Ah, waste. Much is always made of how much can be made in savings by avoiding 'waste'. Truth is the sums more often than not turn out to be tiny.Quote:
Originally Posted by airshifter
Printable View
Ah, waste. Much is always made of how much can be made in savings by avoiding 'waste'. Truth is the sums more often than not turn out to be tiny.Quote:
Originally Posted by airshifter
Do we think such people exist in significant numbers in Europe?Quote:
Originally Posted by airshifter
I'll leave that opinion up to those of you that live there. I know here in the US there are IMO far too many people thinking that it's up to the government to "get them ahead" in life. Also far too many milking the system and working under the table, thus double dipping and screwing those of us that work for what we have and pay the taxes that provides them with such assistance.Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
I can agree that on the issue of waste alone the sums are probably a drop in the bucket of a national budget. But all those drops make ripples and eventually waves. Being a private contractor working on various military installations I see constant waste in contracts, and lack of thought on daily procedures that create waste within the government workers, both military and civilian.
As an example to the above, I work on 5 different bases on a regular basis. I will have 5 different passes to work on those bases. I have one pass that my company pays for and gets me on two of the bases. For the other three I submit paperwork and wait for a background check, then go pick up their specific pass. All of the administration fees and background check fees are absorbed by the base. So when all is said and done I'm subject to background checks 4 times a year, and 3 of those times the government foots the bill.
The one pass we pay for checks just as in depth for background information, but also monitors on a month to month basis for any activity that would cause a pass to be revoked. It's a more efficient system and runs at zero cost to the particular base, but most haven't adopted it. I'm unsure of the total cost per background checks and the passes, labor involved at the pass offices, etc. But as an example on one of the bases that use the pass we pay for, the authorized list for day visitors that obtain those passes is close to 2000 pages, so likely in the neighborhood of 25,000 to 30,000 contractors they were in the past footing the bill for.
I just saw this link today on my home page. Let's just take a look at how evil all these corporations are.
The 10 most charitable companies in America
The 10 Most Charitable Companies in America - Yahoo! Finance
The Most Generous: Kroger
2010 Giving: $64,000,000
Percentage of 2009 Profits: 10.9%
2nd Most Generous: Macy's
2010 Giving: $41,226,887
Percentage of 2009 Profits: 8.1%
3rd Most Generous: Safeway
2010 Giving: $76,500,000
Percentage of 2009 Profits: 7.5%
4th Most Generous: Dow Chemical
2010 Giving: $34,237,817
Percentage of 2009 Profits: 7.3%
5th Most Generous: Morgan Stanley
2010 Giving: $55,641,610
Percentage of 2009 Profits: 5.7%
The Biggest Donor: Wal-Mart
2010 Giving: $319,454,996
2009 Giving: $288,091,839
Change: 10.9%
2nd Biggest Donor: Goldman Sachs
2010 Giving: $315,383,413
2009 Giving: $69,569,895
Change: 353.3%
3rd Biggest Donor: Wells Fargo
2010 Giving: $219,132,065
2009 Giving: $202,014,244
Change: 8.5%
4th Biggest Donor: Bank of America
2010 Giving: $207,939,857
2009 Giving: $209,116,567
Change: -0.6%
5th Biggest Donor: Exxon Mobil
2010 Giving: $198,692,197
2009 Giving: $187,121,560
Change: 6.2%
Those numbers add up fairly quick. And unlike the government, I have a choice to support or not support any business that is in turn charitable. The government just takes it and leaves me no choice in the matter.
Do you not have the choice to support or not support your political representative?Quote:
Originally Posted by airshifter
Not buying your petrol (gas!) from Mobil, for example, is hardly going to make a dent on their profits.
We have no choice when it comes to paying Taxes. We do have a choice on who we elect to decide how to spend our money but we are the victim of the whims of the populace. Every election it is getting harder and harder to win against people who vote themselves a raise.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
This person's vote is equal to mine.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P36x8rTb3jI
Significant? If the Europeans who post here are any judge then it is a huge majorityQuote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
Actually the USA has one of the highest corporate taxes on the planet and there was a time when the highest Tax bracket was over 90%Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark
I would have to disagree with you on that one. Public Healthcare is one Huge waste.Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
I agree. It probably is in the United States. I doubt that there is the skill to run a public healthcare system in the US properly.Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyvop
Public? No better than any other country.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollo
But the USA does have the best Private healthcare system on the planet. And isn't that what is more important? It is the private sector that has created the vast majority of advances in medicine and healthcare.
