... of "values" or because of government bullying.
It's 2016 and information still wants to be free. The Internet is already too censured and ruled by a few with mostly Facebook and Twitter being in charge of so much content (Google is more tolerating I guess), none of them should censor and remove shit.
Drivers can still be installed without Geforce Experience or registration.
Well.. Except for things like the Shield controller. Which also need the whole thing which also needs an Nvidia graphics card because.. Well.. Uhm.. Your USB game controller says Nvidia on it now doesn't it? Go be a good buy and buy an Nvidia video card.
..., anti-christian, for discrimination, against merits before sex, race, religion, against a fair price, free market, viewing people as simply human beings... but hey, at-least they are "right" and have "superior morals" and are much more "good" than anyone else. Surely no other political groups have ever claimed that and been wrong or want to push their stupid agenda before right?
Reading the article for the first time it was definitely over my head but I have played the PS4 Doom demo. Normally I dislike FPS games and especially multiplayer ones, but with Doom I actually found the story mode (What story? Just kill daemons) great fun to play.
In Sweden your greatest benefit is if you're black, woman and/or a Muslim.
Because it's an anti-racist, equal and non-discriminating, tolerant secular country like that.
If you're a criminal? Well that make you a great example for the youth! Go hang around with the guys who have started to go into the wrong direction because you sure got that in common! Talk about your experiences! We'll hire you to have that as a job!!
I meant the math / architect / drawings "compasses."
I have no idea why they are called "compass" in English and the EMP vs magnetics was nothing I even considered with them but I was thinking about how you could hurt others with the nail(s) on the ends of the compass:)
(Well, the measure distance thing may be the "compass" thing I guess (at-least it's somewhat (but very weakly) related), or maybe it had a degrees part or something used against a fixed compass on a map or something.)
The problem with the Swedish system is of course that it's made up on taxes from younger generations.
That's why they argue we "need the immigrants" even though they don't work and cost money and will just be an even larger burden in the future. It's just pushing the expenses forward. It would possibly be true with work and specialist immigrants but it's not with refugees and welfare migrants and Sweden will be even less attractive for anyone else with them here.
IMHO each generation should save for itself which would handle any difference in the size of that generation, or every individual for themselves, whatever.
And as I see if if the expenses for 2015 years immigration instead was put on in a global stock index fund for those born in 2015 or 1997 (18 then = adults = possibly start to work) then they would have an AMAZING pension/retirement ahead of them.
The what on average? 25 year old immigrants will never ever likely even have a positive effect over their life time whereas 50 or 70 years on the stock market would have AMAZING results and be a much better investment.
It's just complete bullshit and the system should be redone because the system is broken if it demands more than 2 children / couple since it seem like rich people don't even have that fertility. For all we know that's true even for the immigrants (eventually) if they reach our standard of living and wealth so replacing the people won't really help.... that or just grant every family 1 or 2 million SEK / children born and they would have more children and the problem would had been solved. But please don't do it with the country full of Africans and Arabs because then it would just be a problem for the Swedes once again.
Swedish politicians has "borrowed" from the pension systems without paying back and there's ideas about using that money to fund "investments" which of-course isn't sound investments based on the greatest return but the society "investments" they want to do (immigrant housing and what not.)
In the way I stated: nearly half the US ends up in the top 10% income bracket for at least a couple of years, so lots of people in the US experience "being rich" part of their lives. It also means that lower taxes for those in the top 10% will benefit a large portion of Americans, not just 10% as one might naively assume.
The US has already gone the way of Sweden in terms of welfare spending, the question is whether to curtail it, to tax accordingly, or live with the liability on the books.
At-least it's harder to come in as an immigrant in the US. Then again to grant all the illegal immigrants permission to stay in Sweden is kinda about as fucked up as the Swedish immigration system is.
No, the US can't simply say "fuck off" because 2/3 of US national debt is held by Americans for their retirement. That's the way retirement works in the US.
Through private savings or public? In Japan most of the debt is owned by the Japanese people too. I consider that as they having lend themselves money, so something which is more neutral even if the numbers may seem large.
Here in Sweden the larger share of your pension come from 2.5% of your income placed into funds where the normal alternative is a 1.5x leverage global stock market fund at 100% up to the age of 55 and then dropping down to 50/50% with a bond fund too to age 70 (67/33 at 75) and from your income which I guess goes to those who are living on pension right now but I don't know how large that share is. So depending on how long you've lived and worked here you both earn your own money to manage in the fund and rights to pension from the public.
