sthompson Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 I read all 38 pages of the healthcare thread. I see the points in favor of NHC/UHC in other countries but I am wondering though.....who foots the bill? I understand that you pay through your taxes. However not everyone pays taxes here in the states. I'm from an area where welfare queens are the norm. Generations abusing the system. They don't have jobs, own homes/property. They live in public housing and collect their welfare checks. They are not paying their "fair share". Does that make sense? So I'm wondering who pays and how. Sales tax? Property tax? Income tax? Thanks for you info! Stephanie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barb_ Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 They are not paying their "fair share". Does that make sense? I think we have to define "fair share" if we are going to discuss this. By fair, do you mean equitable? As in everyone should pay in the same amount? Because flat taxes by nature are unfair as those with more ability to pay will pay a smaller percentage of income. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cottonmama Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 Because flat taxes by nature are unfair as those with more ability to pay will pay a smaller percentage of income. I thought flat tax meant flat percentage... i.e. those with more ability to pay are paying the same percentage, rather than a higher percentage. :confused: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justLisa Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 Well I hate the term welfare queen, but that is an entirely different issue. My sis has a friend that started having babies as a young teen and still going strong.....but to deny them healthcare, I dunno. I have a hard time discussing things like this when I already feel defensive about the way it has been approached. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justLisa Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 I thought flat tax meant flat percentage... i.e. those with more ability to pay are paying the same percentage, rather than a higher percentage. :confused: Yeah, that seems to be the most "fair." No matter what you make, everyone pays the same percentage. Not sure how that would work though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leav97 Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 Who's paying now... You are already paying for everyone that can't pay their own bill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sthompson Posted July 17, 2012 Author Share Posted July 17, 2012 A percentage, flat tax, what one can afford, whatever. What I'm interested in is who pays in other countries, and how? Welfare queens is what we call them. No not everyone is but the folks here are. I've been surround by the projects my whole life. Some use welfare to get by and others live on it. I'm not suggesting denying anything. Just asking a general question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sthompson Posted July 17, 2012 Author Share Posted July 17, 2012 Who's paying now... You are already paying for everyone that can't pay their own bill. Yes. Yes we are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crimson Wife Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 Most European countries and Canada have what's called a "value-added tax". It's kind of like a sales tax but it's levied at every step along the way of the manufacturing process. Most countries' VAT is very high, in the 20-25% range. On one hand, it's fairer than the U.S. system because it's based on consumption and everybody who consumes the same amount pays the same tax. You don't have all the "free riders" like there are here in the U.S. The more affluent typically pay a higher total tax because they consume more, but like sales taxes, it's a flat percentage of the cost of the good. There are still income taxes on top of the VAT, however. Some countries, like France, additionally have a "wealth tax" on total net assets (including primary residences and businesses) exceeding a certain amount. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sthompson Posted July 17, 2012 Author Share Posted July 17, 2012 Most European countries and Canada have what's called a "value-added tax". It's kind of like a sales tax but it's levied at every step along the way of the manufacturing process. Most countries' VAT is very high, in the 20-25% range. On one hand, it's fairer than the U.S. system because it's based on consumption and everybody who consumes the same amount pays the same tax. You don't have all the "free riders" like there are here in the U.S. The more affluent typically pay a higher total tax because they consume more, but like sales taxes, it's a flat percentage of the cost of the good. There are still income taxes on top of the VAT, however. Some countries, like France, additionally have a "wealth tax" on total net assets (including primary residences and businesses) exceeding a certain amount. Thank you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denise in Florida Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 Who's paying now... You are already paying for everyone that can't pay their own bill. :iagree::iagree: Many of the people who can't pay for their healthcare through the current system either use the ER or sign up to pay as individuals and find themselves over their heads and having to declare bankruptcy. While I am sure this group contains some folks who are trying to 'free ride' the sytem, it also contains many many people who are employed full time. I know there are folks who take advantage...there always will be. But they do not represent all the people who need a better system. I don't know the statistics but I believe the 'free ride' type are not the largest portion of the group. My sister and BIL are in the middle of a bankruptcy over medical bills. They are devastated, they will lose everything they have tried to build up. He works, he takes every extra hour he can. He is currently uninsurable. He ignores most problems that should be cared for, when he must receive care (repeated melanomas) he ends up paying twice the rate the insurance companies pay (no negotiated discounts). They have enough income to buy a moderately price insurance if it were available, it isn't. They are not asking for