What's so "semi-complex" about enforcing the immigration laws passed by Congress?
Why America Sucks at Everything
- Thread starter FlickShagwell
- Start date
What's so "semi-complex" about enforcing the immigration laws passed by Congress?
We spend way too much on "defense" costs imo. Way too much.
I'd rather cut and spend it on education imo.
I wont lay the blame on America when it’s Americans that are the ones that suck for the most part.
He makes a lot of statements with no sources. Having actually lives in a couple of the countries cited, I can conform that we have a lower cost of living and a much better quality of life on average. That's my own personal experience.
Interesting video to think about. In the few areas I have more knowledge of it was a disingenuous representation.
Interesting video to think about. In the few areas I have more knowledge of it was a disingenuous representation.
I agree with the gist of this video which is sort of unexpected after reading the title. It's basically saying Americans spend more, in terms of taxes and so on, for less than any other country (especially when you include health care costs).
The problem imo is the government wastes a tremendous amount of money and is very inefficient. Things like lobbying, honest graft, political favors, special programs and so forth, that shouldn't be allowed at all, make it so congress's interests, having too much motivation for their own personal profit, don't align with the people well enough. Need to get rid of all of it.
There's also a myth that any spending is good. Not that all spending is bad, don't conflate that, but there is way too much wasteful spending. For the amount we already spend including health costs, all taxes federal, state and local (or close, I'm guessing here, need to look at everything as a % of GDP including health costs) we could afford the infrastructure, health care, safety nets and so on, comparable to Europe or Canada. We already spend twice as much as most countries on health care in terms of GDP (about 18% US vs about 9% in Europe), so that's a big one.
The problem imo is the government wastes a tremendous amount of money and is very inefficient. Things like lobbying, honest graft, political favors, special programs and so forth, that shouldn't be allowed at all, make it so congress's interests, having too much motivation for their own personal profit, don't align with the people well enough. Need to get rid of all of it.
There's also a myth that any spending is good. Not that all spending is bad, don't conflate that, but there is way too much wasteful spending. For the amount we already spend including health costs, all taxes federal, state and local (or close, I'm guessing here, need to look at everything as a % of GDP including health costs) we could afford the infrastructure, health care, safety nets and so on, comparable to Europe or Canada. We already spend twice as much as most countries on health care in terms of GDP (about 18% US vs about 9% in Europe), so that's a big one.
Last edited:
Except that he mentions sale tax when talking about what people pay which is essentially what the VAT is.
....Aaaaaaand these are the brainiacs that will keep America in decline.
Feel free to dispute my statement. The people that b8tch and complain about America the most are Democrats "deal with it"
Because someone said America has been great to and for them? I get why you are a teacher.
Last edited:
Also, the problem with health care is it's basically the privatization of socialism. There's a reason an x-ray costs 4 times as much in the US as it does in Europe. It's because we have allocated way too much money to health care (and admin) over time. Meaning, insurance premiums have been allowed to go up at a rate much more than inflation, thus making the health care pie itself way too big. This has allowed costs to get out of control over time. In the late 1950's health care was 5% of GDP and now close to 20% (more than anybody in the world AINEC). Too much money (allocated to a specific industry) chasing too few goods and services.
He mentions it but wherever he got his 26% figure for Great Britain seems a little off.....
Standard VAT alone is 20%
VAT rates
Current VAT rates - standard 20% and rates for reduced rate and zero-rated items
Income Tax
Gross salary £25,000
After tax £20,279
Tax rate 18.9%
Gross salary £40,000
After tax £30,480
Tax rate 24.8%
Gross salary £100,000
After tax £65,780
Tax rate 34.3%
Tax on test: do Britons pay more than most?
We examine how the average burden on British people earning £25,000, £40,000 and £100,000 compares with taxes paid by similar earners in Europe, Australia and the US
Gas Tax in Great Britain is the equivalent of $2.90 per gallon
Gas Taxes in Europe
New European tax map compares EU countries on gas excise taxes. Learn more about taxes on Europe gas, Europe diesel, petroleum, and crude oil.
taxfoundation.org
They also make National Insurance Contributions
British workers pay their share of NI contributions to build up an entitlement over time for later payment of a pension and other government benefits such as a maternity allowance.
In 2020, the rate was 12% of the worker's weekly earnings between the equivalent of about $220 a week and about $1,200, dropping to 2% above that maximum.