I see no such people here at all. You, by contrast, see in people purely what you wish to see and nothing more.Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyvop
As with most people of age I can vote, but I've yet to see any candidate (local, state or national) promise me that all the taxes I pay are optional. Even they know better than that lie.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
As for the corporations, who I buy gas from won't make a dent. But if tens of millions of people think (from your example) Mobil is corrupt or greedy then we could sure make them feel the crunch.
You might have the best Private healthcare system on the planet. It still doesn't change the fact that you pay significantly more for that and that not everyone is covered by that standard. The utility of the system in Australia is open to everyone and it shows because we have a higher life expectancy and pay on average less than 30% for it than what you do.Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyvop
But of course the medical system in the US sees you all as customers rather than patients, which I suppose is a good thing, because collectively you've agreed that your money is better off in the hands of Big Pharma rather than your pockets.
Yeah, no "better", rather worse.Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyvop
And here we go, and example of a failed system. This a couple hours later on the same home page that I posted the charity link from.
People living in a 1.2 million dollar home and getting public assistance. Just how equal do they want to be?
Seattle welfare recipient lives in million-dollar home | The Sideshow - Yahoo! News
Based on the article, they stated their proper address. If these people didn't lie and got away with this, what do the ones actually trying hard to scam the system get away with?
You do have a have choice on who you elect to decide how to spend your money but rather than choosing politicians who would choose to improve the quality of the labour force through education programs, you collectively choose as a nation you decide to treat people like refuse; the results have followed.Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyvop
Up until 2008 Germany had free education and collectively the German people are the most productive people in Europe as a result. Unless of course you happen to think there is something special about Germans, then there can't really be much other reason for it.
Why is it so hard for America to take responsibility for its own people? Moreover, I think it's a sad indictment if you are a representative of the American people that you should gloat over people like this.
Really? Don't you believe that all people should have access to free healthcare?Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
My wife is an American and because she lives in Australia, she has it.Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyvop
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollo
So? A quality product usually costs more than a similar product of a lesser quality. You have a problem with that?
Life expectancy has never been a good yardstick to measure healthcare. Lifestyle has a bigger affect. Athletics, War, Driving...etc all have an influence.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollo
Unfortunately I am forced to pay extra to subsidize the lazy and unproductive. That is the problem. People like you think it is OK to spend other people's money just so they can feel good about themselves. Hence I am forced to pay more for a product.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollo
And yes, I much prefer my money going to a private company that produces an honest product than to a government who just TAKES IT BY FORCE and disburses it to whichever voting block they want to appease.
Not Perfect but much better than anywhere else....That is a fact that no amount of liberal whining can change.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollo
So?Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollo
So, what?Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyvop
Say what?Quote:
Originally Posted by ioan
http://www.undrcrwn.com/storage/SAYH...=1282928220204Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Riebe
Pay Gap Between Rich And Poor Growing Faster In UK Than Any Other High-Income Country
Just read this . . . . and not because it is in print does it mean it is true . . . . is it?
Pay Gap Between Rich And Poor Growing Faster In UK Than Any Other High-Income Country
Top earners draw away from lowest paid - FT.comQuote:
Originally Posted by race aficionado
The gap between the highest and lowest paid has grown more quickly in Britain than in any other advanced economy over the past three decades, reflecting a broader rise in inequality across the developed world.
- Financial Times, 05/12/11
UK Income Inequality Rising Faster Than Other OECD Countries
LONDON -- The gap between rich and poor has risen faster in the U.K. than in any other OECD country since 1975 and the U.K. government should consider increasing taxes on top earners to address the inequality, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development said Monday.
In a report on inequality, the OECD said income inequality peaked in the U.K. in 2000 and subsequently fell, but it began rising again in 2005 and is now well above the OECD average.
