92% of Americans prefer Sweden's "socialistic" economic system

Sorry, it was meant as sarcasm. . Right out of the gate I'm told that 92% of Americans responded... I call a GIANT BS. Never heard of the poll or anyone who responded to it. The rest was just my hyperbole..... a reply to: CrapAsUsual

originally posted by: Zyril
Finishing college with no debts and landing a good job with a high salary, I can now look back happier than ever knowing that I put myself where I am today, not society.

You contributed, but you only had that opportunity through factors beyond your control. Companies liked your resume, an employer gave a college kid a job, a state grant funded the college that took you in. You see the work you put into getting where you are, but you're discounting all the other work that went on behind the scenes by society that allowed you to do that.

You are only one small component of that, the smallest part actually because 1% of society is going to be in the top 1% and if you didn't have that slot someone else would be raised into it.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: seasonal

Guess what? 100% of people would like their health care to be free too. I know I would, but when you get down to brass tacks and break down the true costs of "free" (read socialist) health care, most people suddenly decide it isn't all that great anymore and the reported support for it drops a lot.

Simply showing people a pie chart graph is great, but when you get to the brass tacks about how this pie chart is achieved and what the reality of it would be ... I'll bet your support for it would likewise drop.

Sweden personal income tax rate = 57%
U.S. personal income tax rate = 10%, 15%, 25%, 28%, 33%, 35%, and 39.6% depending on your bracket

I'd say there is a WHOPPING huge difference on how they get their healthcare. Imagine giving the government over half of your paycheck to pay for all those wonderful goodies they offer.

originally posted by: Opportunia

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: seasonal

Guess what? 100% of people would like their health care to be free too. I know I would, but when you get down to brass tacks and break down the true costs of "free" (read socialist) health care, most people suddenly decide it isn't all that great anymore and the reported support for it drops a lot.

Simply showing people a pie chart graph is great, but when you get to the brass tacks about how this pie chart is achieved and what the reality of it would be ... I'll bet your support for it would likewise drop.

Sweden personal income tax rate = 57%
U.S. personal income tax rate = 10%, 15%, 25%, 28%, 33%, 35%, and 39.6% depending on your bracket

I'd say there is a WHOPPING huge difference on how they get their healthcare. Imagine giving the government over half of your paycheck to pay for all those wonderful goodies they offer.

Sweden has tax brackets as well, why are you only giving the top rate and comparing that to all the rates in the US?

a reply to: Aazadan

Even more than that, whatever we have today is thank to the hard work of the millions who came before us that helped to create a society like the one we have today. There are places in the world where people live like in the stone age, for those there are no fancy jobs, only hunting and gathering. Their society didn´t evolved.

This is why I say that the opportunities must be equally shared.

a reply to: CrapAsUsual

SSSSHHHHHH, quiet. That isn't hard core individualism, and it takes the spot light off of the center of the universe,... me. If everyone starts to think, things can (or be forced) change, meaning $ may change directions.

This is why I say that the opportunities must be equally shared.
[/quote]
Can you expand?

a reply to: seasonal

I don´t think its individualism at all.

There are basically three main ideas regarding private property.

Things can be owned and inherited
Things can be leased but belong to the state
Things can´t be owned by individuals or states, belong to the planet

I think that we don´t need to be absolute on this so, I think below a certain threshold things can be inherited, above a higher threshold things belong to the state and above that things belong to the planet.

The threshold varies according to the need we all have on these things.

A watch, you can inherit a watch. A house, you can inherit a house for now and until its allowed, a large property, you probably can´t inherit, it belongs to the state, a copper mine, or an ocean you can own it you can´t inherit it it belongs to the planet.

An immense wealth, can´t be owned, can´t be inherited, can´t be created because its a profit os an activity only made possible by the society it was created and the society is the result of the work of millions. Cannot be exploited by individuals.

This causes problems? Sure but its how I think it should be. And in some aspects it already is.

a reply to: CrapAsUsual

Estate worth $5,450,000 in 2016 do not require the filing of an estate tax return.

www.irs.gov...

My point is more to the issue of worker productivity not being shared or trickling down from the corporations since 1979. Where is that money going, to the top. If we weren't so concerned about "me" we could help us.

a reply to: seasonal

Your point its also important. the money went to offshore accounts and to luxury items and lifestyles.

With money you make money, money is like a leverage that helps you to generate more money so the wealt generated by these individuals was used to multiply their already immense wealth.

The result its what you see on your video, the rich are getting richer the poor are getting poorer.

An absolutely obvious problem that no one care to address because the solutions have already been tagged as socialist/communist/dictatorial when the dictatorship is already governing us, its the dictatorship of the powerful, the rich.


The leverage aspect of having large amounts of money could be interrupted if these immense fortunes could not be passes from generation to generation.

a reply to: Opportunia

Forgot to add the actual cost of healthcare to the individual consumer in the US into your simple equation.

Sweden personal income tax rate = 57% U.S. personal income tax rate = 10%, 15%, 25%, 28%, 33%, 35%, and 39.6% depending on your bracket

a reply to: Puppylove

How about making them fight for the right to raise food?

Like, oh, say - for example.......
chickens.



Yep!

The guy who goes into DEEP DEBT to buy the fanciest equipment and all the latest bells and whistles gets the BEST quality chicks.

The farmers who can't afford this season's new model are given crap chicks.....and less food.


The "corporations" punish those who don't spend enough on a fancy-ass 'car', who live in the wrong 'zip code' (so to speak). It's a miserable Hunger Games competition. Because if the farmer doesn't pony up and buy all the latest [inhumane] chicken 'factories' --- they won't get ANY CHICKS AT ALL, or any feed to give them!! And then - they can't make the payments on the brand new equipment they were forced to buy......

like a twisted Avon or Mary Kay scheme. It's bullssssht.

Watch that vid. See how it is.

And note that it was last year ------ and people fighting for the Chicken Farmers are being shown the door.
Disgraceful.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

This is call externalizing costs. Like low wage workers on perpetual social services.

The large corps can demand these changes, lower their costs further. Then the "farmer" is left holding the bag when the big corps demand even bigger and more expensive barns/equipment/training/certifications/ ect. The only way to deal with this is busting up theses large corps like was done to Standard oil and old ma Bell.

Moral leadership, that's all, that would fix it.

a reply to: seasonal

Yes.
Thanks. Bernie for POTUS. I still have the sign in my yard.
I think I'll leave it there until 2020. And I won't apologize for it.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Would Bernie be the answer, he would need to be both a bastard in congress to push votes, and a killer using the soap box to keep America's attention to end the stagnating wages that has occurred since 1979.

I am a Bernie guy, Trump guy or a Johnson guy. But they got their work cut out for them.

a reply to: ScepticScot

Their top rate is 20+ percent over ours so that is why I bothered to only put thier top one, showing all of ours are under thier rates. Sorry for not bothering to put the rest of the brackets, I imagine their lowest will still be higher than ours. I will check that info myself as well, thanks for pointing it out tho!

a reply to: [post=21179364]Opportunia[/po


Depending on how you get insurance, that can be easily 10- 20% of income. It is an economy killer, and in effect it's the new mortgage plus copays and deductibles.
This could to lead to a depression if the medical industry doesn't have it's wings clipped. It is a huge anchor to employment, job changing and starting a business. It also takes away freedoms, through confiscatory costs and punishing increases.

a reply to: seasonal

Ok, I may not have added in "the actual cost of healthcare to the individual consumer in the US" into my concise response to the OP. How would you then add up the added cost of suffering of those who have to wait far longer for that access to healthcare? What dollar amount would all that suffering garnish? We as humans DO put cost amounts on human suffering in courts of law all around the world. So it matters as well.
Their disability programs are much different. Human disability, rehabilitation and such take a lot of time and money. You don't get to live off of S.S.I. all your life because you are in a wheelchair or living in assisted environment because of health problems. You get a certain amount of time to work on your problem, then you must after a period of time, live on WITHOUT the exra money as they cut it off after a determined amount of time. So you now must find a way to EARN income or family must absorb your costs or you add up significant debt and can end up on the streets if you cannot find funds. Also if you are not native and needy...they may not be able to help and often refuse care and refuge to the ill. This article mentions addicts. There are also many in health rehab for illness or injury who face the same fate if they cannot get funds for living needs after their "registered" assistance expires. So their healthcare system will only go so far. The U.S. Healthcare system is also tethered to our social welfare program. People can end up being taken care of, rent paid, doctors paid for the rest of the life on our system. You won't find that in Sweden.

Check out this article for a info on this problem - www.thelocal.se...

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: avgguy

I don't know the % we pay including medical, but some research is needed for an accurate statement.

I think a simple point to make in terms of justice is that the USA's budgeted moneys for foreign nations, if they were instead simply apportioned to every citizen in the USA would fuel enormous growth and development from the bottom up.

A simple reframing of intentions and obligations in the budget of the USA could target money that is now going abroad through many different departments back inside the nation. If you lot in the USA can have TARP to bail out the cretins at the top, why couldn't that same amount of money be dispersed among US citizens who earn less than 200,000 USD per annum.

I think it is easy to see virtues in Sweden's system as it worked in the 1980's. As it is today, the Swedish system is changing. It is better to come up with an US American answer to the problems in the USA rather than thinking in terms of importing another system from a much smaller homogenous nation.

a reply to: Opportunia

I have yet to see an article/study where US vs Sweden or Switzerland ect where the US comes out with better outcomes in terms of medical treatment. Please show me a study were we pay 100-300% higher rates for medical coverage and have Better outcomes. We have worse outcomes with the likes of Columbia (the country) and pay more for it. We should be living longer with all the bling we are throwing to "BIG MEDICAL".

Look into MRI costs in industrialized nations and who decides where the life saving machines are located. Be prepared to be pissed.


Seems like your article deals with migrants.

TextWhile homelessness among Swedes has steadily decreased over the past decade, the number of homeless EU migrants has however skyrocketed.

We literally are at the mercy of a well lobbied beast that has to be reformed. Look at other countries and take the best they have to offer for the United Stated medical patient. This may mean reasonable 6-8% returns for medical companies, but I can live with that.