Many have additional retirement savings from their employees which have saved money in whatever way too.
And finally most people have the least and is the least depending on whatever they have saved away themselves which of course can be in any way.
So I guess bond savings for retirement isn't much of a thing here.
The US has democratized becoming rich
How? Because experienced people are allowed to rise to the top?
Correct. You suggested that there was something wrong with the idea that the US spends more per capita on social welfare than other countries, and then provided to cite numbers on tax burden. I gave you the actually relevant numbers, namely government spending. (Note that governments can have other revenue sources besides taxation.)
All correct. And while I typed it I reflected on that you likely meant in US dollars considering the higher GDP / capita of the US vs most nations.
(Then again I guess we could replace Finland with Norway which have a lower tax / GDP than Finland but a much higher GDP / capita (and a good source of revenue beside taxation..) and then continue the comparison with that instead. Likely easier to have basic income in a natural resources rich nation too (then again isn't all nations? The larger the better? It's just about whatever you exploit what you have or not.))
My point about was mostly that pointing out any number differences wasn't fair because one number was taxation and the other spending.
which means slightly lowering taxes on the rich and massively increasing taxes on the middle class.
Why that?
Personally as I see it for an open country going the route of Sweden is complete madness because strong welfare as long as the country haven't become poor yet will just attract free-loaders and they will take what they is allowed to for free and in many cases more than that (through theft, cheating the system, lies, avoiding paying tax, let a criminal "own" their car so they don't have to pay any fees or tickets and so on) (plus the rising cost for their crimes and so on), they will also vote for more of the handouts and demand and whine for even more from those who produce and have a better living standard than they have.
The end result is of course even higher taxes and even more sharing what is there and productive and rich people and companies leaving for a nation which provide a better deal dropping productivity and wealth of the nation even lower pushing the nation and people down as a whole.
How to be an open nation is instead the opposite, to welcome the rich and wealthy and try to attract them to your nation where their taxes and spending can end up. Sure the people at the absolute bottom may lose out but it's way better than more or less everyone losing out, much more attractive, safe and nice to live in and if the majority is very rich even if they pay little taxes and you can't compete with them chances are at-least your income is pretty decent too.
US social welfare spending is much more directed towards the middle class than towards the poor
Why is that? Because the middle-class is larger and demands for it to be that way?
and that handout to the US middle class is financed by debt
On the other hand people seem to expect the US will pay of their debt. When has the debt of the US ever really shrunk? The problem with a high debt is of course that an interest rate hit you much harder, and it's also more likely because you're heavier into debt.. So..
But the US could simply say: Fuck off - and forget about any payments! too. Lending to the US would become less popular though =P
While the US is doing better than Europe, the economy is anemic and stagnant by US standards. That's why voters are so pissed.
The national economical growth of Sweden was/is very large right now but that's connected to the massive welfare and immigration flows because that of course cost a lot of money and demand a lot of resources. Welfare services will also be accounted for.. It's so insane because those lying Afghan men who the Migration office consider "children" cost the Migration office/budget 1900 SEK / day = $222, out in the municipals it depends on the load, maybe they have to pay even more to house
The number I took is from: http://www.ekonomifakta.se/Fak... "In recent years the tax burden in Sweden dropped slightly , but we are still above the OECD average. The tax burden or tax ratio , calculated as the ratio of total tax revenues and GDP."
I would assume it counted everything and _I_ don't count anything it's a number which already existed.
Government spending per GDP says 38.10% here: http://www.tradingeconomics.co... Don't you have any public taxes and spending beyond what the government spend? No state taxes and spending? As far as taxation goes I think VAT should be included?
This number is _SPENDING_ though, not _TAXATION_, and as we know the US budget is running at a huge national deficit.
Debt as percent of GDP 2015 USA - 104.17% (76% in 2008.) Finland - 63.1% (32.7% in 2008.) Sweden - 43.4% (36.8% in 2008.) Denmark - 40.2% (33.4% in 2008.) (This site was used: http://www.tradingeconomics.co...)
