right wing think tanks use to keep their billionaire sponsor's taxes low.
Billionaires don't care about income taxes. Billionaires care about special government handouts for their corporations. That's why so many billionaires are Democrats.
Income taxes and capital gains taxes mainly matter to incomes between the top 20% and the top 1%, skilled professionals who aren't quite rich enough to be independently wealthy and are completely at the mercy of the IRS.
Europe is doing a much, much better job of regulating income equality.
You know who did an even better job? The communists. That's because the most effective way to eliminate income inequality is to make everybody dirt poor.
Europe hasn't gone quite that far yet, but skilled professionals and exceptional performance are not rewarded in Europe as they are in the US, meaning people don't bother or emigrate.
Finally, the only statistics you see are income inequality; wealth inequality in Europe is massive, it just doesn't show up in the statistics. The super-rich just move to tax havens or hide their wealth, and unlike the US, they then simply don't show up in any statistics anymore.
I'm talking about "Christian" schools run by fundamentalists, which push right-wing politics and Creationism on students.
Attendance at such schools is at the discretion of the parents, as it should be in any society that values liberty.
Also, what's "legal" in public schools isn't always what's done.
And if any public school violates those laws, parents who disagree can have that fixed pretty much instantaneously.
I like what I'm seeing in much of Europe. Marriage falling by the wayside to be replaced with co-habitation. Organized religion becoming less important. Somewhat functional safety nets. Education standardized across countries rather than being a local/municipal responsibility.
I used to like that too, until I figured out what disastrous consequences it produced.
Um. It's a lot easier to prepare for a standardized university entrance exam than to re-do four years of high school grades in the US
What "university entrance exams"? European university admissions for Europeans are usually based on high school performance and tests that you can't repeat.
Imagine going to a Christian high school in the US as an atheist, being told that evolution didn't exist, and getting bad grades when you say that God didn't create the Earth in a week.
You are apparently not aware that Christian instruction is part of many European school curricula.
Christian high schools in the US are private or charter schools; in my experience, they tend to do a better job educating students in the sciences than US or European public high schools. Public high schools are legally prohibited from teaching creationism.
A much more serious problem is going to a US public high school as a classical liberal, being taught critical feminist and race theory, and getting bad grades (and being denounced as a neo-Nazi) when you disagree. And that is not hypothetical.
Part of the reason why I'm considering a graduate program in Europe is that I'm considering staying in the EU. So ultimately, I might end up giving up my American citizenship since I'm a dual citizen,
Well, I sure hope you go through with it: Europe needs true believers like you!
Fact is that that is already accounted for in the data I cited. Fact is also that you're comparing apples and oranges in terms of programs and coverage.
Fact is also that, aside from the $PPP comparison I mentioned, there are massive opportunity costs that Europeans pay that you don't even see as an American. For example, nice for you that you can buy yourself into a European program with American money, but many Europeans are excluded from their own universities because of test scores. And many Europeans who attend university do so because their alternative would be unemployment.
Unless you are willing to give up your US citizenship and accept a European citizenship, you demonstrate with your own choices which country you believe is giving you more opportunities; I voted with my feet in the opposite direction, and I have not regretted it for a moment.
You're repeating the typical fairy tales Americans believe about Europe. Nope, sorry, take it from someone who has been a citizen in both places: things don't work that way.
The US education system, is indeed, garbage, unless you're wealthy. While we're at it, so is health care and many other indicators of quality of life. The US is a really, really awful place to live if you're not wealthy.
Spending lots of money on public health sounds socialist on the surface
That's because it actually is a stated objective of socialism (and a few other authoritarian ideologies, both left and right). It is not a stated objective of capitalism.
but if all that money goes to your rich mates instead of the people who need it, then it's actually capitalist
No, it is simply the inevitable and natural result of implementing the stated objectives of socialism.
Capitalism, on the other hand, is an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state. "Spending lots of [public] money on public health" is not part of capitalist principles.
I pointed you to a wiki link that has all the definitions. Economics, social stratification (inequality), Nationalism, Populism, Religion etc is all much more extreme in the US than most other OECD nations.
The wiki link talks about ideology, not outcomes. For example, believing that "inequality is natural and inevitable" is not the same as having a high degree of inequality. Furthermore, your beliefs about the situation in Europe are simply wrong. Many European nations are more capitalist, more stratified, more nationalistic, more populist, and more Christian than Americans.
No I didn't. If you're unsure try asking rather than tell me what you think I'm thinking.