- NASDAQ, 06/12/11
Income inequality growing faster in UK than any other rich country, says OECD | Society | The Guardian
Top 10% have incomes 12 times greater than bottom 10%, up from eight times greater in 1985, thinktank's study reveals Income inequality among working-age people has risen faster in Britain than in any other rich nation since the mid-1970s, according to a report by the OECD.
- The Grauniad, 05/12/11
Once is fluke. Twice is coincidence. Three times is a pattern.
http://www.verumserum.com/media/2010...-confirmed.jpg
BTW, today Germany did break the 1000 billion Euro exports / year barrier, and are expected to reach 1075 billions by the end of this year.
The only country that exports more is China, who by the way is approx 14 larger as population.
This must be the reason why the US rating agencies think Germany should lose it's AAA rating, they are not making enough money to pay their debts! :rotflmao:
I guess it happens to everyone every now and then.Quote:
Originally Posted by henners88
I can live with that! ;)
Anyway, we are slightly derailing the topic, something I really don't want to happen in this case.
By punishing the higher earners with higher Taxes it in no way means the lower earners wages will improve. Actually the reverse would happen. The economy will suffer and People would lose jobsQuote:
Originally Posted by Rollo
The reasons underlying the OECD report have very little to do with taxation policy but rather punishing labour itself.
Admittedly Britain went through a rapid period of privatisation in the 1980s which did make those companies far more efficient than they were, but it didn't to a thing for the manufacturing industries which existed, not the firms which supported manufacturing.
Nor did privatisation do anything for the people who had been displaced, and now thrity years later we have particularly in the north of England and Scotland a generation of people who've grown up where no-one in the family has a job.
And with reference to this comment:
http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/stats/tax_str...1974to1990.pdfQuote:
Originally Posted by anthonyvop
Over the period, tax rates FELL dramatically not rose, and yet jobs departed Britain's shores. History has yet again proved you wrong.
I doubt Tony will accept HMRC's figures, as he probably believes it to be a criminal organisation that should be charged with STEALING our money.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollo
If you would actually read his comments rather than attack everything he says, you would realize that history has proben nothing in regards to his comment. Where does history show that increasing taxes on those earning more increase the average workers wages?Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollo
You seem to be under the impression that if we place more taxes on the wealthy and the corporations then everything will be taken care of. Do you really think the upper level management won't simply cut more of the average workers wage to compensate for the increased taxes? In the case of the corporations they will generally either do the same or increase the price of the products sold and pass the tax increases on to the consumer. So you will still have that generation without work but now their purchasing power with their government benefits has decreased.
I know airshifter did not address this to me but allow me to quote part of his post to make a comment related to our topic:
Increasing taxes - in other words: everybody paying their fair share of taxes, will not take care of everything but it will be a good start.Quote:
Originally Posted by airshifter
There is a perfect example of why things are wrong. Why punish the average worker or the consumer to make up for those extra million$$$$ "lost" when they were told to pay their taxes just like I also did?Quote:
Originally Posted by airshifter
That reeks of greed and a lack of social consciousness.
There are other actions by the government that hurt job creation along with Taxation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollo
Tax rate fell in general but rules and regulations(Which in reality is a form or taxation) rose considerably.....So History again has proven me correct.
Their fair share?Quote:
Originally Posted by race aficionado
So you are in favor of a Flat Tax....Cool
Did I say that?Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyvop
I don't know if that was an attempt of humor but no, I did not say that.
Again No.Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyvop
The transport, coal, iron and steel, banking, electricity, equity trading, financial services telecommunications, public housing, airlines etc were all DEregulated in Britain in the 1980s, which is precisely the opposite of what you've said.
Only in the eyes someone who is either accidentally or willfully ignorant or an abject liar; so you're one of those three but I don't know which one.Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyvop
I only know mark youdao. so nice/
The ever growing gap between the highest and lowest paid is not a result of government policy or taxation; it's simply one small group of people rewarding themselves at the expense of others because they can.
Given the well-known stories about the gun and his attendance of university, I would plump for the latter.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollo