Thread has been deleted
Last comment
or high tax ? with low tax u obviously see rise in some prices like health care. Do you prefer to pay more taxes for cheaper/free schools and free/cheap health care or does everyone have to pay for their bit ?
2019-04-20 22:08
#1
broky | 
Latvia tragttutS 
low taxes
2019-04-20 22:09
30k tuition fees must be nice
2019-04-20 22:43
Hey wait a minute.
2019-04-20 23:52
Low tax
2019-04-21 11:12
because ?
2019-04-22 00:20
Low tax = control your own money.Besides,it will give people a want to earn more money(the harder you work, the harder you get) and make the economic growth. High tax = people would stop working since they got social welfare.Plus rich people will leave the conutry.Then the government will gain nothing from tax.The country becomes poor.
2019-04-22 02:59
Then don't go to the university, you, fool! This is how the market works. You pay that much only because you're ready to pay that much. Yet it's not essential for success to graduate from some high-class college, unless we're talking about medicine or something highly tied to expensive equipment or facilities.
2019-04-21 00:15
im sorry but are u actually dumb
2019-04-21 00:09
Prove me wrong.
2019-04-21 00:11
expected from Dimitard
2019-04-21 00:14
expected from someone who paid / is paying lots of money for the information that is available freely on the web or is willing to do so.
2019-04-21 00:16
yes i'm sure companies will hire you for your wikipedia skills
2019-04-21 00:19
Surprise, buddy, you can find books and lectures from the universities on the web! And even complete courses for some matters. Yet the fact that you're making this argument makes me think that I'm wrong either because you really need some old guy to oversee you studying liberal arts course or it's a poor trolling (and the dialogue makes no sense at all).
2019-04-21 00:25
Thats why you work for HLTV? xaaaxaxaxaxaxaxa
2019-04-21 00:30
That's why you write this comment, yet for free? xaaaxaxaxaxaxaxa It's better to work at HLTV and earn something on the last year of school than waste this time for preparation to university and stuff like that.
2019-04-21 00:32
TRUE)))))
2019-04-21 01:02
#203
 | 
Poland GumiPr0 
I love how the fucking admin is shittalking like everyone else here and behaving like a braidead 10/10 would use site again
2019-04-21 01:55
#231
 | 
Brazil hrp_ 
well, but its only him and martin. Jonathan E. and nomad are too serious xd
2019-04-21 03:42
Funny to hear that coming from someone who has 3 bans for racist remarks such as monkey for the past a couple of months. Literally the most of those who complain about admins are the most misbehaving.
2019-04-21 10:44
#324
 | 
Poland GumiPr0 
I'm not complaining I actually find it cool that you arent some serious dude who cant have some fun but it seems like I was wrong
2019-04-21 21:37
wtfff dont rekt him that hard mens)))
2019-04-21 22:36
i love u my n-word
2019-04-22 00:06
#280
 | 
Belarus Polotsk 
How is argumenting "shit-talk"?
2019-04-21 11:42
You can continue ,no one will ban you
2019-04-21 08:56
#254
 | 
Italy 1257Legend 
Wow, some apparently 30-something Mr. Intelligent over here telling people just how smart he is and how your decisions are wrong. Go fuck yourself, people just see the state of this site and expect people like you to act civilised, yet here we are.
2019-04-21 10:02
most (good) jobs will require degrees unless you're talking about online universities going to university isn't all about the education, it's the skills you learn, skills that companies look for when hiring. you've gone from "medicine or something highly tied to expensive equipment or facilities." to liberal arts degrees - yes there are less important university courses
2019-04-21 00:39
#195
 | 
Belarus Polotsk 
I'm actually looking for web courses&lectures for this summer (unless I get a summer job). The point is that there is some FREE courses for my studies and it might speed up my graduation, or at least give me pass on some courses, so I can focus on other stuff.
2019-04-21 01:18
#230
 | 
Brazil hrp_ 
well, i doubt if some high companies hire self-taught people, useless they have years of experience
2019-04-21 03:39
The most of the biggest IT companies hire without giving much of attention to your diploma, only skills. Experience is sometimes crucial, but it depends on what you gotta do at the job. But if you have a relevant experience of the work at smaller company, you have a good chance to be hired by a bigger one if you're doing good at the interview.
2019-04-21 10:38
retardation really shows for you.
2019-04-21 00:27
congrats, you proved you can't fire back arguments. Moron.
2019-04-21 00:33
first you need to say something that's actually worth a comeback
2019-04-21 00:33
#255
 | 
Italy 1257Legend 
You haven't provided any arguments yourself, makes you look like a fucking idiot.
2019-04-21 10:03
HLTV is a company xaxaxaxaxaxaxaxa
2019-04-21 01:09
#185
 | 
Israel fvlion123 
university is important and def helps a lot with succeeding in life but its not like you cant succeed without it dont make it seem like you shouldnt go to university
2019-04-21 00:48
My parents both have degrees in the economy field, they don't really work with expensive equipment or facilities, however, they would be completly unable to do their jobs if it weren't for the skills that they were taught during university. Obviously they didn't know everything when they got out of university, but they had the bases to join a good position in a company, then the company teaches them whatever else they need no know. Your argument would kind of stand in my case, as I am studying Biochemistry and need to know how to handle lab equipment and what not, but I also need to learn a boat load of theory and that will only be able to be achieved by going to university. Now, I know you don't need to go to university to be successful in every field, for example, the IT/technology field. There is an immense number of successful people in that industry that either dropped out or never joined a university. But you have to understand those people are more often than not absolutely brilliant at what they do either because they had a great mentor or they are just incredibly gifted, maybe both. For the common person, university will almost always be a better option, as it allows for you to become "specialized" in a certain area and will probably help you get a job. Basically, I think university should be free because almost everyone would benefit from it, and there are many studies that show that the highest a person's education level is, the "more they contribute to society" and the countries that are regarded as the best in the world (in what comes to living conditions, safety, bla bla bla) usually have the highest level of people with university degrees. However I understand that having free university is impossible in some countries, such as mine, because our governmant really doesn't have that much to spend and having free university shouldn't be a priority over free healthcare, law enforcment funding, and other things. But, if a country has enough budget, it will only benefit them imo.
2019-04-21 01:58
+1
2019-04-21 08:43
#256
 | 
Italy 1257Legend 
+1
2019-04-21 10:04
I understand your point, but there is a couple of important remarks I should make: 1) I'm talking about this particular moment of easy access to any information on the web, the situation was completely different 15 or even 10 years ago. 2) I don't consider all the jobs (except for those that are mentioned above) that currently have strict requirements on the diploma to remain with the same policy on them in 5 years. Of course, it always depends on the industry, but the fact is this is the trend. I agree that universities can provide some part of the knowledge that is not available at self-education, but is it worth it? University takes literally 4-6 years from your life. This time could've been spent on self-education, beginning a career and getting actual experience in many fields. And, as, let's say, 5 years have passed, would you, an employer, rather pick up someone with 3-4 years of experience at the field or someone who has just graduated? Experience is easy to get if you're ready to work for free instead of spending dozens of dollars for college, but in the end, you will be able to have the same job. It can be much sooner, it can be slightly later, but this way works for most of the jobs. Not all, but the majority. And my idea is that you have to analyze every particular situation on your own, but not considering the fact that you can get a good job without attending university in 2019 is just silly. I agree that it slightly differs from the point that I made at first, but in 10 years it will surely be the reality. In regard to free education, I'm strongly opposed. Public universities are not effective, and if we let everyone attend a college with a fancy campus that looks like a great hotel instead of doing something useful in the economy (and in the expense of the taxpayers), it won't benefit the society. But should gifted talents get some sort of financial aid? Surely yes. Yet would they succeed after paying out their student loans? Yes, too. And most regular people (let's say, future doctors in wealthy countries) would too if they were careful with it at the beginning.
2019-04-21 11:09
I agree that many jobs don't require you go to university to be good at them, as I mentioned, in the IT/technology field you can very easily educate yourself through online courses and what not if you're willing to put in the hours and effort. However, I would disagree in the many jobs part of your statement. Once again, let's look at my case (Biochemestry). I could not join an university, search for what books they are using to lecture the different courses (at least in my university I think you can search for that in their website even as an outsider) and read them myself. But if I were to go to a lab or a university and ask for a job as an researcher or as a teacher, they would laugh in my face when they found out I was self-taught. Because that really gives you almost zero credentials in most areas. At least from my experience and from what others have told me, in most areas, the degree that you have certainly makes it easier for you to have that job, think of it like comparing a dog with a great pedigree vs. a dog that has no pedigree. One has the diplomas to show he comes from a perfect background and the other is just begging for a chance to prove it's worth. Once again, not all markets are like this and that's great, but most of them are. One thing I agree with you is that, in the future, many online courses will teach more and more skills and many more people will be able to be self taught and find great jobs. However, universities will never stop being important, because many things just can't be self taught. Once again, not to be self centered, but in my case, if I were to try and learn Celullar Biology or Organic Chemistry by myself using online courses I would almost surely fail because, first of all, it's hard to check if all the information is correct. Furthermore, it would be hard to keep up with all the "updates" that science constantly makes, and in my university, not only do they do that for me, they also teach me what's most relevant in that field at the moment and provide me loads of usefull resources that I can use to further improve my knowlodge. Also, in what comes to work experience, in most lines of work, that will be impossible to get unless through an internship program, and most of those are reserved to people with degrees or undergraduates because that's the best way to certify the person will have some knowledge of what they are doing. Online courses or claims of being self-taught, even if you're willig to prove your knowlodge, just won't do the trick most of the time. Now, you bring up an important question, is it worth it? Well, in my case, I believe it is. Firstly, because I don't believe I would be able to succeed in my field any other way. Secondly, I really love what I'm studying (most of it, there are always those supper fun courses everyone hates) so it really isn't that much of a burdon. But everyone has to look at what they want to be in future and choose a path accordingly. I have a friend that has joined a university in the Computer Engeneering branch, but he has taught himself at least 4 programming languages and has done many projects for fun by himself. He has had a job offer in the past, but refused because he was a minor and wasn't sure if he could work in our country full-time as a minor (I actually still don't know if you can, but that's an unimportant detail). He just joined university to get a degree because he will have an insane resumé as a result. Basically, he could have not joined uni and looked for a job, but he chose to go to uni to increase his "market value". That is a personal option everyone has to think about. In my country, depending on the institution, you have 3 year degrees, 2 year masters degrees or 5 years degrees+masters. You have to analyze your situation and decide if it's worth to study 3 more years, 5 more years or even more if you want something more advanced. In what comes to free college, I've given my opinion previously, I think if a country is able to have it, they should. In Portugal, you have to pay around 1000 euros for an entire year of university (in public institutioons, private ones can charge whatever they so desire, but usually public universities are better) and I think it should stay this way until we have a budget that allows that payment to be eliminated, something I'm affraid will probably never happen. TLDR: 1) I agree that many jobs don't require you go to university to be good at them, but I think most jobs will still require university degrees. 2) Many online courses will teach more and more skills and many more people will be able to be self taught and find great jobs, but univeristy is irreplaceable and often is the only way to find some work experience. 3) You bring up an important question, is it worth it? Really depends on the person and their situation. Imo, it's worth it for most, but people are free to do what they want. 4) In what comes to free college, I've given my opinion previously, I think if a country is able to have it, they should. EDIT: sorry for the huge wall of text.