I didn't tell you what you are thinking, I restated what you said: "You said, in effect, 'this can't be socialism because it has corrupt and inefficient outcomes'."
Saying you said X, in fact, implies that I'm guessing that what you said differs from what you are thinking. I have no idea what you are thinking since you seem unable to articulate it clearly and since what you say contradicts the conclusions you want to reach.
My guess is that you aren't thinking at all and just repeat phrases you have picked up, like "very rightwing and right extremist". In fact, accusing people of being "very right wing and authoritarian" seems to be your go-to strategy whenever you are unable to make a logical argument.
Corruption affects both ends of the political spectrum
We agree there. And we also agree that Medicare/Medicaid is a corrupt policy ("big medicine/pharma/insurance getting fat on the public purse", your words). Now, in support of the statement that the US is "very rightwing and right extremist", you described the corrupt nature of Medicare/Medicaid. Since corruption is, as you point out, a feature of both ends of the political spectrum, it logically doesn't tell us whether Medicare/Medicaid is left wing or right wing by your own criteria.
So, you still have provided no convincing argument for the assertion that the US is "very rightwing and right extremist".
You said, in effect, "this can't be socialism because it has corrupt and inefficient outcomes". I merely pointed out that your reasoning is wrong because socialism frequently has corrupt and inefficient outcomes.
In many other countries with 'socialist' policies, they spend less on health and education and get better results.
Which would suggest those policies are actually less socialist, since the more socialist a policy is, the more corrupt and the worse the results tend to be.
Maybe you could tell me where I went wrong? The King is the govt, the cousin is big medicine/pharma/insurance getting fat on the public purse while the people are the peasants not getting a seat at the table.
So just like socialism then. Or how did you think socialism operates?
Is this a joke?
No. I actually emigrated from Europe, so I can tell you from first hand experience that you don't know what you're talking about.
Are the taxes these employees are paying even adequate to build public transportation to get them from the perimeter they are forced to live into work every day?
Why don't you have a look at the budget and answer your own question?
American cities really need to stop catering to companies that aren't willing to lift a finger to help local quality of life.
Amazon paid $250 million to state and local governments in Washington State alone, and it's the largest property tax payer in Seattle. You call that "not lifting a finger"?
To make a stupid analogy, if a rich king gave his entire fortune to his favourite cousin who was a doctor and claimed it as healthcare expenditure, would that make his Kingdom socialist? Yeah see there's a bit more to it...
Well, if you understood how Medicare works then you'd see how stupid that analogy actually is.
Try answering the question again: In what sense is the US "very rightwing and right extremist"?
There are many forms of authoritarianism, and I despise all of them. Not all of them are socialist. But among authoritarian ideologies, both national and international socialism are the worst.
Slashdot Mirror
Oops, sorry... that got cut short.
Billionaires don't care about income taxes. Billionaires care about special government handouts for their corporations. That's why so many billionaires are Democrats.
Income taxes and capital gains taxes mainly matter to incomes between the top 20% and the top 1%, skilled professionals who aren't quite rich enough to be independently wealthy and are completely at the mercy of the IRS.
You know who did an even better job? The communists. That's because the most effective way to eliminate income inequality is to make everybody dirt poor.
Europe hasn't gone quite that far yet, but skilled professionals and exceptional performance are not rewarded in Europe as they are in the US, meaning people don't bother or emigrate.
Finally, the only statistics you see are income inequality; wealth inequality in Europe is massive, it just doesn't show up in the statistics. The super-rich just move to tax havens or hide their wealth, and unlike the US, they then simply don't show up in any statistics anymore.
Attendance at such schools is at the discretion of the parents, as it should be in any society that values liberty.
And if any public school violates those laws, parents who disagree can have that fixed pretty much instantaneously.
I used to like that too, until I figured out what disastrous consequences it produced.
Americans aren't just wealthier "on average", they are wealthier at the median and at every other point of the income distribution.
Yes, I'd rather be poor in the US than poor in Europe.
You know who did an even better job? The communists. That's because low income inequality is pretty much synonymous with
You're welcome to move there if you actually believe that.
I used to believe that fairy tale too; it doesn't stand up to scrutiny.
It's why I moved to the US.
Take it from an immigrant: it did work and it does work.
How nice for you. The UK isn't all of Europe.
The problem isn't quite as bad in the sciences, but grade inflation and lowering of standards exist there as well.