So even if the US spend 41% of the GDP it doesn't _TAX_ that much. Though the difference between 2010-2015 relative GDP is very low, from 2007 to 2010 the debt increased from 64.8% to 95.2% of the GDP (which most likely fell during the same period though..), USA may have at-least some of it back with their strong and growing economy now though.
Quite a difference in the amount of debt. The Swedish house-holds have lots in debt though.
https://data.oecd.org/hha/hous...: Household debt - Total, % of net disposable income, 2014: Denmark - 308% Sweden - 174% Finland - 127% United states - 113%
(Hopefully you own something worth it for all that debt..)
Estonia household debt sat at 83%, they have a governmental debt of just 9.7%, complete tax pressure (above) of 32.9% and spent their 2% of GDP on the military just like NATO wishes. They are the only country which follow both the Euro zone rules for their public debt and the NATO rule for military spending. May be a very well run country. What Sweden should have been (I doubt they look up at Sweden now any longer.. Or Estonian friends:))
You will never be able to argue with someone that believes money is a cause of wealth rather than the result of work. Simply give up. There are a lot of people out there that believe taking your rewards from hard work and giving it to someone else will magically make them work hard.
Well here in Sweden where heritage tax is 0%, the taxation on the wealth is 1% or if you're (stupid enough too?) prefer to have 30% on your capital gains that and then over 50% if your income tax it kinda is.
Or do you think work is the best way to earn, become and maintain your wealth in that system? It's the only one you can effect but it's not at all the most efficient way to accumulate more wealth.
However you can of course not consume more services and goods than what has been produced so to actually increase the amount of services & goods for the people more of it has to be produced, not more money but more actual services and goods, and that one way or the other involves actually working.
First, the US is already spending considerably more per capita than any other country on social welfare (as well as education and healthcare
What? If you discount the things we get "for free" out in society which is also paid for by taxes or how do you make that happen?
2014: 26.0% of the GDP of US went into taxes. 43.9% of the GDP of Finland went into taxes. 50.9% of the GDP of Denmark went into taxes.
2015: 3.3% of the GDP went into the military in the US. 1.3% of the GDP went into the military in Finland. 1.2% of the GDP went into the military in Denmark.
Of course not all goes into "social welfare", some goes into infrastructure and such but of course you get a larger share of social welfare in Finland and Denmark of the GDP than in the US. But this reminds me I'm saying of the GDP so maybe you mean in the number of dollars spent? I'm not really sure that's true either. I won't say because America is more expensive to live in because it unlikely is but because Finland and Denmark has a high GDP / capita too. Or well, maybe you are right. From an equality perspective within the same nation it won't be as good anyway.
Here in Sweden your employee has already been charged about 31.5% of your salary in "employee fee", so.. there goes that. Of the income you then get about 32% goes to the municipality and the county, and if you earn enough you pay even more in national taxation. So in reality you should really think your salary is about 131.5% of what it says it is and you get to keep almost 52% of that after national, municipal and county taxes.. On your income. And that's in Sweden which had a tax pressure of "just" 42.7% of GDP in 2014 relative the others. On top of that VAT is 25% for everything except alcohol & tobacco and energy (much higher) and food (12%) and books (6%.) So of the 52% you had left assume 20% of what you buy is taxes and there you are left with 40% if your income. And that's still assuming you don't have a large salary because then you get to keep even less.
If you pay rent for your apartment or house though you can declare that as a loss and get 30% of that back relative your income taxes (they likely will remove that to fight the high expenses apartments and houses are sold at but more than likely to pay for welfare and the society now when they have taken in so many freeloading immigrants from Africa and the middle-east too too), it's the same taxation which is used on capital gains and interest earned but there's a special account for that where you pay the 30% of what used to be the national debt rate (which sit at 0.42% now..) but now is that + 0.75% so more like 0.4% or whatever of what you have on your savings account (including stocks) instead. There's no longer any taxation on gifts and heritage in Sweden so old money and capital gains have very low taxation but income taxes are very high.
Regarding
"And do you seriously believe that the millions of people who currently work on delivering and supervising welfare-related benefits are going to just quietly give up their jobs?"
... this is why Sweden is so fucked up as it is politically. Imagine a nation where ~half of the GDP end up in the tax coffins. Now imagine how many that employ and how many need those handouts and use them for their activities and think they need that / need even more of that.
