draw much social security unless ever improving medical science gives them a few more years.  Such incidents are common and it unfairly stigmatizes the low income people who have the pride to try their best given their capabilities.
 
Personally I feel the SS retirement age should be increased to 70-yo.  Most 70-yo people have the capacity to continue to work, and many do.  You might feel differently.   If so, I hope my political candidate wins. 
 
 

[Gator]

Nope, most of the measures to cut the deficit occurred before resource prices went through the roof. They even started when oil prices were bottoming out in the 80s.


Though we hated it (and still do), I would say one important measure was introducing the reviled Goods and Services Tax in the 1980s and then the cost cutting in government expenses and the raising of taxes in the 1990s. During the good years, this allowed massive surpluses that paid down the debt as the economy grew and allowed investments in infrastructure. This allowed Canada to weather the recession quite nicely.

Did not know that.  A good example of how our quick perceptions can fail us. 
 
Maybe the parliamentary system is better.  It certainly enacts legislation faster.  And maybe a parliament would appoint a better president than the clowns America has elected lately. 

[Muzh]

 
What is fair?  Is it fair for a low income person to consume a disproportionate share of Medicare simply because they have abused their bodies all their life and their prognosis is  bad?  Too many people are not doing their best yet want the government to save them.  At least they will not live long enough to draw much social security unless ever improving medical science gives them a few more years.  Such incidents are common and it unfairly stigmatizes the low income people who have the pride to try their best given their capabilities.
 

Or maybe we should find a final solution to all these low income moochers that abused their bodies. That would definitely solve the Medicare/Medicade problem.

[Gator]

Or maybe we should find a final solution to all these low income moochers that abused their bodies. That would definitely solve the Medicare/Medicade problem.

Good idea.  What if the government made and distributed meth, but added a deadly poison that has no affect at first but bioaccumulates with a timed release of 5 years.  When the news gets out, too late, they're gone.  Sadly, not even Republicans are that cruel. 

[Misha]

Maybe the parliamentary system is better.  It certainly enacts legislation faster.  And maybe a parliament would appoint a better president than the clowns America has elected lately.

The advantage is that in such situations, if the Prime Minister has a majority of the seats in Parliament, that the Prime Minister has largely unfettered power (within reason, of course, as the Supreme Court could strike down laws that were unconstitutional). This is also the disadvantage: once elected, Members of Parliament are kept under a very tight leash and would never vote against their party if so ordered by the whip of the party. This makes it easier for the Prime Minister to push through potentially unpopular laws or cuts that could rile the population. If they do it early, the hope is that in 3 or 4 or 5 years the populace will forgive them if the pain has subsided.

[Misha]

Is it fair for a low income person to consume a disproportionate share of Medicare simply because they have abused their bodies all their life and their prognosis is  bad?

We could certainly argue about this at length, but policies that encourage preventative care will always be cheaper in the long run. If you make it too difficult or too expensive to get medical care when you are still early and favor people waiting until they are really sick and have to go to the emergency, then you will inadvertently be driving up the cost of health care delivery.

[Gator]

We could certainly argue about this at length, but policies that encourage preventative care will always be cheaper in the long run. If you make it too difficult or too expensive to get medical care when you are still early and favor people waiting until they are really sick and have to go to the emergency, then you will inadvertently be driving up the cost of health care delivery.

A friend is a critical care physician at the VA hospital (Veterans Admin or ex-military).  He remarks how his patients  had access to annual examinations and other preventative medicine, etc. Yet, they smoked like a chimney and drank like a fish.  Many are obese and diabetic. The list goes on.  Now that death lingers, they demand the best care and treatment available.

[Misha]

A friend is a critical care physician at the VA hospital (Veterans Admin or ex-military).  He remarks how his patients  had access to annual examinations and other preventative medicine, etc. Yet, they smoked like a chimney and drank like a fish.

If you want to reduce smoking, you have to put forth a number of measures including higher taxes for tobacco products and for alcohol: http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2007-08-09-1Alede_N.htm


It won't stop everybody from smoking, but it will generate revenue to help cover some of the extra health care costs that will be generated.

Many are obese and diabetic. The list goes on.  Now that death lingers, they demand the best care and treatment available.

Obese and diabetic are major challenges as well. The challenge is to start people eating well or at least better when young and have them exercise more.

[SMS60]

A corporation is taxed as it's own entity, to claim that as individual tax is incorrect in my opinion. 

A caveat for discussion

Indirectly the individual will pay this tax. Its a dirty little secret the pro tax groups don't want to tell.