2019-04-21 18:28
Thank you for the detailed answer, I've read it all, but I can't provide such thing myself, so I will try to be short: 1) It's hard to actually argue on that. It depends on how you count: by the number of students of the courses or by the number of courses. It depends on the country too. It also depends on the perspective from which you view on the matter. So I can say that your position may be correct with a decent chance. 2) The academic area will be the place where real science happens in the forseen future, and to join it you need to attend university. But to help maintaining education there's plenty of online communities that share information and discuss it. In some cases it can fully replace the institution of an institute (:D), in some cases, it's obviously impossible at the moment. 3) I agree that even some humanitarian disciplines can be a reasonable choice for certain type of uncertain people, but I think it's the right thing to encourage them to use the path of self-education. Also, the important point here is that it's not an argument "money that could have spent for education vs. diploma", but "money + years of time vs. diploma", as, in my opinion, the amount of time university takes from people is its the biggest disadvantage. 4) It's rather a matter of your political views than views on education. I'm a libertarian, and I support the free market and as low taxes as possible. From the economical point of view, it would create the wrong stimulus for the young (frequently unreasonable at such decisions) people to attend college parties and regularly get drunk while studying the easiest course possible instead of doing something actually working and studying. And, you know, "why did I pay my taxes if I/my child decided not to go to the university in the end???". Kids from poor households could use charity programmes as it's, for example, widely possible in the US universities if you're gifted and the university is big. Summarizing, I have to say that I respect your views, and I see that you're actually someone who knows what he's talking about (unlike those who didn't like me using the word "fool"). I'm sure from what you've told that what you're personally doing now is a greatly reasonable life choice. But when it comes to political choices such as should we have free education, what education should be subsidized, etc, or even if we want to say what part of studies could be done without universities, we need to have decent research on how the things actually are. Also, I partly was wrong when I didn't add, let's say for the sake of simplicity, scientists and naturally uncertain people from the list of potential college beneficiaries. Thank you again for such a worthy discussion and best of luck to you in studing your field! (and sorry in advance if I won't be able to properly answer to your arguments that you wanted to make in response to mine).
2019-04-21 21:52
Thank you for the wishes, best of luck to you too in your career choices :). I have nothing to add to points 1 and 2, I think we have clearly stated our opinions on both. In point 3, you bring up two very important things: firstly, yes, we should encourage people to be curious and teach themselves as much as they can, but, imo, university is a place where you can extend that search and that allows you to look for a job opportunity that will keep that journey going. Secondly, you mention the time you spend in college is the biggest disavantage, and you are absolutely correct. That is why it's still important for every person to look at their situation and determine which path is best for them, studying 3-5 or more years or learn as much as they can in their area of interest and try to get as much work experience as possible or any other option they can think of. As I said before, for most, I think uni would be benefitial. In regards to point 4, I just wanted to add a little bit more about my views. I also support the free market and believe that taxes should be the lowest they can, but what you said after I think isn't really related to college, but more to the way young people are these days. Drinking and partying is just what is considered fun by a lot of teenagers and young adults, and college parties are just one of the parties they can go too, if they aren't in college, they'll still find a way to get drunk, but i understand that they at least wouldn't be indirectly burning tax payers money, but rather their own. However, you have to consider the other side of the spectrum, those that can't afford university and would actually be hardworking and would be top students if they had the chance. I don't really know how social scolarships work outside of Portugal, what I know is that in my country, they are very limited in availability and actual funds, so I don't think that would really be enough to solve the problem of hardworking people that can't afford college. I think it would still be benefitial to have free college (if a countries budget allows it) because the contribution of the latter group would outweight the mistakes of the first group mentioned (this is just my opinion, I can't really state this as a fact, I just think their contributions would almost surely outshine any behaviour from the party-goers). To sum up, even though we have our disagreements, I respect your opinion aswell, it's actually nice for once to have a civilized argument about a polarizing topic, in HLTV of all places :D. I agree that research is fundamental to determine which political way of thinking would actually be the best, even though that might be impossible. I think my views have just one problem: we would have to trust our politicians a lot and their ability to manage the peoples taxes in a way that would actually benefit us, which seems extremly unlikely, but I hope one day that will be possible. Once again, best of luck in your life and thank you! :) (Don't worry, you responded to my arguments quite well) Edit: I guess I'm inspired today, once again, sorry for the big response. Edit 2: Spelling mistakes.
2019-04-21 22:35
#212
 | 
Cambodia litdabber21 
dude you are literally an hltv admin
2019-04-21 02:04
#258
 | 
Italy 1257Legend 
Quite frankly an embarrassment to this community. No wonder it goes down the shithole when you have this "veteran" arguing with people who decided to take a logical route after high school. Even if you disagree, you shouldn't act like a fucking retard.
2019-04-21 10:05
I know the truth is hard to handle sometimes, mate.
2019-04-21 11:16
= "Only rich people should be allowed to go to university" Dumbest most elitist shit I have ever heard.
2019-04-21 09:14
#259
 | 
Italy 1257Legend 
+1
2019-04-21 10:05
I've never said that. If you're a talented, hardworking guy, you will be able to pay out your student loans. If not really gifted (which is fine, I'm not either), but you're still hardworking, you can always find yourself with a good job without a diploma. The sad truth here is that not literally everyone is supposed to have prestigious job with a wage of 3 average salaries of your country.
2019-04-21 11:15
#281
 | 
Finland Jodecast 
well must be pretty bad for you considering russias average 400dollar income I can see why you are so mad
2019-04-21 11:44
That includes the assertion that multiple tens of thousands of student debt could not be a crippling blow to families who are living off a starvation wage.
2019-04-21 13:54
That includes assertion that you shoulnd't have taken those loans in the first place. It was YOUR choice. Of course, there's always a chance of unexpected circumstances that would ruin your ability to pay your bills, but it's not the case for the most of those thousands. And what do you suggest? Make me pay for your loan to study internet marketing in university? And make me pay for everyone who picks other similiar worthless courses by implementing free higher education? No, do it yourself (unless there was an obvious reason that prevented you to have an insurance from unexpected circumstances).
2019-04-21 21:05
Yes, thats exactly what I suggest. If all of that super-rich-money is just going to sit there in its millions and billions and get inherited from person to person without being put to use, better take it and invest it usefully. If you dont like taxation, go to guatemala, but dont be surprised if everything infrastructural is shit. Equality of opportunity (not equality of outcome) is the goal. Its not an equality of opportunity if the rich families get to stay rich with no problems and the poor people either cant make it at ALL or have to "work ultra-hard" for it (multiple jobs while studying? dont be ridiculous).
2019-04-21 22:36
#343
 | 
Germany nobodyCS 
+1
2019-04-22 00:14
#276
 | 
Finland Jodecast 
dumbest shit I heard all day
2019-04-21 11:33
#3
 | 
Poland Wypas17 
low taxes
2019-04-20 22:09
because ?
2019-04-20 23:04
#182
 | 
Poland mtumee 
he probably doesn't even pay taxes
2019-04-21 00:44
#285
 | 
Poland Wypas17 
its impossible no to pay them even if you child
2019-04-21 12:39
#319
 | 
Finland ZesseX 
No it's not
2019-04-21 21:14
tradingeconomics.com/country-list/person.. Just look at the countries with the highest, there must be a correlation there
2019-04-20 22:10
correlation of being the happiest countries ?
2019-04-20 22:11
yes, with a few exceptions
2019-04-20 22:12
#39
 | 
United Kingdom Klashnekoff 
this +1
2019-04-20 22:29
> there must be a correlation > with a few exceptions xDDDd
2019-04-21 00:31
Think about your comment again
2019-04-21 00:32
chad 60.00 lmao
2019-04-21 00:42
I dont pay 61% in tax WTF
2019-04-21 08:52
Im guessing that its the average, maybe other people in sweden pay more than 61%? Or the companies pay more and citizens less?
2019-04-21 09:16
average is 33%
2019-04-21 13:18
there's tax on everything you buy, your employer pays taxes for you aswell.
2019-04-21 11:15
low taxes
2019-04-20 22:11
so u even pay taxes ?
2019-04-20 23:08
yes
2019-04-20 23:09
thanks for the insight
2019-04-20 23:10
#66
 | 
Brazil BlueLighting 
Brazil has one of the most high taxes in products in the world... We know what we're talking about...
2019-04-20 23:16
well thats bad... u should make rest of the south america do the same and kill the drug cartells. Without the drug cartells south america could be a huge part of blobal.
2019-04-20 23:19
#77
 | 
Brazil BlueLighting 
well, drugs are a problem in Northeast and in Hell de Janeiro, not a big problem in the rest of the country. Our problem its our politicians. A car in here have something about 50% of tax... I mean... wtf....
2019-04-20 23:22
vote better
2019-04-20 23:26
#91
 | 
Brazil BlueLighting 
ez to say... hard to choose someone good in the middle of a lot of scum bags
2019-04-20 23:39
but didnt u just say drugs arent the whole country ? you all need to get free of drugs.
2019-04-20 23:41
#175
 | 
Brazil BlueLighting 
politicians here don't steal because of drug dealers, they steal because they want to have an easy life with money coming from our taxes, simple as that.
2019-04-21 00:38
I don't mind paying high taxes, I'm not poor men))))
2019-04-20 22:11
ok men
2019-04-20 23:13
100% tax and everything for free
2019-04-20 22:11
hey i've seen this one before
2019-04-20 23:57
Wait.. what
2019-04-21 20:19
tax the rich 90%
2019-04-20 22:11
So being talented has no reward. Thats no way to go.
2019-04-20 22:14
It is rewarding. They will still find tax-loopholes.