Personally I question what right the collective have to both rule and tax the individual at all. Supposedly wanting less immigrants or have the idea that they are bad because they don't assimilate is racist and wrong but somehow we also need to be open-minded, progressive and democratic and let them change the society into what they want it to be.. Uhm.. See any problem in that? The only reason to be tolerant of those different than you is if they are peaceful and live there way and let you live in your way, otherwise why the fuck would you? Sadly those
PAY to have the taxes, the company and any money to buy any of the services or products moved to say Somalia instead. That or simple move everyone in Somalia to the US.
I assume it can be fixed out of the regular user-interface if one really want it.
I doubt companies HAVE to deal with this shit for machines which absolutely can't have it.
These seem pretty bad since they kinda disable it, I know know if anything have changed with Anniversary update (previously I could at-least pick a date and time when I wanted to upgrade - I'm not allowed to any longer.) http://www.forbes.com/sites/go...
Seem like when a restart has been scheduled one can go in and change Restart options to a different day now too under update status. I don't seem to be able to have that the default though.
I'm not sure the later actually work, then again considering the number of hits and that it should be possibly somehow for some people to actually refuse it...
Guess if nothing else one could block the network connections to Microsoft for checking for updates..
I used to use the BSDs and Linux distributions but also OS X hack and OS X on a Macbook Pro but the Macbook Pro was trash too (ohnoz! Not that one too! At-least I follow what the GP asked for and haven't bought a new one.)
However I've bought games for what? $2000? If I don't run Windows (or wine) 90+% of them become useless.
Slashdot Mirror
... of "values" or because of government bullying.
It's 2016 and information still wants to be free.
The Internet is already too censured and ruled by a few with mostly Facebook and Twitter being in charge of so much content (Google is more tolerating I guess), none of them should censor and remove shit.
Drivers can still be installed without Geforce Experience or registration.
Well.. Except for things like the Shield controller. Which also need the whole thing which also needs an Nvidia graphics card because.. Well.. Uhm.. Your USB game controller says Nvidia on it now doesn't it? Go be a good buy and buy an Nvidia video card.
..., anti-christian, for discrimination, against merits before sex, race, religion, against a fair price, free market, viewing people as simply human beings. .. but hey, at-least they are "right" and have "superior morals" and are much more "good" than anyone else. Surely no other political groups have ever claimed that and been wrong or want to push their stupid agenda before right?
And all in vivid shades of dark brown
Zune.
Reading the article for the first time it was definitely over my head but I have played the PS4 Doom demo. Normally I dislike FPS games and especially multiplayer ones, but with Doom I actually found the story mode (What story? Just kill daemons) great fun to play.
Shadow warrior next?
(Support Rise of the triad too ;D)
You'd have second thoughts too if you saw a "Made in China" label on something capable of ripping a hole in the fabric of space-time.
The great Chinese singularity of equality.
Not just visible from space. It engulfed all of it.
I should had said OUTRAGEOUS! because that's the expected Windows user reaction :/, or what the Windows haters want to trigger.
It's not called OS X 10.1, it's Mac OS X 10.1. But it's not Mac OS X anymore, it's MacOS.
Thanks! That will help people understand what I was talking about!
"Only the latest version of your OS will fully support the new processors!"
No full Zen or Kaby lake support on Linux 2.0.3! Or NetBSD 1.3! Or OS X 10.1!
THE HORRORS!!
In Sweden your greatest benefit is if you're black, woman and/or a Muslim.
Because it's an anti-racist, equal and non-discriminating, tolerant secular country like that.
If you're a criminal? Well that make you a great example for the youth! Go hang around with the guys who have started to go into the wrong direction because you sure got that in common! Talk about your experiences! We'll hire you to have that as a job!!
I meant the math / architect / drawings "compasses."
I have no idea why they are called "compass" in English and the EMP vs magnetics was nothing I even considered with them but I was thinking about how you could hurt others with the nail(s) on the ends of the compass :)
(Well, the measure distance thing may be the "compass" thing I guess (at-least it's somewhat (but very weakly) related), or maybe it had a degrees part or something used against a fixed compass on a map or something.)
The problem with the Swedish system is of course that it's made up on taxes from younger generations.
That's why they argue we "need the immigrants" even though they don't work and cost money and will just be an even larger burden in the future. It's just pushing the expenses forward. It would possibly be true with work and specialist immigrants but it's not with refugees and welfare migrants and Sweden will be even less attractive for anyone else with them here.