Corporations collect taxes from you, me, and every other customer and passes it along to the government. If the congress raises taxes on corporations the corporations will raise the prices on their products and services to re coup the extra expense. If they dont raise their prices they will cut expenses mostly in the form of wages or eliminate employees to cover the bigger tax bill.

So, when people start chanting raise the corporation taxes they are actually cheerleading for a increase in prices of the products they buy or protesting for a elimination of their job

[Vincenzo]

 
What is fair?  Is it fair for a low income person to consume a disproportionate share of Medicare simply because they have abused their bodies all their life and their prognosis is  bad?  Too many people are not doing their best yet want the government to save them.  At least they will not live long enough to draw much social security unless ever improving medical science gives them a few more years.  Such incidents are common and it unfairly stigmatizes the low income people who have the pride to try their best given their capabilities.
 

Is it fair that the young who start their lives penniless and who can't afford good medicine must subsidize unlimited medical care to the old who are usually the richest part of the population?

I think it's fair when a person who pays $0 taxes gets nothing from the government, and a person who pays $1,000,000 gets much more services for his million.

[Gator]

The challenge is to start people eating well or at least better when young and have them exercise more.

Something our nation did not do figuratively speaking, viz obese government.
 
What bothers me the most is the austerity associated with budget controls when our economy is already weak.  Hopefully we can walk the tightrope and enjoy healthy days again. 
 
To make this relevant to RW:  RW interested in meeting Western men should step up the pace.     

[OlgaH]

Obese and diabetic are major challenges as well. The challenge is to start people eating well or at least better when young and have them exercise more.

Most medical schools in the US don't teach nutrition and most doctors don't know a thing about nutrition. Actually nutrition is not so profitable as some kind of "magic pill" that btw cost in the US twice and three times more than in Canada.

Below is an old article (2005) but the problem is still the same.
Over 60% of surgeries are unjustified
http://www.encognitive.com/node/1573

The U.S. Attorney's Office announced the conviction of 59-year-old Dr. John R. McLean. Prosecutors say he falsely recorded in the patients' medical records the existence or extent of coronary artery blockage, to justify the stent and the submission of claims to programs including Medicare and Medicaid.
http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/health/DC-Cardiologist-Convicted-for-Performing-Unecessary-Procedures-126240838.html

Medicare spends a fortune each year on procedures that have no proven benefit and should not be covered.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/26/opinion/26redberg.html?_r=1

Not long time ago I was reading an article about billions of dollars spent by Medicare each year on untreatable cancer patients who are 65 y.o. and older. The cancer clinics know beforehand about no result of treatment but profit is first of all.

[Misha]

What bothers me the most is the austerity associated with budget controls when our economy is already weak. 

The making of a nasty double-dip recession as you would have both consumers saving and paying off debt given the high unemployment and loss of equity in homes and the government cutting costs to pay of its debt while business stays on the sidelines sitting on piles of cash waiting for better times.... It could lead to a depression.

[OlgaH]

What do their oligarchs contribute compared to people like Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, Ted Turner and thousands of others ? Where are their giant foundations that give so much money to so many different causes ?
What buildings are named after them at so many hospitals, universities, parks and many other places.
They seem a particularly stingy nation and people to me.

"Almost every Russian businessperson from the Forbes rich list supports charity projects via their personal foundations. For example, the foundations headed by Mikhail Prokhorov and Vladimir Potanin organize major cultural projects. Dmitry Zimin’s Dynasty Foundation is one of the largest sponsors of fundamental science. Vagit Alekperov, the co-owner of the Lukoil oil firm, created a foundation that supports health-care and educational institutions, science, culture, architectural restoration, and the construction of churches in regions in which the company operates."
http://www.readrussia.com/blog/business/00333/

"Russian businessman Vladimir Potanin has announced that he will donate all his wealth to philanthropic purposes over the next ten years."
http://www.fundraising.co.uk/news/2010/02/02/russian-businessman-donate-entire-wealth-charity

Currently Russia has no clear-cut regulations providing tax deductions for businesses who donate to charity.
http://en.rian.ru/russia/20110429/163780445.html

More information you can find in Russian.

[Gator]

The making of a nasty double-dip recession as you would have both consumers saving and paying off debt given the high unemployment and loss of equity in homes and the government cutting costs to pay of its debt while business stays on the sidelines sitting on piles of cash waiting for better times.... It could lead to a depression.

It seems industrialized countries are in a race to devalue their currency (e. g, monetize their debt).  Even the Swiss joined the race.