2019-04-20 22:15
we werent talking about tax-loopholes. Why we couldnt come up with a method of taxing where rich doesnt have to find loop-holes ? they are already paying more taxes than normal people even if the rate was the same.
2019-04-20 22:17
I never said rich arent coming up with loopholes... That link is very public information.
2019-04-20 22:20
TAX THEM TO DEATH
2019-04-20 22:21
Or maybe make them to pay the tax without taxing them to death ? Jeff bezos is a brialliant mind even tho he is killing the e-market.
2019-04-20 22:23
if he paid 90% taxes he would still have 15 billion $
2019-04-20 22:28
okay ? do you think that a complete retard could build a empire worth of 150b ? no. We should let people with talent to make money but ofc tax them like we do normal population or even more but not to death.
2019-04-20 22:31
Nazi
2019-04-21 08:33
Since when rich people are talented? Some are, but most of rich people inherited their situation.
2019-04-21 00:02
#139
 | 
Portugal nakbarone 
so what
2019-04-21 00:05
So his message is irrelevant.
2019-04-21 00:07
i was talking about talent not about about heritance...
2019-04-21 00:06
And most of talented people are not part of the rich, so your message is irrelevant. BTW, 10 of 1 billion is still 100 million. At this point, 100 200 or 500 millions is not really different as a "reward for your talent".
2019-04-21 00:09
And your parents are your clone (same person), that means they deserve it.
2019-04-21 02:27
Then the rich take their money, dismiss their employees and go to another country. What would you do then?
2019-04-20 22:43
A one world Communist conspiracy.
2019-04-21 02:35
#67
 | 
Brazil BlueLighting 
lmao, economy in a nutshell
2019-04-20 23:16
#10
 | 
Netherlands installwizard 
high tax for sure
2019-04-20 22:12
So people tryna study has to study for 8hrs + work 8rs to pay rent and buy food ?
2019-04-20 22:15
you dont understand how this works do you?
2019-04-20 22:17
i guess so... tell me where i went wrong ?
2019-04-20 22:21
do you think your tax money just disappears down a hole??
2019-04-20 22:24
Ofc not. But it goes to the wrong places.
2019-04-20 22:25
yea, here in norway we have an annual money burning contest set up by the goverment
2019-04-20 22:26
not even funny because u fucks could have that :D u have like 500 mrd safety fund right ? mean while in finland we have like 153 mrd in debt :/
2019-04-20 22:29
nbim.no/no/ you can see the money flow live
2019-04-20 22:30
#69
 | 
Brazil BlueLighting 
in here our taxes go to politicians pockets, so yes... "money just disappears down a hole"
2019-04-20 23:17
#28
 | 
Netherlands installwizard 
that should not be necessary when the government is able to make sure those extra funds are properly spread. Making sure the younger people who study get some sort of allowance or tax cut from the government so they can focus more on actual studying would be a vital part in that.
2019-04-20 22:23
#13
 | 
United States southamerican 
I'd say 17-29% for middle class. 65% for the super rich
2019-04-20 22:15
#36
 | 
Latvia BionicRick 
Imagine thinking it's fair to take more than half of someone's earnings just because he has created a product/service that people need/want. I don't know how anyone is still surprised the rich look for tax loopholes, move their business to other countries etc.
2019-04-20 22:28
#71
 | 
Brazil BlueLighting 
at least someone in here have a brain... good.
2019-04-20 23:18
Rich people created product ? Most did not. I can considered as rich, yet I never created product or services. Before spreading such non sense, you should look at sociology studies about wealthiest people.
2019-04-21 00:04
#158
 | 
United States 1Will 
Rich in baguette land = poverty everywhere else
2019-04-21 00:19
I'm sure 99% of hltv people (meaning a very international audience) aware of my wealth situation would disagree with you.
2019-04-21 00:25
#179
 | 
Latvia BionicRick 
There are only a handful of ways to get rich. You can create something that is in high demand (e.g. Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates etc.) You can make smart and calculated investments to multiply your wealth (e.g. Warren Buffet) You can be ridicilously good at something (e.g. athletes) Anyone in these 3 categories deserves their wealth and should not be legally robbed via tax. It is of course possible to win the lottery, inherit wealth etc. and get rich by doing virtually nothing, in which case it is kind of undeserved but this sort of RNG adds some fun to the mix.
2019-04-21 00:41
Even Buffet says he has to pay more in taxes but ok.Summing up huge amounts of wealth hurts the economy if you have them sitting and not re investing .
2019-04-21 02:09
#295
 | 
Latvia BionicRick 
Almost none of the super-rich people are just "sitting" on a pile of cash. Their net worth is calculated through all of their investments, equity, real estate etc. For example, Bezos is rich because of his huge stack of shares in Amazon. It's almost impossible for him to actually transform that into money, even though Amazon stock is fairly liquid, if he wanted to sell off billions of dollars worth of stock in an instant, it'd crash the price.
2019-04-21 17:26
Apple has 250 billions sitting.Also you are kinda wrong here.Selling all of his shares means he is selling his company basicly.Monsanto was sold quite a bit higher than its share price at that moment not lower.And by investing I don't mean investing in derivatives and trying to make money out of money .
2019-04-22 00:02
#368
 | 
Latvia BionicRick 
You said rich people are sitting on cash, now you're calling out one company that has a stockpile of cash. Make up your mind. Yes, selling his shares would be the same as selling his company, that's why they're called SHARES. That doesn't change the fact that he isn't sitting on cash, he's sitting on shares worth a load of cash.
2019-04-23 21:40
#261
 | 
Italy 1257Legend 
+1
2019-04-21 10:06
found the guy that doesn't know how tax brackets work
2019-04-21 20:40
#367
 | 
Latvia BionicRick 
I know exactly how tax brackets work. I don't think you know how basic math works.
2019-04-23 21:34
it's nonsense that low taxes will make things worse for the general public the problem lies with the fact that governments use convoluted pathways and the pig bureaucrats obsessively obfuscate everything your money is going down the drain then again, those people need to be employed to keep the facade going employment for the sake of social order, truly disgusting
2019-04-20 22:16
Idk about turkey the tax money isnt going to the pockets of politicians other than their pay. Its just that it goes to the wrong places.
2019-04-20 22:18
You only say those things because you live in a place with no real democracy, freedom and where corruption is rampant. I well functioning democracies with no corruption no money goes down the drain, instead the money works for everyone ensuring a society where everybody has the freedom to pursue their own happiness and a safety net for those that fail.
2019-04-20 22:23
Thats not true! you know as me that the politicians in denmark is so bad at have to use the money! look at dsb with the c4 trains. . corruption maybe not. but ppl there use our money so bad that its insane. for that tax i pay i dont get shit for it. the road is a mess. a Brita nielsen steal 111mio. and skat did knew about it, then its a joke im okay to pay that tax. but i cant the politicians to do better with my money!
2019-04-20 23:32
If you think you get nothing apparently you have never been abroad. I didn't say everything is perfect or that there are not things which needs improving, but on average things here are working very well and you'd be shocked on how bad things are in many other places including those you might think work better than here. There is going to be elections both for the EU and for the our parliament in the next months. If you're not happy then make sure to vote or even better, get involved and help change things for the better.
2019-04-20 23:50
You truly are fucking retarded.
2019-04-21 00:44
your right that our vison is better than many other countries. But I still think it could be much better. im okay to pay so much tax. But I also want something for my money. It could do so much better. Unfortunately, we probably have some of the world's worst policies, no they are not corrupt! Unfortunately, but they have no experience. And being politics is no way for me. why? democracy is one of the most important things. But just as good it is. just as devastation it is to control a country. It is impossible to get any sense through. at a private company. there is 1 that decides. and others can come up with ideas. You make every effort to choose the right decision. To make even more money. politics there are kindergartens left and right. and they are all opposed to each other's idea because they did not come up with the idea themselves. they work for themselves and not Denmark (and yes i know i cant say that and its not totaly true.)
2019-04-21 10:45
There is a quote about Democracy, if I am not mistaken it is by Churchill and the gist is that Democracy is the least bad way of Government. I hold that to be true. You mention private companies and yes, things there are very simple however it is also very simple what purpose such companies has as they are all essentially about making as many money to the owner as possible. Yet, even though that is "simple" many companies fails in doing that only we tend to mostly notice those that are very successful.
2019-04-21 12:41
If you looked at the public then ALT would be closed for a long time ago if they could run around themselves. Often, they are making new initiatives that cost a lot of money, so finding out it didn't work, they also spend even more money on something new. There is a wrong approach. besides that, they have spent just as much money finding out the solution that they first tried was the right one. the public is a joke. Yes, there are also many companies that do not run well. But that's because there are many who sell the same thing. and Danes do not think more locally than in the old days. But who pays for Denmark to run? it does private companies.
2019-04-21 12:49
Depends on the country. For the smaller countries I think that the benefits achieved with the welfare state do support having higher taxes, whereas somewhere like in the US where a welfare state isn't really possible, because it is too large, I think that lower taxes should be the default.
2019-04-20 22:17
But still u have alot of unemployed living off of welfare.
2019-04-20 22:35
I don’t deny that, which is why I think that especially the welfare system regarding unemployment support should be rebranded. Ideally there should be a requirement to show that you are actively looking for work to qualify for the payments.
2019-04-20 22:50
Which we have in the high tax countries. To receive welfare u gotta be looking for a job. In the countriest they expect you to be looking and be ready to accept for a job.
2019-04-20 22:53
No tax, no government. ye boi.
2019-04-20 22:21
ah yes the perfect esport country
2019-04-20 22:24
very high tax
2019-04-20 22:23
#46
 | 
Poland FitPolak 
Current taxes are ok, what we need is to simplify taxes
2019-04-20 22:45
no1 knows about polish taxes so do specify
2019-04-20 22:46
#49
 | 
Poland FitPolak 
Taxes are nearly the same in most of countries % of taking from people is different
2019-04-20 22:47
so what do you mean about simplyfying taxes ?
2019-04-20 22:48
#52
 | 
Sweden mrarrogant 
imo free school from 6-18 y/o, free healthcare, minimalistic welfare are essential. altho i like the idea of free uni as it allows more lower class to better their life, but i don't wanna pay tax money to ppl who study art or gender studies etc
2019-04-20 22:52
I agreed with the beginning of ur message but... Free school until ur 18, then loan to make trhought UNI. But the fact is that the world is changing. As much as u hate it. Gender studies might employ tons of people in the future and they wont ask for ur opinion. Also there is alot of artists who pay more taxes than normal lads.