IMHO each generation should save for itself which would handle any difference in the size of that generation, or every individual for themselves, whatever.
And as I see if if the expenses for 2015 years immigration instead was put on in a global stock index fund for those born in 2015 or 1997 (18 then = adults = possibly start to work) then they would have an AMAZING pension/retirement ahead of them.
The what on average? 25 year old immigrants will never ever likely even have a positive effect over their life time whereas 50 or 70 years on the stock market would have AMAZING results and be a much better investment.
It's just complete bullshit and the system should be redone because the system is broken if it demands more than 2 children / couple since it seem like rich people don't even have that fertility. For all we know that's true even for the immigrants (eventually) if they reach our standard of living and wealth so replacing the people won't really help. ... that or just grant every family 1 or 2 million SEK / children born and they would have more children and the problem would had been solved. But please don't do it with the country full of Africans and Arabs because then it would just be a problem for the Swedes once again.
Swedish politicians has "borrowed" from the pension systems without paying back and there's ideas about using that money to fund "investments" which of-course isn't sound investments based on the greatest return but the society "investments" they want to do (immigrant housing and what not.)
In the way I stated: nearly half the US ends up in the top 10% income bracket for at least a couple of years, so lots of people in the US experience "being rich" part of their lives. It also means that lower taxes for those in the top 10% will benefit a large portion of Americans, not just 10% as one might naively assume.
But why / how do they reach that position?
What about "with compasses"?
(Weird word for me.)
The US has already gone the way of Sweden in terms of welfare spending, the question is whether to curtail it, to tax accordingly, or live with the liability on the books.
At-least it's harder to come in as an immigrant in the US. Then again to grant all the illegal immigrants permission to stay in Sweden is kinda about as fucked up as the Swedish immigration system is.
No, the US can't simply say "fuck off" because 2/3 of US national debt is held by Americans for their retirement. That's the way retirement works in the US.
Through private savings or public?
In Japan most of the debt is owned by the Japanese people too. I consider that as they having lend themselves money, so something which is more neutral even if the numbers may seem large.
Here in Sweden the larger share of your pension come from 2.5% of your income placed into funds where the normal alternative is a 1.5x leverage global stock market fund at 100% up to the age of 55 and then dropping down to 50/50% with a bond fund too to age 70 (67/33 at 75) and from your income which I guess goes to those who are living on pension right now but I don't know how large that share is. So depending on how long you've lived and worked here you both earn your own money to manage in the fund and rights to pension from the public.
Many have additional retirement savings from their employees which have saved money in whatever way too.
And finally most people have the least and is the least depending on whatever they have saved away themselves which of course can be in any way.
So I guess bond savings for retirement isn't much of a thing here.
The US has democratized becoming rich
How? Because experienced people are allowed to rise to the top?
Correct. You suggested that there was something wrong with the idea that the US spends more per capita on social welfare than other countries, and then provided to cite numbers on tax burden. I gave you the actually relevant numbers, namely government spending. (Note that governments can have other revenue sources besides taxation.)
All correct. And while I typed it I reflected on that you likely meant in US dollars considering the higher GDP / capita of the US vs most nations.
(Then again I guess we could replace Finland with Norway which have a lower tax / GDP than Finland but a much higher GDP / capita (and a good source of revenue beside taxation ..) and then continue the comparison with that instead. Likely easier to have basic income in a natural resources rich nation too (then again isn't all nations? The larger the better? It's just about whatever you exploit what you have or not.))
My point about was mostly that pointing out any number differences wasn't fair because one number was taxation and the other spending.
which means slightly lowering taxes on the rich and massively increasing taxes on the middle class.
Why that?
Personally as I see it for an open country going the route of Sweden is complete madness because strong welfare as long as the country haven't become poor yet will just attract free-loaders and they will take what they is allowed to for free and in many cases more than that (through theft, cheating the system, lies, avoiding paying tax, let a criminal "own" their car so they don't have to pay any fees or tickets and so on) (plus the rising cost for their crimes and so on), they will also vote for more of the handouts and demand and whine for even more from those who produce and have a better living standard than they have.
The end result is of course even higher taxes and even more sharing what is there and productive and rich people and companies leaving for a nation which provide a better deal dropping productivity and wealth of the nation even lower pushing the nation and people down as a whole.