What Are National Insurance Contributions (NIC)?
National Insurance Contributions are taxes paid by employees and employers in the United Kingdom to fund a wide range of government benefits programs.
He mentions it but wherever he got his 26% figure for Great Britain seems a little off.....
Standard VAT alone is 20%
VAT rates
Current VAT rates - standard 20% and rates for reduced rate and zero-rated itemswww.gov.uk
Income Tax
Gross salary £25,000
After tax £20,279
Tax rate 18.9%
Gross salary £40,000
After tax £30,480
Tax rate 24.8%
Gross salary £100,000
After tax £65,780
Tax rate 34.3%
Tax on test: do Britons pay more than most?
We examine how the average burden on British people earning £25,000, £40,000 and £100,000 compares with taxes paid by similar earners in Europe, Australia and the USwww.theguardian.com
Gas Tax in Great Britain is the equivalent of $2.90 per gallon
Gas Taxes in Europe
New European tax map compares EU countries on gas excise taxes. Learn more about taxes on Europe gas, Europe diesel, petroleum, and crude oil.
They also make National Insurance Contributions
British workers pay their share of NI contributions to build up an entitlement over time for later payment of a pension and other government benefits such as a maternity allowance.
In 2020, the rate was 12% of the worker's weekly earnings between the equivalent of about $220 a week and about $1,200, dropping to 2% above that maximum.
What Are National Insurance Contributions (NIC)?
National Insurance Contributions are taxes paid by employees and employers in the United Kingdom to fund a wide range of government benefits programs.www.investopedia.com
Oh mah gawd. Are you seriously telling me that a video posted by flick shagwell featuring David Cross about how bad America is…………..is not accurate?
Mind Blown
Next thing you know, you will be telling me that Menace Sockeyes bought in hook line and sinker while insulting people who disagreed with that premise.
.we also subsidize those wonderful free health systems in Europe by paying more for literally everything in the US on the consumer side and are largely responsible for the majority of research and development. Nice of places like Europe and Canada to cap what can be charged for a drug for example where the burden of that cost is shifted to American consumers. So awesome for videos like this saying we suck when we are paying for ours and theirs as well
So the a quibbling by some here on the British figure renders the entire thing moot? Next you’ll tell me Ronald Mexico is too dumb understand the entire premise.
Most other countries don’t have an economy that requires a steady source of cheap labor.
A groundbreaking study by Just Facts has discovered that after accounting for all income, charity, and non-cash welfare benefits like subsidized housing and Food Stamps—the poorest 20% of Americans consume more goods and services than the national averages for all people in most affluent countries. This includes the majority of countries in the prestigious Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), including its European members. In other words, if the U.S. “poor” were a nation, it would be one of the world’s richest.
Notably, this study was reviewed by Dr. Henrique Schneider, professor of economics at Nordakademie University in Germany and the chief economist of the Swiss Federation of Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises. After examining the source data and Just Facts’ methodology, he concluded: “This study is sound and conforms with academic standards. I personally think it provides valuable insight into poverty measures and adds considerably to this field of research.”
The “Poorest” Rich Nation?
In a July 1st New York Times video op-ed that decries “fake news” and calls for “a more truthful approach” to “the myth of America as the greatest nation on earth,” Times producers Taige Jensen and Nayeema Raza claim that the U.S. has “fallen well behind Europe” in many respects and has “more in common with ‘developing countries’ than we’d like to admit.”“One good test” of this, they say, is how the U.S. ranks in the OECD, a group of “36 countries, predominantly wealthy, Western, and Democratic.” While examining these rankings, they corrupt the truth in ways that violate the Times’ op-ed standards, which declare that “you can have any opinion you would like,” but “the facts in a piece must be supported and validated,” and “you can’t say that a certain battle began on a certain day if it did not.”
A prime example is their claim that “America is the richest country” in the OECD, “but we’re also the poorest, with a whopping 18% poverty rate—closer to Mexico than Western Europe.” That assertion prompted Just Facts to conduct a rigorous, original study of this issue with data from the OECD, the World Bank, and the U.S. government’s Bureau of Economic Analysis. It found that the Times is not merely wrong about this issue but is reporting the polar opposite of reality.
Poor Compared to Who?
