Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
blahblahblah
ParticipantFunny about that Concho as several clients I have who have Canadian relatives, and even some of my own family in Canada came to the USA for medical procedures due to the length of time they had to wait for their own system to get them the procedure.
Funny thing about anecdotes is that everyone has ’em. A buddy of mine moved to Canada a few years back, broke his hand horribly in a bike crash and received excellent care for free. He was referred through several different surgeons until the best one was found to do the reconstructive surgery. He didn’t have to wait, he didn’t have to put up with second rate care, everything was covered, he couldn’t be happier at least for a man who’s hand was pretty much wrecked.
And let me tell you about waiting — lots of us here in the US wait to see doctors too; I don’t even go anymore because every time I call the response is “Well, the doctor’s first available appointment is 4 months from now. If you’d like we can get you in with the PA in 2 months or the NP can see you in 3 weeks.”
Not saying Canadian-style healthcare will work here. This place is 10 times the size and so it has 10 times the graft and corruption.
blahblahblah
ParticipantI use to joke around with my Canadian buddies that they’re bending over when it comes to taxaction….I guess the last laugh is on us…Feel canadian lately, ey?
At least they get decent healthcare as part of the deal. We’ll still be stuck with our criminal health insurance companies.
blahblahblah
ParticipantI use to joke around with my Canadian buddies that they’re bending over when it comes to taxaction….I guess the last laugh is on us…Feel canadian lately, ey?
At least they get decent healthcare as part of the deal. We’ll still be stuck with our criminal health insurance companies.
blahblahblah
ParticipantI use to joke around with my Canadian buddies that they’re bending over when it comes to taxaction….I guess the last laugh is on us…Feel canadian lately, ey?
At least they get decent healthcare as part of the deal. We’ll still be stuck with our criminal health insurance companies.
blahblahblah
ParticipantI use to joke around with my Canadian buddies that they’re bending over when it comes to taxaction….I guess the last laugh is on us…Feel canadian lately, ey?
At least they get decent healthcare as part of the deal. We’ll still be stuck with our criminal health insurance companies.
blahblahblah
ParticipantI use to joke around with my Canadian buddies that they’re bending over when it comes to taxaction….I guess the last laugh is on us…Feel canadian lately, ey?
At least they get decent healthcare as part of the deal. We’ll still be stuck with our criminal health insurance companies.
blahblahblah
ParticipantIt really doesn’t matter which administration is in office…Whenever folks say about “taxing the rich”, they really mean “taking more from the upper middle class giving it to the poor/middle class and leave the trully wealthy (who funds campaign contributions, lobbying groups, and/or derive their substantial money from assets/capital versus W-2’s folks) alone.”
Exactly flu. Very well said and unfortunately true.
blahblahblah
ParticipantIt really doesn’t matter which administration is in office…Whenever folks say about “taxing the rich”, they really mean “taking more from the upper middle class giving it to the poor/middle class and leave the trully wealthy (who funds campaign contributions, lobbying groups, and/or derive their substantial money from assets/capital versus W-2’s folks) alone.”
Exactly flu. Very well said and unfortunately true.
blahblahblah
ParticipantIt really doesn’t matter which administration is in office…Whenever folks say about “taxing the rich”, they really mean “taking more from the upper middle class giving it to the poor/middle class and leave the trully wealthy (who funds campaign contributions, lobbying groups, and/or derive their substantial money from assets/capital versus W-2’s folks) alone.”
Exactly flu. Very well said and unfortunately true.
blahblahblah
ParticipantIt really doesn’t matter which administration is in office…Whenever folks say about “taxing the rich”, they really mean “taking more from the upper middle class giving it to the poor/middle class and leave the trully wealthy (who funds campaign contributions, lobbying groups, and/or derive their substantial money from assets/capital versus W-2’s folks) alone.”
Exactly flu. Very well said and unfortunately true.
blahblahblah
ParticipantIt really doesn’t matter which administration is in office…Whenever folks say about “taxing the rich”, they really mean “taking more from the upper middle class giving it to the poor/middle class and leave the trully wealthy (who funds campaign contributions, lobbying groups, and/or derive their substantial money from assets/capital versus W-2’s folks) alone.”
Exactly flu. Very well said and unfortunately true.
blahblahblah
ParticipantSales tax is not regressive. The tax does not decrease as the amount subject to tax increases.
FAIL. Sales tax is regressive because as the ratio of income to purchases increases, the proportion taxed decreases. Think of it this way, a person making $200K/year uses the same amount of laundry detergent as a person making $50K/year, yet the person making $50K will pay a higher percentage of their income in tax purchasing that item.
Here’s some good info from wikipedia about regressive taxation.
blahblahblah
ParticipantSales tax is not regressive. The tax does not decrease as the amount subject to tax increases.
FAIL. Sales tax is regressive because as the ratio of income to purchases increases, the proportion taxed decreases. Think of it this way, a person making $200K/year uses the same amount of laundry detergent as a person making $50K/year, yet the person making $50K will pay a higher percentage of their income in tax purchasing that item.
Here’s some good info from wikipedia about regressive taxation.
blahblahblah
ParticipantSales tax is not regressive. The tax does not decrease as the amount subject to tax increases.
FAIL. Sales tax is regressive because as the ratio of income to purchases increases, the proportion taxed decreases. Think of it this way, a person making $200K/year uses the same amount of laundry detergent as a person making $50K/year, yet the person making $50K will pay a higher percentage of their income in tax purchasing that item.
Here’s some good info from wikipedia about regressive taxation.
-
AuthorPosts