How to be an open nation is instead the opposite, to welcome the rich and wealthy and try to attract them to your nation where their taxes and spending can end up. Sure the people at the absolute bottom may lose out but it's way better than more or less everyone losing out, much more attractive, safe and nice to live in and if the majority is very rich even if they pay little taxes and you can't compete with them chances are at-least your income is pretty decent too.
US social welfare spending is much more directed towards the middle class than towards the poor
Why is that? Because the middle-class is larger and demands for it to be that way?
and that handout to the US middle class is financed by debt
On the other hand people seem to expect the US will pay of their debt. When has the debt of the US ever really shrunk? The problem with a high debt is of course that an interest rate hit you much harder, and it's also more likely because you're heavier into debt .. So ..
But the US could simply say: Fuck off - and forget about any payments! too. Lending to the US would become less popular though =P
While the US is doing better than Europe, the economy is anemic and stagnant by US standards. That's why voters are so pissed.
The national economical growth of Sweden was/is very large right now but that's connected to the massive welfare and immigration flows because that of course cost a lot of money and demand a lot of resources. Welfare services will also be accounted for .. It's so insane because those lying Afghan men who the Migration office consider "children" cost the Migration office/budget 1900 SEK / day = $222, out in the municipals it depends on the load, maybe they have to pay even more to house
The number I took is from:
http://www.ekonomifakta.se/Fak...
"In recent years the tax burden in Sweden dropped slightly , but we are still above the OECD average. The tax burden or tax ratio , calculated as the ratio of total tax revenues and GDP."
I would assume it counted everything and _I_ don't count anything it's a number which already existed.
Government spending per GDP says 38.10% here:
http://www.tradingeconomics.co...
Don't you have any public taxes and spending beyond what the government spend? No state taxes and spending? As far as taxation goes I think VAT should be included?
This number is _SPENDING_ though, not _TAXATION_, and as we know the US budget is running at a huge national deficit.
Debt as percent of GDP 2015
USA - 104.17% (76% in 2008.)
Finland - 63.1% (32.7% in 2008.)
Sweden - 43.4% (36.8% in 2008.)
Denmark - 40.2% (33.4% in 2008.)
(This site was used: http://www.tradingeconomics.co...)
So even if the US spend 41% of the GDP it doesn't _TAX_ that much. Though the difference between 2010-2015 relative GDP is very low, from 2007 to 2010 the debt increased from 64.8% to 95.2% of the GDP (which most likely fell during the same period though..), USA may have at-least some of it back with their strong and growing economy now though.
Quite a difference in the amount of debt. The Swedish house-holds have lots in debt though.
https://data.oecd.org/hha/hous...:
Household debt - Total, % of net disposable income, 2014:
Denmark - 308%
Sweden - 174%
Finland - 127%
United states - 113%
(Hopefully you own something worth it for all that debt ..)
Estonia household debt sat at 83%, they have a governmental debt of just 9.7%, complete tax pressure (above) of 32.9% and spent their 2% of GDP on the military just like NATO wishes. They are the only country which follow both the Euro zone rules for their public debt and the NATO rule for military spending. :))
May be a very well run country. What Sweden should have been (I doubt they look up at Sweden now any longer.. Or Estonian friends
You will never be able to argue with someone that believes money is a cause of wealth rather than the result of work. Simply give up. There are a lot of people out there that believe taking your rewards from hard work and giving it to someone else will magically make them work hard.
Well here in Sweden where heritage tax is 0%, the taxation on the wealth is 1% or if you're (stupid enough too?) prefer to have 30% on your capital gains that and then over 50% if your income tax it kinda is.
Or do you think work is the best way to earn, become and maintain your wealth in that system? It's the only one you can effect but it's not at all the most efficient way to accumulate more wealth.
However you can of course not consume more services and goods than what has been produced so to actually increase the amount of services & goods for the people more of it has to be produced, not more money but more actual services and goods, and that one way or the other involves actually working.
First, the US is already spending considerably more per capita than any other country on social welfare (as well as education and healthcare
What?
If you discount the things we get "for free" out in society which is also paid for by taxes or how do you make that happen?
2014:
26.0% of the GDP of US went into taxes.
43.9% of the GDP of Finland went into taxes.
50.9% of the GDP of Denmark went into taxes.
2015:
3.3% of the GDP went into the military in the US.