2019-04-20 22:57
#59
 | 
United Kingdom XNL 
Well we have low taxes, free schools (minus uni, that's a bit different) and free healthcare.
2019-04-20 23:11
Do you prefer it over high taxes ?
2019-04-20 23:12
#99
 | 
United Kingdom XNL 
Well we have the benefits of paying high taxes when most people only pay 20%. The max you'll pay in the UK is 45%, but you have to be earning over £150,000 to be paying that much.
2019-04-20 23:43
nice answer that never answered my question :)
2019-04-22 00:13
#349
 | 
United Kingdom XNL 
The answer isn't as straight forward as low tax or high tax.
2019-04-22 00:45
Well that is true but in average ? Obviously diff countries are gonna tax different shit differently.
2019-04-22 00:45
Low tax I would rather stay healthy myself and have to pay for my own health care than having obese pigs eat my tax money in a free health care system.
2019-04-20 23:12
uhh... so ur basically for high tax ?
2019-04-20 23:14
No, In the UK, health care is free, I would rather pay for my own health care than have obese people suck up all of the resources and tax money, in a free service (with high taxes)
2019-04-20 23:18
So ur students are strugling to pay the rent while obese lads are paying rent ?
2019-04-20 23:20
Yea, our students are struggling to pay rent but how is tax related to this
2019-04-20 23:21
#209
 | 
United Kingdom XNL 
Well an increase in tax could give students free housing. Of course that wouldn't be the case as we have more important things to worry about, but that's an example of what higher taxes could do.
2019-04-21 02:02
#313
 | 
Denmark Weylyn2 
yes obese people suck
2019-04-21 20:35
TAX OMEGALUL u mean free extra money for our thief politicians ?
2019-04-20 23:14
idk about slovaks but i cant see the money that is paid to my politicians and as much as it is, it is not close to the money we spend on the wrong things.
2019-04-20 23:17
In our state money magicaly disapears, lets say they want to build a highway, they choose a wierd company that does it for double the amount it could be done, and it takes twice the time, and the extra money just goes to someones pocket... now change highway for anything else and the same principle happends...
2019-04-20 23:29
#282
frozen | 
Slovakia S1W0 
This is true Feelsbadman
2019-04-21 11:48
what we have now is good imo so high?
2019-04-20 23:14
not sure man
2019-04-20 23:19
Mix of both I want free education for everyone but i dont want to pay for fat peoples knee problems or smokers lung cancers. I guess thats a whole different topic on how to spend those tax moneys.
2019-04-20 23:20
So ur basically saying u wanna pay ur taxes for good but not bad... The thing is taxes are gonna be used for both. ur sick granny is gonna be paid with those taxes.
2019-04-20 23:29
you could set it up so only sicknesses that aren't a result of your bad choices are taken care of
2019-04-20 23:41
No i could not. Im not in a position for that.
2019-04-20 23:43
funny
2019-04-21 00:08
Its good that my granny is getting tax moneys. She has never been fat or smoked. Worked for her whole life and deserves all the help she can get. Tax moneys should go to those who deserve it
2019-04-21 08:28
+1 More intelligent people are healthier in average. Fact. Fuck paying for dumb people obesity, lung cancer or drunker road injuries.
2019-04-20 23:50
#210
 | 
United Kingdom XNL 
Some people get lung cancer without smoking a day in their life. You're post is pure ignorance.
2019-04-21 02:03
Then it is unfair. Just like being run over by a random car when crossing the street is unfair. Just like being struck by lightning is unfair. And then what ? It doesn't legitimize being unfair to other people that are not responsible of your lung cancer by making them pay.
2019-04-21 02:06
#216
 | 
United Kingdom XNL 
What are you even talking about?
2019-04-21 02:07
Simply saying that the universe is unfair and that it doesn't mean other people should pay you with their own earned money to protect you from the universe. Gov should protect you against other's people bad behavior, not your own behavior or the universe randomness.
2019-04-21 02:11
#222
 | 
United Kingdom XNL 
So if I get shot, I shouldn't be entitled to free healthcare?
2019-04-21 02:13
"Gov should protect you against other's people bad behavior" Did you even read ?
2019-04-21 02:14
#224
 | 
United Kingdom XNL 
Your logic is awful. So if I get cancer I can rot and die, but if I get shot then I'm able to get treatment.
2019-04-21 02:17
That is not how it works though. If you get cancer, you can still pay for treatment. You can work, or ask for your relatives help or ask a bank. Maybe you already have an insurance like most people in non-socialist healtcare countries ? There are plenty of options. If you get shot, the other guy will pay for you OR you will have limited gov help. Anyway, if you want to play with emotion instead of logics, I am not your guy. Whataboutery is not enough to prove a system wrong.
2019-04-21 02:31
#252
 | 
United Kingdom XNL 
Well we have the best healthcare in the world (as rated last year) and ours is free. Our system works just fine.
2019-04-21 09:50
If putting trillions of debt on future generations is fine, then yes. It is fine. Myself, I believe the oppposite. I believe this is a catrastrophe and I blame it on the short-sightness of our politicians and their eagerness to give away """free stuff""" so they get reelected. Social programs only work fine when the economy is booming, on behalf of hard-working, productive people that create surplus wealth. As soon as the recession hit, it becomes an economic nightmare. It is a time bomb and nobody has the balls to make anything about it. ft.com/content/f37cace3-ad91-3e4d-99e7-a.. & express.co.uk/finance/city/746042/Britai.. Sorry if I can't change your mind. You and the others will realize how wrong you were the day the economy finally crashes like it did in Greece. Then the social programs will be over, you will have no alternative, and no more public money to help anyone. I just pray it will be for our generation and not my kids.
2019-04-21 12:56
Then those people should get free healthcare #95 said it well
2019-04-21 08:29
#260
 | 
United Kingdom XNL 
Well we have free healthcare in the UK and it was statistically the best in the world last year. Just because it's free, doesn't mean the quality of the care will drop. Look at the US, their healthcare is awful.
2019-04-21 10:06
Facts but u are generalizing here... that no way to go.
2019-04-22 00:12
#81
Aleksib | 
Finland xore1 
poor people want high tax cuz they dont have to pay much more and they enjoy most of the benefits
2019-04-20 23:30
they dont pay taxes so ur 2nd argument is pure air.
2019-04-20 23:37
#96
Aleksib | 
Finland xore1 
no the benefits with tax money is made to help poor people rich people pay most of the taxes
2019-04-20 23:41
Feels like alot of edited messages out here... But the biggest thing out here is that i am not about to tax rich people more than normal people... im about taxing people with even count.
2019-04-20 23:46
#117
Aleksib | 
Finland xore1 
so you tax people with income of 2000 per month the same amount of euros than people with 7000 per month?
2019-04-20 23:51
Yes. Tax people with talent the same as people without talent but DONT TAX THEM MORE.
2019-04-20 23:54
why would you want to have high taxes? to pay more money to gypsies, refugees or what?
2019-04-20 23:30
To pay for the humans.
2019-04-20 23:37
i dont want to share with anybody
2019-04-20 23:38
Okay so ur stance to having high taxes are settled.
2019-04-20 23:39
Tax money should only fund universal institutions. No reason to help a specific group, fuck that mindset.
2019-04-20 23:40
High taxes... I don´t want sth like Detroit in my country tbh
2019-04-20 23:33
1,2 million homeless people in Germany, how is your "high tax" going ? Taxes are not the only, not even the main factor in crime and poverty.
2019-04-20 23:39
1,2 Mio? Are you drunk?
2019-04-21 01:40
I was an estimation. neweurope.eu/article/150-rise-number-hom.. If you have the exact number today, I would appreciate.
2019-04-21 01:53
#213
 | 
United Kingdom XNL 
This article is super old.
2019-04-21 02:05
Totally. Because as I said, It was an estimation for 2018. However, since no particular housing program was launched by Germany since then, it would be dumb to believe the problems magically disappeared.
2019-04-21 02:08
#221
 | 
United Kingdom XNL 
Well I can't find any statistics for last year to prove if it did go up or down.
2019-04-21 02:11
You are aware of the refugee crisis and the influx of hundreds of thousands of destitute and unskilled asylum seekers?
2019-04-21 21:11
"Wir schaffen das" and all, I am very aware of that. But it was no natural disaster, your government asked for it. However, the number is still insane even taking that into account. The approximation is 600'000 native homeless and 600'000 refugees. In France we have a grand total of 200'000 homeless. 6 times less than Germany, and 3 times less than native German homeless people.
2019-04-21 21:16
I don´t think those numbers are accurate tbh. But if they are it really isn´t connected to taxation whatsoever. There is very affordable housing in east germany (Brandeburg, Saxony eg.) But the problem is that no one wants to live there since the regions were under soviet control until the reunification of germany. They are severly underdeveloped and lack good job opportunies. Aditionally imagine how the situation would look like with low taxes...
2019-04-21 21:42
Imo uk has it pretty good. Taxes arent ridiculously high, but we have decent welfare, and the nhs does the job. Our higher education funding system seems fair too.
2019-04-20 23:33
Pay £9k a year for 3 years to go to university Get into £30k debt before you have a job, Before it used to be 100% free of charge
2019-04-20 23:43
More like £45k once you take into account maintenance loans. The repayment system is very fair tho and you only pay the fee backs if you earm a high wage. Going to university is a great opportunity and worth every penny imo
2019-04-21 00:39
#217
 | 
United Kingdom XNL 
Anyone who thinks university is a bad investment is an idiot.
2019-04-21 02:07
So many people go to uni without a care in the world for their studies or future career and then wonder wonder why it’s a waste of money when they graduate and can’t find a well paid job.
2019-04-21 09:56
#257
 | 
United Kingdom XNL 
That's true. The system we have does allow people to do that, but then they won't be forced to pay anything back (if they don't earn enough).
2019-04-21 10:04
High taxes doesn't equal lower school/health prices. What's matter is the quality of the school compared to the price, not the price alone. If you pay less to go to a shittier school, you are not winning a cent. Also public administration is a terrible waste of money so it is ALWAYS less cost effective.
2019-04-20 23:38
"It is amazing that people who think we cannot afford to pay for doctors, hospitals, and medication somehow think that we can afford to pay for doctors, hospitals, medication and a government bureaucracy to administer it." T. Sowell
2019-04-20 23:41
+9999999
2019-04-20 23:45
Because an insurance based private healthcare system is not bureaucratic at all?? around 18 % of US gdp is spent on healthcare compared to 10-12% in european countries. They spend more and often receive a comparably worse service. for a society to function well you need to pool risk through insurance or a nationalised service paid for by taxes. Imagine having to save large sums of money incase you or a family member got ill and knowing that even then if disaster strikes youre fucked.
