Flat taxes are awful and are what lead to gross income inequality.

Do you think it's fair for millionaires and billionaires to pay a smaller share of their income than a guy that makes $40,000 a year? Who do you think needs it more?

Furthermore, the US is a consumer-based income. It's dependent on Joe and Jane America to use their cash to purchase products. What do most wealthy people do? They take their income, hoard it and occasionally spend it on something like a Swedish-made yacht.

Americans have become politically retarded. They now support policies counterintuitive to what's good for their nation and themselves. Furthermore, you have class-based societies like the UK that have better social mobility than the United States. 2/3 rich people in the United States inherit their wealth, they don't work for it, they don't produce anything. People like Bill Gates and Steve Jobs earned their wealth. They made something. Mitt Romney on the other hand never accomplished anything, and represents everything that's wrong with America (see Bain Capital).

The rich don't just hoard there money, they reinvest there money to try to get a return on it as well. In turn the money used will be used to improve businesses, hire more workers, or expand.

Now lets look at other statistics shall we. Like how those in the very top bracket rarely stay there for more than a decade. I believe the statistic was 1/3 of the families in the highest bracket were still there after a decade. It's actually extraordinarily easy to see the wealth of the people in a bracket. What is not easy is actually following individuals over the years. Yes, the top bracket is very wealthy, but for the families at the top they do not stay there, they move up and down like all other families. During the housing bubble, anyone that owned a house could have been in the top 1 percent of income holders as long as they sold the house.

Don't get me wrong, I do hate the large amount of influence corporations and multi-nationals have. With there large influence they can do many things to screw over citizens. I just believe we don't need a large government that has a judicial monopoly over its people.

Also, so what if people inherit money. It's a shame I didn't inherit amazing violin playing potential. So I suggest we cut out a violinist brain and transplant his music playing potential into everyone equally. Nature in itself is not fair. If the person that inherit the money pisses it away on stupid that is his fault. If he cannot invest the money in the correct things or makes to many risky choices, he will lose his money. On a more personal level, I have a friend that is very fortunate, his father is part of a very successful business and he is living the good life. My friend is probably just going to piss away the money is father spent on college as he does nothing because he is lazy. (I still love the guy though)

In Canada our universal healthcare program is called Medicare. It's simply public insurance.

Medicare, Medicaid and Veterans Hospitals aren't what cost so much. The US also doesn't take very good care of its Veterans compared to Canada, the UK and France.

Dude, everything you're saying is nonsense, it's bullshit. You've been terribly mislead and I don't know where you're coming up with this stuff.

"Whenever the people are well-informed, they can be trusted with their own government." - Thomas Jefferson.

Sorry to say, but you're not well informed. Nor do most Americans seems to be.

". . . whenever the people are well-informed, they can be trusted with their own government; that, whenever things get so far wrong as to attract their notice, they may be relied on to set them right." - Thomas Jefferson

>Medicare, Medicaid don't cost so much
>Year 2000 + 12
>Calling everything I said as bullshit
>Quoting Thomas Jefferson
>Not knowing basic Economics
>2012
>Calling me misinformed.
>TwentyTwelve

Almost took you seriously there.

Care to point out the bullshit?

Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security make up the majority of U.S. expenditure. Of course there are other things like military and education, but when it comes to Healthcare expenditure taking into account both private and public. Public funding is always a larger portion in America.

wut

Brooklyn in Midwood. I may be biased because I have to deal with the worst of them. It is mainly the Hasidim ones I have an issue with.

Ah,
I live in Orange county near Kiryas Joel- A Hasidic community. They are the fucking worse here and everyone knows it. However, since they all vote in blocks, there is nothing we can do to stop the Hasidics from getting someone in office that is giving them special services. Because the state government considers them a 'poor' community, they are given a lot of tax payer dollars. They use our water system without paying for the service.

I do have to commend them though. When they want something, they are really good a jewing the government for it.

Social issues. Constitutional every man and woman are equals and can not be discriminated against. Though these laws were set up at a diffrent time before we came into contact with other cultures, it still sticks and is almost impossible to disregard. It's a sensitive issue, like the right to bear arms in america.

Netherlands. We have a lot of immigrants from the poor parts of arabia (mostly moroco) and, though I know it's unfair to discriminate, most of them refuse to intergrate and have medival views on how to treat women and stuff. There are some who do intergrate properly and one can have a good conversation with those poeple but sadly thats only like 1-2%

I always found stuff like this confusing. Why do people assume people who mass immigrate into a country will integrate into society.

When the English mass immigrated to the Colonies, they didn't integrate into the Native American population.

It is perfectly fine to discriminate against something. You are discriminant with the food you eat, friends you have, and what you do with your time. A group of people is no different.

It just confuses me how in England (or Western Europe), so many people are against mass immigration, but the leaders continue these policies.

Social issues. Constitutional every man and woman are equals and can not be discriminated against. Though these laws were set up at a diffrent time before we came into contact with other cultures, it still sticks and is almost impossible to disregard. It's a sensitive issue, like the right to bear arms in america.

WHY DOES EVERYONE KEEP MENTIONING ME

It fucking sucks, that's how I see it

Where do you live? Just wondering

Netherlands. We have a lot of immigrants from the poor parts of arabia (mostly moroco) and, though I know it's unfair to discriminate, most of them refuse to intergrate and have medival views on how to treat women and stuff. There are some who do intergrate properly and one can have a good conversation with those poeple but sadly thats only like 1-2%

I always found stuff like this confusing. Why do people assume people who mass immigrate into a country will integrate into society.

When the English mass immigrated to the Colonies, they didn't integrate into the Native American population.

It is perfectly fine to discriminate against something. You are discriminant with the food you eat, friends you have, and what you do with your time. A group of people is no different.

It just confuses me how in England (or Western Europe), so many people are against mass immigration, but the leaders continue these policies.

Social issues. Constitutional every man and woman are equals and can not be discriminated against. Though these laws were set up at a diffrent time before we came into contact with other cultures, it still sticks and is almost impossible to disregard. It's a sensitive issue, like the right to bear arms in america.

WHY DOES EVERYONE KEEP MENTIONING ME