1.3% of the GDP went into the military in Finland.
1.2% of the GDP went into the military in Denmark.
Of course not all goes into "social welfare", some goes into infrastructure and such but of course you get a larger share of social welfare in Finland and Denmark of the GDP than in the US. But this reminds me I'm saying of the GDP so maybe you mean in the number of dollars spent? I'm not really sure that's true either. I won't say because America is more expensive to live in because it unlikely is but because Finland and Denmark has a high GDP / capita too. Or well, maybe you are right. From an equality perspective within the same nation it won't be as good anyway.
Here in Sweden your employee has already been charged about 31.5% of your salary in "employee fee", so.. there goes that. Of the income you then get about 32% goes to the municipality and the county, and if you earn enough you pay even more in national taxation. So in reality you should really think your salary is about 131.5% of what it says it is and you get to keep almost 52% of that after national, municipal and county taxes.. On your income. And that's in Sweden which had a tax pressure of "just" 42.7% of GDP in 2014 relative the others.
On top of that VAT is 25% for everything except alcohol & tobacco and energy (much higher) and food (12%) and books (6%.) So of the 52% you had left assume 20% of what you buy is taxes and there you are left with 40% if your income. And that's still assuming you don't have a large salary because then you get to keep even less.
If you pay rent for your apartment or house though you can declare that as a loss and get 30% of that back relative your income taxes (they likely will remove that to fight the high expenses apartments and houses are sold at but more than likely to pay for welfare and the society now when they have taken in so many freeloading immigrants from Africa and the middle-east too too), it's the same taxation which is used on capital gains and interest earned but there's a special account for that where you pay the 30% of what used to be the national debt rate (which sit at 0.42% now ..) but now is that + 0.75% so more like 0.4% or whatever of what you have on your savings account (including stocks) instead. There's no longer any taxation on gifts and heritage in Sweden so old money and capital gains have very low taxation but income taxes are very high.
Regarding
"And do you seriously believe that the millions of people who currently work on delivering and supervising welfare-related benefits are going to just quietly give up their jobs?"
... this is why Sweden is so fucked up as it is politically.
Imagine a nation where ~half of the GDP end up in the tax coffins. Now imagine how many that employ and how many need those handouts and use them for their activities and think they need that / need even more of that.
Personally I question what right the collective have to both rule and tax the individual at all. .. Uhm.. See any problem in that?
Supposedly wanting less immigrants or have the idea that they are bad because they don't assimilate is racist and wrong but somehow we also need to be open-minded, progressive and democratic and let them change the society into what they want it to be
The only reason to be tolerant of those different than you is if they are peaceful and live there way and let you live in your way, otherwise why the fuck would you? Sadly those
Do it the Swedish way:
PAY to have the taxes, the company and any money to buy any of the services or products moved to say Somalia instead.
That or simple move everyone in Somalia to the US.
cataegory 3 civilizations and we had better watch our "P"'s and "Q"'s.... Just sayin'
Pussys and Qocks?
I assume it can be fixed out of the regular user-interface if one really want it.
I doubt companies HAVE to deal with this shit for machines which absolutely can't have it.
These seem pretty bad since they kinda disable it, I know know if anything have changed with Anniversary update (previously I could at-least pick a date and time when I wanted to upgrade - I'm not allowed to any longer.)
http://www.forbes.com/sites/go...
Seem like when a restart has been scheduled one can go in and change Restart options to a different day now too under update status. I don't seem to be able to have that the default though.
No idea if this old tips work:
http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/d...
http://answers.microsoft.com/e...
http://tweaks.com/windows/6573...
I'm not sure the later actually work, then again considering the number of hits and that it should be possibly somehow for some people to actually refuse it ...
Guess if nothing else one could block the network connections to Microsoft for checking for updates ..
I don't need to have a computer at all.
Yes, of course. And Microsoft still suck for demanding it you idiot.
I hate their enforced restarts and need it for games. Now fuck off.
I used to use the BSDs and Linux distributions but also OS X hack and OS X on a Macbook Pro but the Macbook Pro was trash too (ohnoz! Not that one too! At-least I follow what the GP asked for and haven't bought a new one.)
However I've bought games for what? $2000?
If I don't run Windows (or wine) 90+% of them become useless.
I have games.
It's ok to dislike something you use. You don't have to like it.