• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Frence pension problem is real, and it's going to be a US issue soon.

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
blackangst1 said:
Sigh. This propaganda again? I suggest you read this.
Click to expand...

Man did I call it, haha. Conservatives argue those countries are not socialist right up until you try to implement policies exactly like theirs in America, at which point those policies are decried as socialism.

I can only imagine the shrieks of socialism if the Democrats suggested we ramp up government spending to consume 50% of GDP like Norway does.
 
fskimospy said:
Man did I call it, haha. Conservatives argue those countries are not socialist right up until you try to implement policies exactly like theirs in America, at which point those policies are decried as socialism.

I can only imagine the shrieks of socialism if the Democrats suggested we ramp up government spending to consume 50% of GDP like Norway does.
Click to expand...

So you'd be down with raising income tax for 85% of the popularion to 40-60%, and lowering the top tier income tax? Lets start with that.
 
darkswordsman17 said:
It seems weird that you literally just went from "WHAT?!?!?! The US is Socialist????!?!?!?!?!?" to "Duh the US has adopted some Socialist stuff" like what the fuck even is that? I know what it is, but it doesn't make it any less ridiculous. Which, even more absurd if you also started in this thread by declaring that the problem is education and a lack of it because you didn't know interest rates (FYI, we were taught that shit in junior high at least, and again in high school and that was just in math classes, we had an econ/finance class available in high school). You think people are gonna get ahead with the shitass interest rates available now? I saw some place touting its "5X the national average rate" for a savings account. It was I think fucking 1.2%. I remember when 4% meant you got basically the bare minimum rate offered and meant you were a high school student with no financial history whatsoever (and that if you were even a fuckup you could get like 5%).

Granted, I think you inadvertently stumbled onto the problem. The US is using capitalism as its form of government. That was never supposed to be the case, capitalism is just supposed to be economic policy. Granted even that's a failure in the US because we're not making companies pay for their negative externalities (or rewarding them for their positive ones), then bailing out all the literally criminal fuckers who fuck up the economy while letting predatory markets (health care, telecoms, many modern financial institutions) exist unfettered and then creating protected ones that then spend decades fucking up then demanding more (see farmers).
Click to expand...

We can agree to disagree. I dont see capitalism as "the problem".
 
blackangst1 said:
So you'd be down with raising income tax for 85% of the popularion to 40-60%, and lowering the top tier income tax? Lets start with that.
Click to expand...

Nope, let's not start there. Let's put a stop to the 'socialism two-step' here where you say successful Nordic countries aren't socialist and yet complain about implementing their exact same policies as socialism.

Are you going to say liberals advocating for EXACTLY the same policies as Norway, increasing government expenditures to 50% of GDP wouldn't be called socialism by US conservatives?
 
fskimospy said:
Nope, let's not start there. Let's put a stop to the 'socialism two-step' here where you say successful Nordic countries aren't socialist and yet complain about implementing their exact same policies as socialism.

Are you going to say liberals advocating for EXACTLY the same policies as Norway, increasing government expenditures to 50% of GDP wouldn't be called socialism by US conservatives?
Click to expand...

Now youre mincing words. No Im not saying that. But the reason countries like Norway have such large social programs is because they tax their citizens extraordinarily high.That cant be ignored. Tax revenue to GDP is about 35% in Norway compared to about 25% in the USA. Liberals think if only we could raise taxes on the wealthy they could pay for their proposals. Which is false.

So back to my point. Yep we have to start there. We cant implement such proposals without significantly raising taxes on EVERYONE. Including the poor.
 
blackangst1 said:
Easy. Capitalism.
Click to expand...

We have captialism now and it has not worked. What changes are you suggesting to capitalism that might?
The problem with capitalism is it does not care about people. It sees people as a product, and once they are no longer productive they are no longer useful. Per capitalism once something is no longer useful you should stop spending resources on it.
 
blackangst1 said:
Liberals think if only we could raise taxes on the wealthy they could pay for their proposals. Which is false.
Click to expand...
When you say tax, do you mean remove some of the gold that these dragons are sleeping on, which will definitely find its way into the government and public funding pool? Or are you one of those people that will argue semantics of what the word 'tax' means?

Explain to me how physically removing 90% of the wealth of people with more than 100 million dollars will NOT fund proposals?
 
blackangst1 said:
Now youre mincing words. No Im not saying that. But the reason countries like Norway have such large social programs is because they tax their citizens extraordinarily high.That cant be ignored. Tax revenue to GDP is about 35% in Norway compared to about 25% in the USA. Liberals think if only we could raise taxes on the wealthy they could pay for their proposals. Which is false.