What "university entrance exams"? European university admissions for Europeans are usually based on high school performance and tests that you can't repeat.
You are apparently not aware that Christian instruction is part of many European school curricula.
Christian high schools in the US are private or charter schools; in my experience, they tend to do a better job educating students in the sciences than US or European public high schools. Public high schools are legally prohibited from teaching creationism.
A much more serious problem is going to a US public high school as a classical liberal, being taught critical feminist and race theory, and getting bad grades (and being denounced as a neo-Nazi) when you disagree. And that is not hypothetical.
Well, I sure hope you go through with it: Europe needs true believers like you!
Fact is that that is already accounted for in the data I cited. Fact is also that you're comparing apples and oranges in terms of programs and coverage.
Fact is also that, aside from the $PPP comparison I mentioned, there are massive opportunity costs that Europeans pay that you don't even see as an American. For example, nice for you that you can buy yourself into a European program with American money, but many Europeans are excluded from their own universities because of test scores. And many Europeans who attend university do so because their alternative would be unemployment.
Unless you are willing to give up your US citizenship and accept a European citizenship, you demonstrate with your own choices which country you believe is giving you more opportunities; I voted with my feet in the opposite direction, and I have not regretted it for a moment.
You're repeating the typical fairy tales Americans believe about Europe. Nope, sorry, take it from someone who has been a citizen in both places: things don't work that way.
Good thing then that most Americans are wealthy by European standards.
Yes, and that's because college grades have become nearly meaningless.
No, but you defended it. And you gratuitously accused me of being "very right wing and authoritarian".
That's because it actually is a stated objective of socialism (and a few other authoritarian ideologies, both left and right). It is not a stated objective of capitalism.
No, it is simply the inevitable and natural result of implementing the stated objectives of socialism.
Capitalism, on the other hand, is an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state. "Spending lots of [public] money on public health" is not part of capitalist principles.
The wiki link talks about ideology, not outcomes. For example, believing that "inequality is natural and inevitable" is not the same as having a high degree of inequality. Furthermore, your beliefs about the situation in Europe are simply wrong. Many European nations are more capitalist, more stratified, more nationalistic, more populist, and more Christian than Americans.
I didn't tell you what you are thinking, I restated what you said: "You said, in effect, 'this can't be socialism because it has corrupt and inefficient outcomes'."
Saying you said X, in fact, implies that I'm guessing that what you said differs from what you are thinking. I have no idea what you are thinking since you seem unable to articulate it clearly and since what you say contradicts the conclusions you want to reach.
My guess is that you aren't thinking at all and just repeat phrases you have picked up, like "very rightwing and right extremist". In fact, accusing people of being "very right wing and authoritarian" seems to be your go-to strategy whenever you are unable to make a logical argument.
We agree there. And we also agree that Medicare/Medicaid is a corrupt policy ("big medicine/pharma/insurance getting fat on the public purse", your words). Now, in support of the statement that the US is "very rightwing and right extremist", you described the corrupt nature of Medicare/Medicaid. Since corruption is, as you point out, a feature of both ends of the political spectrum, it logically doesn't tell us whether Medicare/Medicaid is left wing or right wing by your own criteria.
So, you still have provided no convincing argument for the assertion that the US is "very rightwing and right extremist".
You said, in effect, "this can't be socialism because it has corrupt and inefficient outcomes". I merely pointed out that your reasoning is wrong because socialism frequently has corrupt and inefficient outcomes.
Which would suggest those policies are actually less socialist, since the more socialist a policy is, the more corrupt and the worse the results tend to be.
It's about 1% of their worldwide profit. In what possible way is Washington State even entitled to that much?
People never matter to governments, least of all to leftist governments.
So just like socialism then. Or how did you think socialism operates?
No. I actually emigrated from Europe, so I can tell you from first hand experience that you don't know what you're talking about.
Why don't you have a look at the budget and answer your own question?
Amazon paid $250 million to state and local governments in Washington State alone, and it's the largest property tax payer in Seattle. You call that "not lifting a finger"?
Well, if you understood how Medicare works then you'd see how stupid that analogy actually is.
Try answering the question again: In what sense is the US "very rightwing and right extremist"?
There are many forms of authoritarianism, and I despise all of them. Not all of them are socialist. But among authoritarian ideologies, both national and international socialism are the worst.
I don't expect anything from a fool anyway.
Just ignore those parts; what's left is still better than anything else on the market.
Seems to be working so far.
That still wouldn't have made her a good choice.