2019-04-21 00:46
The thing is that the government ALWAYS need a bigger administration, since it also has the goal of collecting and redistributing money + it needs to work with many other gouvernemental administrations + it is more regulated + public servants have special status and benefits. So yes : gov bureaucracy is bigger, worse and a terrible waste of money. Yes, the public healthcare in the US is shit because the US is not a socialist system (which makes it even worse) hence why Trump wants to remove the Obamacare and he's right. It is a money sinkhole. 90% of workers in the US already have corporate healthcare anyway. But I don't see how it helps your point, you just shown that public healthcare are expensive. "Imagine having to save large sums of money incase you or a family member got ill and knowing that even then if disaster strikes youre fucked." So what you are saying is : either you are not cautious and fucked, or smart and ok. Where do I sign ? I'm tired of paying taxes for unhealthy people because they smoke or are fat fucks, and I'm tired of the government doing what I could do myself at a more expensive price.
2019-04-21 01:10
The US healthcare system was bloated before obamacare. US healthcare is expensive because of administrative costs even tho its private so youre wrong in that regard. They also pay more for drugs since they cant use collective bargining power, which they could do if they used a nationalised service. What I was saying was that even if youre smart and save, you could get hit with a six figure bill for cancer treatment and not be able to afford it.
2019-04-21 01:09
1) One of the biggest public expenditures by the federal government is healthcare. 2) U.S Americans pay more for drugs because the price to get a new drug out after all the taxes and regulations by the DEA is absolute fucking insanity , BILLIONS of dollars all out of the lab. pocket. 3) You lefties always use the extreme outliers to spread your bullshit , no , a system that decimates the fiscal health of the country and puts it under trillions of external debt is NOT healthy , i dont care how popular it might be.
2019-04-21 13:57
Obamacare is publicy funded health insurance. Not really comparable to a nationalised health service. Yes it’s expensive but that simply shows how costly private health care is. The US healthcare system is hugely inefficient (estimated 25-30% is administrative costs). Having a nationalised service would be more economically efficient. I’m not left wing, I just appreciate sound economic policy. A lack of a welfare system necessitates high a high saving rate (look at China for an example). Not having to worry about having your life destroyed by a huge medical bill gives you a lot of freedom which is well worth the higher tax.
2019-04-21 17:52
You are veeeery far on the left. Statizing sectors of the private economy is never "efficient" it's just great in the short term and terrible in the long term , you keep talking about how bad healthcare in the u.s is but the hundreds of thousands of canadians who cross the border to get attended in u.s private institutions completly disagree, public healthcare is not sustainable , it is extremely popular and it will win you a bunch of elections but in reality it destroys progress , it's decline , we have public health in Argentina , Brasil , Venezuela and bunch of other alt left shithole s.a countries , and for some reason you lefties seem to think that you wont end up with the same result in the long term "because we're better" "it doesn't work there cuz...corruption" ... pfff If you're an irresponsible idiot get fucked , if you're responsible and you take care of your health and financials you wont get destroyed by a medical bill , if Europe wants to keep basing their economy in sentimentalism populism and outliers you're free to do so but who will you blame in the future when you end up looking like Cuba???? certainly not "the empire" right?
2019-04-21 18:04
In the third world it might not work buts it’s great here in the uk
2019-04-21 19:06
Maybe in Western Europe , but mainly because you havent been doing this for a while and it already has taken a huge toll on the country , you just don't care about it. France and UK are in absolute bankrupt , drowned in debt and with terribly low growth rates , imagine running this system for 70 years???? you think is a lot and you don't care because you're probably a teenager who can't see past the next week , in 70 years your grandkids will probably still be underaged , would you really not care if the country they recieve is shittier because of your absolute fucking ignorance??? But you're aproaching the whole thing from a terrible standpoint , see , your country didn't become great because of big government giving free stuff to everyone or even just the poor , fighting for social justice , no wtf....your country was in shambles after WW2 and they didnt get back to the top with big government , regulations everywhere and anti capitalist anti successful anti millionaires rethoric nonsense wtf? rofl , your country got back to being one of the best countries in the world embracing capitalism , embracing free market , embracing low regulations and in reality, low taxes because even though the system was retarded the vast majority of the taxes in the 40's 50's and early 60's in UK were deductible and/or nobody paid them. That created the stability and purchasing power that your generation has today and you want to throw it all away because you've been fooled into believing that this equality and social justice agenda are anything else besides retarded , you're about to make a terrible mistake and you have no clue what you're talking about. Be honest and think about the future , put your feelings aside and do what's best for your kids , their kids and so on.
2019-04-21 23:58
The nhs was founded in 1948 just so you know. Dergulation of financial services and neo liberal monetary policy of low interest rates have led to high debt levels, not social welfare programs as you think. Productivity growth is low not because of spending on healthcare thats not only a vast over simplifaction but just also wrong. When I was interviewed for a job at the bank of england a senior manager asked me about problems the bank will face and I brought up the structural issues within the uk economy to do with productivity. He fobbed it off and said thats not really the banks problem. Just shows they only really care about london and financial services.
2019-04-22 01:42
"Neo Liberalism" Im out.
2019-04-22 03:03
You clearly dont know what youre takimg about so probably for the best xD
2019-04-22 09:46
You european leftist beta cucks really have no clue wtf is going on do you?
2019-04-20 23:41
Do enlighten me..
2019-04-20 23:47
I dont think anyone could , you're too far on the spectrum by now.
2019-04-20 23:47
So basically u have no arguments..................
2019-04-20 23:49
Only people in rich, capitalist countries want to go full-on tax and socialism... because they don't understand what that really means. They are spoiled, lazy kids wishing for a nanny state. Every people that ever suffered from real socialism, want to escape it and pray for capitalism. Hence why so many South Americans are violently against it. Fact.
2019-04-20 23:48
Yeah it blows my mind how little they care about history and what went on in their neighbour countries , is not like you gotta cross the river to know what big government , protectionism , isolation and "free" stuff does to a country. If the kids doing these kinds of threads and comments don't learn some basic economics and history and dont get out into the real world , europe is doomed.
2019-04-20 23:51
"bUt IT wAsNt REal sOCiAliSm" Hayek, Keynes, Friedman, Samuelson... The best modern economists warned us against the return and the developpement of big states, high taxes and socialist institutions, yet generation Z kids somehow believe their 10 IQ knowledge is more important than their works.
2019-04-21 00:01
8/8 nick
2019-04-20 23:48
maksaisitko muka vähemmä veroi ?
2019-04-20 23:50
maksaisin
2019-04-20 23:58
en usko
2019-04-22 00:11
For starters, I want everyone to pay their taxes. As it stands, the richest people, biggest earners and largest money moving institutions all avoid paying taxes yet have far more rights than any regular person
2019-04-20 23:49
All i i want is normal lads and the biggest earnest to pay taxes...
2019-04-20 23:51
That is actually a real problem, even if I'm against taxes. If rich people and companies actually paid everytime they had to, even low taxes, It would be much easier to garanty decent funding for the much-needed institutions.
2019-04-20 23:53
I think the state of the world is bizarre and we are very powerless. The rich do what do want and they do so entirely without consequences. The investors are the mayan gods and the working class (or anynone not born rich for that matter) is the bloody sacrifice. I couldn't name a politician in the last 10 years that actually cared about justice and people and actually had influence if I tried.
2019-04-21 00:01
I dont mind if tax money gets spent on good things. But 1 million dollars on electric bicycles is a heck no from me.
2019-04-20 23:50
! million dollars of what money ? money spent on electric bikes aint waste unless there was something more worth while.
2019-04-20 23:52
tax payers money. Also tax money spent on art, and unecessary authorities is theft. The police's budget got cut, we have a failing intergraton project, severe lack of resources in health care, bad border controls, an underfunded railroad network and a lack of resources in the elderly care. Spending tax payers money on electric bikes when all of these need huge funds is theft.
2019-04-20 23:58
Spending money on electric bikes is simply clientelism. It is pure virtue signaling for the bourgeois.
2019-04-21 00:13
I say like tax middle class etc at around 15-20% while the rich have to pay 25-30% tax. And companies like Amazon ESPECIALLY need to pay their share instead of getting away with not paying any. And I couldn't care less about how high taxes are as long as they're going to shit that will actually benefit this country.
2019-04-20 23:50
Your name scares me
2019-04-20 23:52
delete urself im the original
2019-04-20 23:55
Less _ = Better
2019-04-20 23:56
_= isnt a mathemathical operator.... just .... delete...
2019-04-20 23:56
only makes it worse...
2019-04-21 00:00
estonia has low taxes and i like estonia, so i prefer low taxes.
2019-04-20 23:55
so there is no way why u could understand high taxes ?
2019-04-20 23:58
i do understand high tax!1
2019-04-20 23:58
What do u think about them ? high taxes that is.
2019-04-22 00:09
high taxes is not good in my opinion because its like the government rules you. yes they make the hospitals, police, schools and other stuff cheaper... but maybe i dont want that? i want to own my own life, and i pay for stuff that i really want, and i want to work for that.
2019-04-22 11:57
How i can pay for something that's free? I always thought that i don't need to pay for free stuff...
2019-04-20 23:58
Have fun paying 50euros for one quick meet with a doc
2019-04-20 23:59
One time in a year it's nothing.
2019-04-21 00:06
+1
2019-04-21 00:25
and thats how you die. cancer. and other illnesses are important to be found quickly. when it costs money, you never get to a doctor
2019-04-21 10:53
i love fucking scary shits like you. that's the biggest problem in this world. "free medicine" is totally shit because people don't care about what they are eating. if they will pay for doctor every time it may encourage them to be interested in it. if not, ok, no problem for me, i don't want to pay for healing retarded ppl who don't care. So tell me, why i should care if they don't? if you have cancer it's mostly end for you. you have less then 5% to be alive. i don't want pay for retarded healing for big money to kill u. u can easily dead without it.