So back to my point. Yep we have to start there. We cant implement such proposals without significantly raising taxes on EVERYONE. Including the poor.
Click to expand...

No, we do not have to start there, we have to start with what socialism is as you implied socialism isn't successful.

Do you consider Norway socialist, yes or no?

If no, do you think a majority of conservatives would consider an attempt to implement EXACTLY those same policies here socialism?
 
[DHT]Osiris said:
When you say tax, do you mean remove some of the gold that these dragons are sleeping on, which will definitely find its way into the government and public funding pool? Or are you one of those people that will argue semantics of what the word 'tax' means?

Explain to me how physically removing 90% of the wealth of people with more than 100 million dollars will NOT fund proposals?
Click to expand...

uh its not the governments money. Full stop. End of story. This kind of wealth tax falls into the same uniocorn and rainbow bucket the Green New Deal falls in to: unattainable dream.
 
blackangst1 said:
Now youre mincing words. No Im not saying that. But the reason countries like Norway have such large social programs is because they tax their citizens extraordinarily high.That cant be ignored. Tax revenue to GDP is about 35% in Norway compared to about 25% in the USA. Liberals think if only we could raise taxes on the wealthy they could pay for their proposals. Which is false.

So back to my point. Yep we have to start there. We cant implement such proposals without significantly raising taxes on EVERYONE. Including the poor.
Click to expand...

Here is the things about countries like Norway and their social programs, yes they pay more taxes, but they get more for their taxes, and overall they are very happy with it.
It is okay to pay more when you get more and are happy with what you get. This is something capitalism should have taught you.
 
SMOGZINN said:
Here is the things about countries like Norway and their social programs, yes they pay more taxes, but they get more for their taxes, and overall they are very happy with it.
It is okay to pay more when you get more and are happy with what you get. This is something capitalism should have taught you.
Click to expand...

So you would support increasing income taxes for the upper poor and middle class to 40-60%?
 
blackangst1 said:
uh its not the governments money. Full stop. End of story. This kind of wealth tax falls into the same uniocorn and rainbow bucket the Green New Deal falls in to: unattainable dream.
Click to expand...
It is if it's taken by the government. The government takes shit all the time, why should they stop at rich people's money?

Hell, the government used to take it. Things were really good during that time, middle class had a great life.
 
[DHT]Osiris said:
It is if it's taken by the government. The government takes shit all the time, why should they stop at rich people's money?

Hell, the government used to take it. Things were really good during that time, middle class had a great life.
Click to expand...

Right. And at that time there were more loopholes for high income earners that we dont have now.

And frankly I just cant understand this thinking (it is if the government takes it). Its anti-American.
 
blackangst1 said:
Right. And at that time there were more loopholes for high income earners that we dont have now.

And frankly I just cant understand this thinking (it is if the government takes it). Its anti-American.
Click to expand...

You think the idea of government property is anti-American?

Speaking of education just how warped has it become where money taxed by the government isn't owned by the government? The Constitution was literally written in large part so that the federal government could explicitly take people's property in the form of taxation.
 
blackangst1 said:
Right. And at that time there were more loopholes for high income earners that we dont have now.

And frankly I just cant understand this thinking (it is if the government takes it). Its anti-American.
Click to expand...
Because I'm past the point of caring that someone with literally millions of times more money than other people think they somehow earned it, and that it shouldn't be removed from them and injected back into the economy.

At some point, probably very soon, we're going to hit a few existential crises cliffs, and the poor are going to eat the rich. Better to not be rich when that time comes.
 
blackangst1 said:
Wow. I dont think you'd get much, if any, support for that.

Oh wait. Hey we'll tax you so much you cant afford rent or food, but dont worry! We'll give it to you!
Click to expand...

When you take my money, and give me stuff I need in exchange for it, that is how it is supposed to work.
More and more people are not able to afford those things now, and a huge chunk of them can't afford to when they are too old to be productive. That is what social programs are for.

I find it strange that you think that 'paying for things' won't get traction, but think capitalism is the solution.
 
fskimospy said:
Man that sure sounds pretty socialist to me. I thought you said they weren't socialist?
Click to expand...

Typically "socialist" is defined by the government controlling or interfering free markets, nationalizing industries (which many Democrats want to do), and subsidizing industries they feel should get it (hello Green New Deal). What the Nordic countries are is a welfare state. There is a difference.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top