The most glaring evidence against the Times’ rhetoric is a note located just above the OECD’s data for poverty rates. It explains that these rates measure relative poverty within nations, not between nations. As the note states, the figures represent portions of people with less than “half the median household income” in their own nations—and thus—”two countries with the same poverty rates may differ in terms of the relative income-level of the poor.”The upshot is laid bare by the fact that this OECD measure assigns a higher poverty rate to the U.S. (17.8%) than to Mexico (16.6%). Yet, World Bank data shows that 35% of Mexico’s population lives on less than $5.50 per day, as compared to only 2% of people in the United States.
Hence, the OECD’s poverty rates say nothing about which nation is “the poorest.” Nonetheless, this is exactly how the Times misrepresented them.
"least effective healthcare"...
Dont conflate unhealthy practices of the individual with healthcare.
Not that I would ever look to a comedian for any sort of valuable politcal, social, cultural insight (or any insight for that matter).
Dont conflate unhealthy practices of the individual with healthcare.
Not that I would ever look to a comedian for any sort of valuable politcal, social, cultural insight (or any insight for that matter).
Maybe you can tell me about your over decade old graph on consumption?Can you explain this graph to the rest of the class?
It's a simple graph, Menace. What does it tell you?
Don't Bogart that big brain. Tell us what this graph shows. Ron might need your help.
Amazing how often America gets called terrible and racist and the model that gets held up to follow is countries that are predominantly homogeneous and white with Western culture. Weird isn't it?
That over a decade ago, Americans were spending way to much money? Help me, macroeconomics professor!
You like to lump everyone together don't you. Not all dems are for open boarders I guessing most aren't.
You know I'm not David Cross, right? I know that's assuming a lot when it comes to you.
The LOWEST 20% households by income (just a little bit more than the portion we consider in relative poverty) in the United States enjoy a consumption level ABOVE THE AVERAGE for the people in Canada, Greece, United Kingdom, Sweden, Australia, Spain, Portugal, Japan, Denmark, Iceland, New Zealand, Slovenia, Slovak Republic, Israel, Republic of Korea, Czech Republic, Estonia, Poland, Chile, Hungary, Turkey and Mexico.
And that consumption level is within spitting distance ($3k) of the AVERAGE consumption for the populations of the Netherlands, France, Ireland, Finland, Belgium, Norway, Italy, Germany and Austria.
Kind of weird you weren't willing to acknowledge this. Seems like it would be good news that someone would like to see. It's nice to see that our poorest enjoy a standard of living better than the average in most OECD countries, isn't it?
Wait, you think consumption = standard of living?!?!? Hahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!
Let’s see how the richest country in the world is doing on that...
| 1 | Switzerland | 188.36 |
| 2 | Denmark | 186.25 |
| 3 | Netherlands | 180.27 |
| 4 | Finland | 178.95 |
| 5 | Australia | 178.41 |
| 6 | Iceland | 177.64 |
| 7 | Austria | 176.36 |
| 8 | Germany | 175.24 |
| 9 | New Zealand | 173.60 |
| 10 | Luxembourg | 171.81 |
| 11 | Norway | 171.72 |
| 12 | Estonia | 171.16 |
| 13 | Sweden | 170.19 |
| 14 | Oman | 168.82 |
| 15 | Slovenia | 165.74 |
| 16 | Japan | 164.06 |
| 17 | United States | 163.60 |
| 18 | Spain | 163.48 |
| 19 | Lithuania | 160.29 |
| 20 | Portugal | 159.83 |
Last edited:
Credit card default.Can you explain this graph to the rest of the class?
My ex is from Denmark. She was here for school, before she went to free med-school after Italy. She had been through all European counties. She told me this country is doomed. It is, and if you can’t see that you’re a fool. She said you’re raising alcoholic idiots that are clueless about the real world and education,
Sweet index, want to explain to the class what those arbitrary numbers mean, and how they're formulated compared to the OECD's purchasing power parity?
You can start here and you don't have to get far to see how arbitrary it becomes.
Derpity doubling down on a derpity dumb point.
Who’s rooting against our Olympic teams? Who wears the “Make America Great Again” hats? Who just tried to overthrow the government? Who obstructs every effort to actually make America better?
I love the comparisons to homogeneously populated countries with 2% of our population and 4% of the land mass. Seems apt...
What impact do you think this has? And do you mean culturally or ethnically.