2019-04-21 11:41
You showed just how ignorant you can be to whole hltv. Many are cured of cancer. but only if they find it in time. And again you show how ignorant you can be. Cancer comes all the possible reasons. even if you eat healthy. and live healthy. Your example just shows that if 5% from the pole survives cancer then your "not medical care" is so bad for you! or your medical care is so bad! in denmark there is a 60% chance of surviving after 5 years. Also, there is a good chance that you will be cancer free after that. When doctors can see that you are so late that you cannot survive, you will not be treated either. But helps you die without pain Remember, people do not always choose to become ill intentionally. many lives healthy. but still gets sick. free medical care and will always be! the best you can have in your country! anbd then you and others can say what you want. But you only says it because you can afford it!! Also, I would call you super arrogant in every way. I can by no means see the fun that children cannot be treated because their parents have been unlucky in life! Besides that if what you pay in insurance was removed and put on tax you will never feel it. When you have free medical care, no one is going to make money either. so it would also be cheaper
2019-04-21 12:36
high taxes, because whatever government choice about how to spend them it won't be worst that no or low taxes. Except if they take it for themselves.
2019-04-21 00:06
So you are saying that government are necessarily more competent and know better what the people want and need ? That is laughable. Especially since we both are from France where the government single-handedly DESTROYED our economy and services.
2019-04-21 00:13
For your very exemple : France. When state take your money for social cause, they can spread it amongst various things : elder, schools, healthcare, security, monuments, whatever. When private people give their money : 1 billions euros in 48h to rebuild a church while 500 people die in the street every years. So yes, government exist for the very reason to be more competent than its people on what is needed. Because it is its very meaning to have a wider vision, not just a narrow vision on personnal issues or trend like individuals have. About your judgement on our economy and services, it is up to you, but I beg to disagree. France is world champion in dividend for shareholders, one of the best (beside northern countries) in reducing inequities. I could keep going for hours, but most of people talking like you are just people that have absolutely no idea how it is abroad. This being said, you can disagree on french policies, I am, but that's not the point.
2019-04-21 00:23
Your argument on Notre-Dame is lame and I'm actually quite disappointed to hear such ridiculous economic non-sense from you. 1) The 1 billion were not going to homeless people anyway so your argument doesn't work 2) The 1 billion are going to be used for paying actual workers or raw material, meaning income taxes + TVA = most of that money will come back to the state anyway instead of staying in banks or buying stock actions. 3) People either give money for whatever they want or you destroy the very meaning of working and being paid. Are you in favor of removing every liberties to prevent people from doing, not bad things, but instead things YOU dislike or the government dislike ? Dangerous way of thinking.
2019-04-21 00:30
1. yes this 1 billion is not going for the poor or any other cause, because this one billion is not handled by the state but by individuals, it is exactly my point. 2. I agree that one billion will be used as what we call a stimulative policy, if you think this is a good way to use money, then you should have voted for Hamon or Melechon. BTW, there will be no TVA involved in this particular rebuild neither wage of the worker will be the main cost of it but whatever this is just a detail of this particular situation. 3. Who said we should take 100% of people wage as taxes? I don't and I didn't read it at all. So this kind of overstatement is, as you said, disappointing. I hope this is some kind of misstep from you, so if you come back with some more objective arguments, as you did before, I'd gladly answer to it.
2019-04-21 00:39
1) But if the state say "I'm going to take your 1 billion", then the 1 billion or the people possessing it will disappear. Why stay in a country that wish only to take away all your money without giving anything in return ? That is not selfishness but common sense. 2) Problem is basically every politician in France is too socialist for me, even MLP or Dupont-Aignan. 3) It is not what I meant. You believe than the gov should take as much as possible because it makes better use of it, I believe it is the other way around. Simple as that. With 50% of taxes instead of 30%, you still lost a lot of your liberty of choice.
2019-04-21 00:43
1. How the money from taxes just disappear? About Notre Dame rebuild, you talked about workers wage, then took back in taxes on revenues or VAT (= TVA in english). It is the very same with taxes : it pay state employes. Don't you think policemen pay taxes? Don't you think their income is spend in local (and real) economy? 2. Yet you genuinely said stimulative policies are (or can be) good, which is a far left stance today (used to be more common decades ago). Anyway this is your political choice, and I am no one to judge you. 3. Yes we agree on more taxes = less liberties of choice for you (assuming you are the taxed one ofc) but it also mean more liberties to others. As you took some silly comparition with subsaharian countries, I'll give you another silly (yet closer as the relative purchasing power is close) exemple : ask americans with kids what sacrifice (aka no choice) they have to make to send their child to post graduation scholarship, vs ask europeans. Europeans (for most of them) don't have to chose between vacations and their children studies, aka they have more liberties. But more importantly, as I said before, private interest sum is not the best general interest, if you want another exemple: global warming. Assuming it is not a hoax (or you can troll it is, but in this case our talk ends here) no one want to do (private interest) what's needed for our grand children to have a life like we know, yet it is mandatory if we want so. Why? Because our private perspective can't handle the larger scope. For this very exemple long term duration, or for previous subject, all subject were money is needed, you have no clue about it til you need this services and or infrastructure. It seems to me you are kind of libertarian. And as you said before, sub saharian countries life is nothing like ours. Ask yourself why. A libertarian heaven is Somalia : no taxes, total freedom. I'm not sure somalies are happier than those tax blood sucked french
2019-04-21 01:12
1) You don't understand. I simply said that rich people will go to another country or change the tax adress of the company (thanks the EU for Ireland tax loophole). 2) To me, left/right is about progessivism or conservatism. It is debatable of course. 3) Being dependant is the opposite of liberty to me. Sorry. If your health/retirement/housing/education is "cared" by gov it is not liberty at all. Your "sacrifice" is the opposite of "no choice" : nobody force you to have kids or giving all your money to raise them. If you are poor and can't afford it... well. Bad luck I guess. But you should know that even with public education, social climbing remains limited -> poor/uneducated people still tend to have poor/uneducated children and the improvement is not enough to justify the spoliation/loss of liberty. Global warming is a tricky question, quite unfair from you to use it. If it is true, then no gov can solve it. Only a worldwide effort would and no sane free market/low tax advocates would ak for the end of the world. Death of all is not liberty. Death is nothingness. Not really, libertarian want no gov and only insane/ignorant people believe it would works imo. I am classical liberal. Somalia is no heaven, because neither property, rule of law nor free market are guaranteed there, and those are the basis of liberalism.
2019-04-21 01:38
1. here again you seems to agree with Melenchon (not Hamon this time) or the UPR guy. Corporate taxes avoidance, thanks to the EU, is a problem for national budget indeed. But not because of the tax level, but because of the, as you said yourself, "flaws" in EU laws. Fact is : this fiscal exile of individuals is a fake news. In 2015, while ISF (note for non french : added tax for the wealthiest, up to 1.5%/year of your total assets). was still existing and no candidate wanted to delete it, only 0.6% of expatriate people did it for fiscal purpose. Around 500 people a year over 66 millions citizens. The end of the exit tax by Macron costed to the national budget more than these tax evaders. And it was deleted because "it was giving us so little". That's the level of this argument. 3. I understand the core of our disagreement is based on our vision of what the freedom is. You consider freedom as its pure version. I don't. I do believe people shouldn't be able to buy a gun to suicide themselves. But I understand the point people thinking otherwise. The "bad luck" as you said is the reason I agree on taxes, heavy taxes even : to counter this "bad luck". Because I believe people should be allowed to become what they are just with their personal skills. Not be stuck because of their family, environment, decease or whatever. And on the opposite, I'm against people that are rich or powerful just because they are born in a rich or powerful family. And to me, taxes should be a leverage to reduce these inequities (I know you don't like this word, sorry). Global warming is not unfair, it is the very exemple of the limit of classical liberalism vision : you can't grow indefinitely in a finished environment. But on this subject at least we meet : I believe there is no power strong enough to make us do what's needed and so I believe it ring the end of our civilisation, perhaps not in 10 years, but in 50 to 80 years, sure. Note that I don't say the end of humanity, but our civilisations anyway that is another subject. Somalia allow me to ask you : why there are not these mandatory things? My answer is : to insure a stable enough gov able to set rules, security, property, laws and free market it must be able to be funded, that's why taxes kick in.
2019-04-21 01:45
1) But all of these is theorical. We never experienced really high taxes on rich people in a democratic and non-socialist country. And don't confuse expatriate people, with expatriate company fiscality. Plenty of companies are benificing from foreign loopholes while the CEOs remain in the country. The ISF is dumb anyway. With or without. It is simply made to make people believe there is some kind of justice, but it is neither socialist or liberal. To be short : I don't believe in "high income taxes" vs "low income taxes". It thinks the real question is how you tax "self-earned money" vs "estate money". (and yeah, I actually quite like Asselineau) 3) We agree on this. Liberalism is about being free to use the money you rightfully deserved... but you first have to define what is "rightfully deserved". Again, we simply agree of the last part. The question was not "tax or not" but "high or low taxes".
2019-04-21 01:58
" Because it is its very meaning to have a wider vision, not just a narrow vision on personnal issues or trend like individuals have. " It actually believe the opposite, so does many economists. Yes, 1 individual has a "narrow" vision... but 10000 individuals still have a wider vision than 10000 gov officials that think and act the same way. Your point is only true if you believe the government is right 100% of the time, which is never the case. "France is world champion in dividend for shareholders, one of the best (beside northern countries) in reducing inequities" "Inequities" is actually a word used by most people that don't know anything about economics, since "inequities" don't mean ANYTHING. What's matter is the average living standards. Without "inequities", there is no growth, no incentive to innovate, no reason to surpass yourselves. A certain amount of "inequities" is actually needed to have a decent economy. Rich countries often have high inequities, yet the living standards are still way above any poor country. The poorest 10% people of France are richer than the richer 10% of Sub-Saharan Africa.
2019-04-21 00:38
No, sorry to disappoint you but most of actual economists (real economists, with a degree in economy, not liberal columnist with whatever scholarship) don't believe in Smith vision (and in fact, Smith was more fine than just how he is summarized today) as "the sum of the individual interest equal the general interest". I would advice you to get in touch with Sonnenschein or Stiglitz writing as initiation of the critic of Smith. It seems your vision of economy is outdated of 250 years. Inequities have actual meanings, acknowledged by the world bank, the world fund, OECD and most of national or non governmental organisation specialized in economy all over the world. First google.fr result : oecd.org/fr/social/inegalite-et-pauvrete.. As in you previous post, here you come with overstatement. Who said there wouldn't be any inequities? I didn't and didn't saw anyone claim for it. Question is not about no inequities (theorical communism) but an acceptable level of inequities, and it spread based on "deserved" item such as reward for work, innovation, etc. It seems that's why you agree with inequities as well : because people do something good for the society (creating work, wealth, technology, entertainment, whatever). But it is not how it is in most of the case today. No idea why you compare France with sub saharian countries, this kind of comparison is, I believe lame. That's like saying "why do you complain of starvation? Some people die of thirst". So I won't go there with you.