a hand out just a chance to get into the same market as everyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haiku Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 I'm from an area where welfare queens are the norm. I suggest you read the book The Myth of the Welfare Queen. Most people think they know all about women on welfare, but the idea of the welfare queen has been pretty soundly debunked ... repeatedly. Tangentially, it really drives me nuts to no end that people insist that women take responsibility for their actions if they become pregnant outside of marriage, but then when these women do exactly that, accept responsibility and raise their children (often without the guys, who are the ones who are actually shirking their responsibility), they get labeled with all sorts of derogatory terms. Tara Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dicentra Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 Disclaimer: I'm not an accountant nor am I an expert in tax law or constitutional law in Canada - I'm a former high school chem teacher turned homeschooler. :001_smile: Here's how income tax is calculated in Canada: http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/ndvdls/fq/txrts-eng.html We pay a federal income tax as well as a provincial one. We are also taxed provincially for other things - this is for Ontairo: http://www.fin.gov.on.ca/en/tax/index.html In terms of health care in Ontario, see this: http://www.fin.gov.on.ca/en/tax/healthpremium/rates.html Canada has federal transfer payments to some provinces so that (I'm assuming) some of the federal taxes we pay do end up being used (in an indirect way) for health care (even though health care is a provincial mandate) because some of my federal tax dollars are given to what are termed "have-not" provinces (although I've never liked that term). This explains is in a nut-shell: http://www.fin.gc.ca/fedprov/eqp-eng.asp Links galore here: http://www.fin.gc.ca/access/fedprov-eng.asp I pay federal income tax, I pay provincial income tax and provincial taxes on a multitude of other things. I also pay a health care premium based on our household income. Income tax in Canada is percentage-based and it's not a flat percentage - you make more, you pay a higher percentage. That can be offset if you choose to invest in things (retirement savings plans or educational savings plans) that are tax-sheltered. There is also income splitting (the higher earner can "transfer" some of their income to the lower earner to avoid a higher tax bracket). Do I mind paying all these taxes? Actually - I don't. Our household income is in the low six figure range. We're also relatively healthy. I guess that means we're paying for others to access health care. I just look at it as "paying it forward". :001_smile: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VeritasMama Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 I suggest you read the book The Myth of the Welfare Queen. Most people think they know all about women on welfare, but the idea of the welfare queen has been pretty soundly debunked ... repeatedly. Tangentially, it really drives me nuts to no end that people insist that women take responsibility for their actions if they become pregnant outside of marriage, but then when these women do exactly that, accept responsibility and raise their children (often without the guys, who are the ones who are actually shirking their responsibility), they get labeled with all sorts of derogatory terms. Tara I agree that this stereotype is applied to individuals far too often, but I am related through marriage to someone you could describe as a stereotypical "welfare queen." She even moved across state lines to get better benefits. I'm not sure how prevalent this type of behavior is, and I'm not trying to judge people on welfare, my point is that the stereotype of a "welfare queen" does exist for a reason, it was not created out of thin air or created merely due to bigottry. I would choose to label them something other than "welfare queens," but women like this really do exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crimson Wife Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 I know there are folks who take advantage...there always will be. But they do not represent all the people who need a better system. I don't know the statistics but I believe the 'free ride' type are not the largest portion of the group. When I was referring to "free riders" earlier in the thread, I mean the nearly half of all Americans who do not pay Federal income tax. I believe that percentage is WAAAAAAAY too high, and really only the most destitute should be exempt. It embarrassed me that in 2006 we got a larger refund than the total of our withholdings (essentially a handout from the government). We weren't poor, either, but had an income around $50k. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 This is second hand, so take it witha grain of salt. My friends in Belgium are taxed a lot. From what they say 50% of their income goes to taxes. (This is from a general conversation. I've never seen their paperwork.) If they also pay VAT that is a sizable portion of income. When we lived there, we were required to also pay a tax for every TV and radio we owned...not that that applies toward health care, but is an example of how taxes and taxables grow. I dunno...we are self employed/contract labor. Our monthly insurance bill is 750 with a 3500 deductable. Then we pay 25% of each bill up to another limit. It all starts over at the beginning of each year. These threads are making me think and question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jennifer3141 Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 I suggest you read the book The Myth of the Welfare Queen. Most people think they know all about women on welfare, but the idea of the welfare queen has been pretty soundly debunked ... repeatedly. Tangentially, it really drives me nuts to no end that people insist that women take responsibility for their actions if they become pregnant outside of marriage, but then when these women do exactly that, accept responsibility and raise their children (often without the guys, who are the ones who are actually shirking their responsibility), they get labeled with all sorts of derogatory terms. Tara You know what else makes me laugh? Where are the welfare