2019-04-21 00:57
Who the fuck cares about Smith anymore ? Hayek and Keynes are the modern references. It is actually funny that you talk about Stiglitz, because he believes in moderate gov and free market. So does Friedman. All of them are Nobel prizes and they opposed big states, they simply asked for regulation and intelligent free markets. So nice try but I never even read Smith. He was probably a genius for his time but nowadays you shouldn't even study him. Your link only shows that high inequities are bad, which is obvious when you have a brain since it dissuades you from working and makes it impossible to succeed even through hard-work and skill. I never defended high inequities since I ask moderate taxes, not 0. Also, there are multiple definitions of poverty : don't confuse national poverty (what you spoke about) with wordly poverty (what I spoke about). If you can afford car, food, roof, water and electricity you are good worldwide... but if you can only afford this in France, that makes you poor. I actually agree when you say "it is not how it is in most of the case today". I believe in hard tax on every underserved penny and low tax on earned money. It is the only fair system to me. Fuck heritage, but multimillionnaires self-made men ? Yes. I am not saying that the problems you points out are non-existent, I simply believe in other ways to solve them.
2019-04-21 01:32
I didn't read the content of my link, I just linked an official page talking about inequities. Meaning: "Inequities is actually a word used by most people that don't know anything about economics, since "inequities" don't mean ANYTHING." sa you stated is false No idea why you genuinely pick economist position about size of state in a tax level discussion (in fact I have an idea: its a decoy attempt). At least we agree on the deserved money vs undeserved one. But do you think we could make a law like "money from inheritance is taxed up to 95% ?" I wish we could if it paid to give to everyone equal chances. But it won't ever happen I'm afraid. I believe solution you believe in have been tried multiple time in multiple countries since decades, and never worked out. Anyway, we both exposed our points, have a nice night.
2019-04-21 01:52
Because high taxes = big state 99% of the time. You need big structures to redistribute the money you took (healtcare, retirement, education, social welfares, etc...). If you have a different view, then I'm listening... but if you want shared healtcare or pension, you have to understand you need a big gov behind that. I don't know if such a law on heritance could work. Just like you don't know if really high taxes would work in democracy without crashing the economy (or creating gov tyranny to prevent people from seeking their own interests). I hope so, but biggest problem is again the EU (most disgusting form of said "free market" you could ask for). This solution was not tried without being perverted by corruption and clientelism sadly. Have a nice night too. We might disagree but I believe this kind of educated debate is always meaningful and instructive.
2019-04-21 02:03
Healthcare state employes is like 10k people probably less, over 66 millions population, same with any way of redistribution. It can be even less with today internet and electronics. Big state usually criticized by libertarians is about regulations, and how large the amont of chapter where state intervention is present. Yet you can redistribute taxes without all that. Both are different subjects. For exemple, take this already made proposal : universal pay. Give everyone 1k/month, finance it by high taxes on the wealthiest. Make the tax braket in a way that people not needing it will give it back true taxes (for exemple above 3k/month of wage balance is 0). Ofc we can speak about ethic of getting money for nothing or whatever but just look at the economical perspective : - wealthiest people lose money from their actual situation ofc, but how do they spend it? I take numbers of an ipsos survey of this month about how is spend the money gained after the end of ISF : 40% in consumption (going directly in economy) 40% in saving (going into financial market, international free market one, so barely no return for french economy) 20% in corporate investment (and 95% of it is secondary market: trading, no impact on french economy, remain 1% helping french economy). These numbers are approx. as I'm lazy to search for exact ones but it mean ISF money lose from the state went for only 40-45% of it in french economy (job, wage, etc). Take those few billions, give them to the poorest true as in the exemple, universal pay : they will spend it in consumption (and don't start with chinese products as only 30% of our consumption come from abroad : 70% is still better than 45% no mention how a revenu increase for the poorest can redirect their expenses in local product, such as bio local food instead of international intensive farming food). Meaning it will be more efficient for our economy at least twice as efficient. And as you seems aware, it is a gear that turn another and another, that's a starter very efficient. You named Keynes above, remember his theory about, such as what you said for Notre Dame, stimulative policy. And you don't need big state to do so. It is totally independent. It doesn't crash the economy, unlike what liberal columnist would say on the media. About high taxes, you should take a look at your very country history of taxes, after WW2 taxes were up to 80%, yet a lot of people consider this era as a golden era for France. And as far I can't tell, it was a democracy and its economy was not crashing. We both agree on EU. I do believe that a supra national organization that promote as president someone who turned his micro industrial country as a tax heaven for companies, draining all corporate taxes from is neighbors is something wrong. To come back on the main subject, high taxes doesn't mean tyranny, it doesn't mean it kill individual progression, the will to be sucessful or whatever. Because even 20% of 1 million is still 200k. 200k a year is already way more than enough to have a very pleasant life. And in a country that would use this 800k taken for useful things, it would be even better. A bit less than 1 non taxed million ofc, but as quitte confortable myself, I'd gladly give a big chunk of my money in exchange of never crossing homeless people, that every disabled people or elder people would be taken in care correctly, that no children in my very wealthy country never would go to school with an empty belly, etc.. The level of satisfaction when you go from 20k/month to 40k/month is nothing as high as when you go from 2 to 4k/month. I've been in those both cases so it is not a theory. And this as been documented by sociologists. From what I recall, level of happiness barely increase above something like 5 to 6k/month in french economy. Obviously you will find people running after a dream of a pool of gold crying about too high taxes, but except those monomaniacs (and I know some) most of rich people would gladly give up part of it for not feeling stigmatized anymore. Problem is their defiance, like you, with how this money will be spend by the state. I'm not saying our state is doing it well, far from it, but I disagree with the idea it is impossible for the state to spend it correctly. Here we only talk about taxes on revenues, because it is a way to balance tax equities : the poorer you are, the higher flat taxes such as VAT is a big topic of expense for you, and so taxes on revenue kind of balance it. But today in France tax on wage is only 72 billions gain for the state, while VAT is something like 200 billions. Said otherwise, taxes on wage is not the all and everything of a fiscal policy.
2019-04-21 03:38
Quick correct: when I say "inequities" don't mean anything, I mean they don't mean anything by themselves. Just like "average income" doesn't mean anything without cost of living/tax rate, or "average housing price" doesn't mean anything without average income. You can't just say "inequities = bad" like too many people do.
2019-04-21 02:29
Calculate it based on your pension. Take the amount that will be deducted from your pension. Then calculate the life as a pensioner (average life expectancy - retirement age). Now take the same amount, which will be deducted from your pension. Consider average salary increases, inflation and an interest rate that will be offered to you if you regularly pay 40 - 45 years into such a fund. You will find that you retire much, much wealthier if you take care of your retirement. By the way, this is the case with all the "services" that the government "offers".
2019-04-21 00:10
Exactly. High taxes benefit stupid people that always end up bankrupted. Low taxes benefit smart, cautious people.
2019-04-21 00:16
Yes thats how it is in Denmark. there is alot of ppl dont want to do anything, they get alot of money from the system for doing nothing at all. Look at det immigrant we got. they cost us 33 billions danish in a year. And then the lower class danish ppl there dont want to work comes. is nice to have a safety net. But it needs alot of work, so people don't use it
2019-04-21 11:11
I feel you man. Same in France. In every city there are entire districts of leeches that don't work, don't integrate and don't do anything about it. We should really fix our own problems instead of importing more people and problems with them. Our governments are simply crazy, all they care about is reelection. During this time, our countries are burning... Denmark in 2019 : youtube.com/watch?v=Ly99DTIYX7Q -> Fucking RIOT because he played with a Quran ? What the fuck ? I'm disgusted to see the decadence of Denmark and Sweden, I hope the madness will stop before it is too late.
2019-04-21 13:10
I know that Denmark is a very rich country. and that we enjoy it. But as you say we have our own problems. We need to help other countries. But all people from poor countries will live in the rich countries just because they get better here. I can understand them. but there is just no room. And finally there is no money. We are a very rich country. But over the past many years we have to save a lot of money in areas that make our country poor. Older people live worse than criminals. We have just built a luxury prison. Our children do not get the right care. because that has to be saved so much. hospital staff never have breaks and runs to reach everything. Our roads are crowded with cars. I think it's a very hard way the man does things. But he is right in many of the things he says. A normal person does not do violence if you burn a book. Also, I don't care if it's quran. You need to find out how the country you have moved to live. If we came to their country they expect the same. Which is also why I NEVER move to a Muslim country. Why do Muslims come to the EU? we are very far apart the way we live. There are lots of other Muslim countries. but they just want better. Unfortunately, many of them are criminals. and should just be sent home.  this link is with a sausage lady: D immigrant boys are after her because she sells pork. And now she shuts down because she can't handle it anymore. ekstrabladet.dk/nyheder/samfund/poelseda.. One of them did say this. And that where i get made." - I asked him what they were doing and why they behaved like that. He just answered coolly 'just wait until we're plenty'." it there i say out with the ppl who cant behave after the law
2019-04-21 14:09
low ofc. i want to spend my money on what i want not on what someone else wants. i know best what i need.
2019-04-21 00:11
The state should only provide basic things like roads, free primary education, policemen, firemen, courts and prisons.
2019-04-21 00:15
#186
 | 
Poland mtumee 
so old people should be left to die? disabled people should starve? the unemployed should be homeless? university should only be accessible to the rich? good idea
2019-04-21 00:49
sounds like civil war to me
2019-04-21 04:24
-Their children can take care of their parents when they are old or old people can save money to live with. -Parents should take care of disabled children. -Yes, the unemployed should take care of themselves. -You can always take out student loans or get a scholarship
2019-04-21 11:30
I guess you want to live in a society with massive inequality and suffering.
2019-04-21 20:14
#187
 | 
United States Trump2020KAG 
low i have health dental vision from my job no college for me i wana pay for what i use and i need i pay enough for the lazy bums that dont work and live off the government
2019-04-21 00:53
#207
 | 
Sweden Bakkmann 
Everything checks out
2019-04-21 01:59
Fuck em' I got mine Official slogan of the Republican party.
2019-04-21 09:05
#294
 | 
United States Trump2020KAG 
Whats wrong with getting a job??? What’s wrong with making my own money??? Have just a little pride kiddo. I find it embarrassing and appalling depending on the government for ur everyday needs. It’s one thing if u need some assistance every once in awhile and another thing to be a life long collector(which America has ALOT OF)
2019-04-21 16:11
You already depend on the government for your everyday needs.
2019-04-21 19:44
#304
 | 
United States Trump2020KAG 
like military roads services defense police fire natural disasters...yes i do i also pay taxes what i dont use the government for is feeding me getting me a house paying my utility bills paying my phone bill paying my health care paying my transportation etc etc etc....
2019-04-21 19:47
This is a strawman. No one advocates for the government to feed everyone, pay their bills, etc. We simply want a fair society in which the poor aren't left to rot. You make it seem so easy getting a job with health care, but what happens if you lose that job? It's not so simple finding another job with good healthcare. What if someone has cancer and loses their healthcare due to losing their job? Literally every developed country has a single-payer system in one way or the other and we're still over here with people dying because they can't afford healthcare.
2019-04-21 20:10
#310
 | 
United States Trump2020KAG 
people die because of no health care????? u know a hospital CANT TURN ANYONE AWAY if they arrive at ANY HOSPITAL IN AMERICA needing care right.....it dont matter if u are a citizen non citizen illegal tourist millionaire bum drug user etc etc.....NOBODY can be turned down for immediate medical services so im not sure what u are talking about
2019-04-21 20:22
It's due to LACK OF HEALTH INSURANCE. They're scared to go to the hospital because they don't want to saddled with debt for the rest of their life. This leads of deaths because many people don't go to the doctor when they need to. news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2009/09/n.. And this source is 10 years old, it's probably even worse now.
2019-04-21 20:26
#312
 | 
United States Trump2020KAG 
dude u really dont understand how it works...... a hospital cant turn anyone down....with that u wont get the best of the best..u will get the minimum BUT u will still get treated as for the debt from a hospital bill it have very little impact on creditscore... a old cell phone bill or old utility bill will affect ur score more then a 100k hospital bill....but the scam is if u have no insurance u go get treated get a bill for whatever say 25k then u claim bankruptcy or just dont pay it...a hospital cant force u to pay...its up to the person if they wana pay or not....even if i owe a hospital 6 million i can still go in that same exact hospital with a broken arm and get treated....and as far as the whole no free health care thing GET A JOB....even mcdonalds has health care...i get health dental vision prescription from my job...80% of jobs in America have some type of plan for single/family...once again its the people who live off the government that have the biggest issues with everything....people need to stop being so lazy and get a job....
2019-04-21 20:34
Yeah, just don't pay your debt. Then they will come after your paychecks, house, and any of your assets. Just pull yourself up by the bootstraps 4HEad. You have a very black and white view of the world my friend, it's time to do some research and actually see the issues.
2019-04-21 21:49
#327
 | 
United States Trump2020KAG 
i just told u a hospital cant garnish paychecks or bank account..... i literally said that because i knew u would use that as a excuse.....THEY CANT GARNISH YOUUUUUUUUU....
2019-04-21 22:19
They can just sue you, and they win. The fact that even exists is a fucking joke. But go ahead and keep defending a broken system.
2019-04-21 22:45
#353
 | 
United States Trump2020KAG 
Lmao ok so a hospital will spend thousands and thousands more in legal fees while trials can carry on for months months and years costing upwards of 100s of thousands of dollars so they can get what??? Obviously if they have huge hospital bills they don’t have money. They people can then just set up payment plans and pay 200$ a month for 10 years. It’s not worth it. U been watching to much tv and are talking about 50cent. Yea the hospitals sued him because he became a millionaire and they sued him for 300k. Btw debt disappears after 7 years in America. So still I don’t get ur point. If u are trying to say our system is shit then just say it. Our system is fine for people with jobs and terrible for people with out. I have a job so everything is fine for me and everyone in my family works and has good jobs so they also all have insurance Stop sticking up for the lazy fucks and appreciate the working class that keeps countries running unlike the lazy who drain countries.
2019-04-22 02:52
Rekt
2019-04-22 14:35
#190
 | 
Canada NELK 
normal tax
2019-04-21 01:01
#197
 | 
Brazil de_lite 
something awful was an ok site
2019-04-21 01:28
High
2019-04-21 01:55
#208
 | 
Sweden Bakkmann 
High, but keep it to income, dont go around taxing everything and get greedy
2019-04-21 02:00
What are low and high taxes? What are the reference grades? 30% is low tax if applied to percentile 5, is high if applied to percentile 50. The question here is: are those taxes fully applied to country development or diverted for maintenance?
2019-04-21 02:05
#232
 | 
Argentina YH!one 
I would implement a reasonable and fair progressive taxes scheme. This means I would put lower taxes on the middle class and working class to encourage new entrepreneurs to open their businesses, invest in the economy and internal market so they can create jobs. And I would tax the richest more but I wouldn't tax them to death making them to leave, in this way they can keep investing here, they have multimillionaire earnings anyways. 10/15 % taxes on the working class. 20/25 % on the middle classes. 35 % or 40 % on the richest.
2019-04-21 04:24
On what? wages, corporate tax? dividends?
2019-04-21 04:25
#278
REZ | 
Sweden katt1n 
>fair >litterarily stealing pick one
2019-04-21 11:34
#238
 | 
Denmark Xipingu 
High tax. I have seen some examples of healthcare prices w/o taxes, basically you’re screwed if you get really sick. If not from the disease itself then from the loan that will rip you apart even if you recover.
2019-04-21 08:39
HIgh tax 100%
2019-04-21 08:44
#241
 | 
Finland hotguy2004 
no taxes so everyone rich 😎
2019-04-21 08:44
Adjustable tax with rise and fall of wealth disparities. You could do a lower rate on the poorest and and make it increasingly higher to the top earners who would pay a large amount. Over time as the gaps thin you adjust it to be more even.
2019-04-21 08:47
Low taxes Because in my country all of that goes either on military or its getting stolen by officials 😎
2019-04-21 08:53
+1
2019-04-21 09:22
Progressive tax, period. Id like to add that I think that a lot of the people here that are saying "high taxes" mean progressive tax
2019-04-21 09:18
With a cap.
2019-04-21 20:21
cap downwards maybe but not upwards, mahd00d.
2019-04-21 20:22
Why not?
2019-04-21 20:35
Because I dont see why there should be one. But I do see why there should NOT be one.
2019-04-21 20:37
Honestly it very much depends on the country, in my situation I prefer low to zero taxation because all the money is being stolen by officials
2019-04-21 09:22
#277
REZ | 
Sweden katt1n 
Same thing in all countries, they are just better at hiding it.
2019-04-21 11:33
#266
 | 
Sweden ThorinEk 
low tax means people can afford expensive health care, maybe...
2019-04-21 10:57
#275
REZ | 
Sweden katt1n 
No tax because theft is infringing on natrual rights.
2019-04-21 11:33
#283
frozen | 
Slovakia S1W0 
You dont need crazy high taxes but your government has to spent the money on the right things.
2019-04-21 11:54
I like the danish system because you cant really get fucked from cancer or some expensive sickness, but i think we "waste" way too many tax money on, immigrants, too nice prisons, lazy people etc. i also think that people who earn more than average shouldnt get taxed a higher % (topskat, as it is called in denmark) and we also have an insane taxation on importing cars. but that everybody pays betweem 40-50 % tax so we have free healthcare and school, is something i support.
2019-04-21 17:57
low because u know why
2019-04-21 18:07
Lol honestly i dont :O why low tax ?
2019-04-22 00:04
To the guys that think heavy taxing the richest to get free stuff or cheap stuff is okay, here is a video for you youtube.com/watch?v=keZu9_Lbne4
2019-04-21 18:34
High hitler
2019-04-21 21:18
pathetic
2019-04-22 00:06
yeah bro hitler was pathetic
2019-04-22 00:14
That is true, but so was ur answer to a actual answer.
2019-04-22 00:15
#322
cosmeeeN | 
Romania qAp 
High taxes because everything becomes cheaper
2019-04-21 21:18
So you are fine with losing more from ur salary ?
2019-04-22 00:02
#356
cosmeeeN | 
Romania qAp 
Yes
2019-04-22 08:43
No tax. This is mafia. Taxes are illegal
2019-04-22 00:09
except that mafia asks for taxes LOL
2019-04-22 00:14
Work in a country that has high salaries + high taxes but live in a country with lower taxes. That's what a lot of people do here in France. They work in Switzerland where average salary is 4000€ and live in France to pay lower taxes
2019-04-22 00:19
#350
 | 
Russia cuba_libre10 
High tax = Good from my experience of living in sweden.
2019-04-22 00:41
#357
 | 
Australia tavalol 
I used to not give a fuck before finshing university but now i have a real job and make real money i fucking hate having to pay more tax (still lower than some EU countries but i'm paying like 20k usd annually just on income tax). Don't use any of the "benefits" available to me either
2019-04-22 08:51
That's the thing which frustrates me. I pay a lot more and also don't or can't use a lot of benefits. Thats the downside of being self-employed. Had to incorporate to make my total tax percentage down to more normal levels.
2019-04-22 17:01
#359
 | 
Indonesia EvilPolish 
high tax if no corruption
2019-04-22 09:50
if is the keyword
2019-04-23 17:33
in Russia, propagandists usually claim that Russia is better because income tax is only 13%, in comparison to Europe up to 30-40ish percent in some countries, but at the same time Russians don't even know they are paying about 50% of their income via some "hidden" taxes and other payments (VAT, licenses etc.). Russians pay 50%+ of their income as taxes and they have nothing (bad medicine, bad roads, infrastructure etc.), because money being stolen or spent ineffectively, Europeans usually complain about their countries' tax policy, but in return they get everything the Russians don't get. So, I go for high taxes in return for good infrastructure, medicine and other goods that government must do for their people.
2019-04-22 12:07
thats what corruption does
2019-04-23 12:17
#366
 | 
Yugoslavia kief 
both haves pros and cons low tax has expensive education, expensive health care, but it also means less people with useless degrees, high quality and efficient health care high tax has education and "free" health care, but it also has bunch of people with useless degrees who basically waste taxpayer money and inefficient health care where you can die before you get to a operating table high tax is good for people who use the system but if you didn't pursue higher education and are overall healthy individual you basically throw away 50% of your paycheck every month in theory high tax should be good for the people because lot of the money should end up in soft infrastructure but it often goes displaced because the government is either corrupt or just wastes money on bullshit because they can get away with it and therefore just make people poorer for no reason
2019-04-23 17:50
Login or register to add your comment to the discussion.