KINGS? There actually isn't a STORK that brings babies, people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Momof3littles Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 You know what else makes me laugh? Where are the welfare KINGS? There actually isn't a STORK that brings babies, people. MIL was recently ranting about women with several children accessing a low cost clinic for healthcare near where she was taking her own mother for a neurologist appt. She was asking why they continue to have kids if they "can't afford healthcare for them." I had to point out to her that many leaders who share her politics have an issue with funding birth control for women, including married women. IMO you can't have it both ways. Eta: I also pointed out to her that in our last home state, there were low cost vasectomies available for low income men who wanted them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sthompson Posted July 17, 2012 Author Share Posted July 17, 2012 You know what else makes me laugh? Where are the welfare KINGS? There actually isn't a STORK that brings babies, people. 1,000 apologies to those better than me :001_smile: How does "welfare people" work? Better:D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TranquilMind Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 Who's paying now... You are already paying for everyone that can't pay their own bill. We all pay...through the nose. This is why the ER costs $1000 for them just to look at you and tell you that you are fine. You are paying for all those who can't or don't. Even worse, if you don't have insurance, you pay even more than those who do who still have to pay out of pocket, because of the negotiated rates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TranquilMind Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 1,000 apologies to those better than me :001_smile: How does "welfare people" work? Better:D Probably "those on government assistance" would be more appropriate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laura Corin Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 Income tax in the UK. Those who earn more, pay more. Our total taxes in the UK are less than would be taxes plus health insurance in the US. My mother hasn't paid tax personally in about fifty years. I'm glad that she has the NHS to support her. My brother has mental health problems and has only worked intermittently. I'm also glad to support the NHS for him. Laura Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laura Corin Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 duplicate L Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKL Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 (edited) Chiming in to say that the current tax structure in the USA would not be a fair structure for paying for health care. In fact, it's not a fair structure period, so let's not add insult to injury. As for welfare queens, yes it is a derogatory term, and yes some people intentionally procreate in order to continue on welfare longer. I know some personally who are not the least embarrassed to admit it. (And yes, it takes two to tango, with the men happily along for the ride.) The OP asked a good question and a couple responders provided helpful answers. VAT is so different from what we do here. Think cigarette tax, without the unhealthy aspect of it. A simple person who happens to have a high taxable income (using much of it for charity or savings) would not pay the share of 10+ families as occurs in our tax system. And maybe the politics would be a little more balanced without 50% of the people demanding that the other 50% keep paying more, more, more. Edited July 17, 2012 by SKL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tex-mex Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 I'm from an area where welfare queens are the norm. Generations abusing the system. They don't have jobs, own homes/property. They live in public housing and collect their welfare checks. :confused: I know in the state I live in the food stamp (SNAP) program is a 5 year limit. This was done back in the late '90s to discourage as you termed, "Welfare Queens". If they get rent paid via a Section 8, that is under HUD and the waiting list is very long to get in. In my state, they are not allowing anyone to sign up for it anymore. I used to be a landlord and many of my former tenants were Section 8. I have to admit it was great to get a steady monthly rent/income with no issues or non-payment as one knew the government was backing the check. And I owned a very upscale 4-plex in a nice neighborhood north of Dallas in Collin County. Many tenants moved to our areas as the schools were better. And all of my Section 8 renters had jobs -- they simply as single parents could not afford rent with the low wages they earned. Which is why they qualified for the Section 8. I never had issue or problems with them as a landlord. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Momof3littles Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 (edited) I'd be in favor of reducing our expenditures on defense and military spending, and am okay with an increase in taxes. Edited July 17, 2012 by Momof3littles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tex-mex Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 Probably "those on government assistance" would be more appropriate. :iagree: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKL Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 Probably "those on government assistance" would be more appropriate. Not really, because that would include people who are temporarily down on their luck. I don't think that's what the OP is talking about (but I could be wrong). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astrid Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 (edited) 1,000 apologies to those better than me :001_smile: How does "welfare people" work? Better:D Wow. Way to go with the snarky, insincere "apologies." astrid Edited July 17, 2012 by astrid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TranquilMind Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 Not really, because that would include people who are temporarily down on their luck. I don't think that's what the OP is talking about (but I could be wrong). "Those on government assistance on an ongoing, not temporary, basis?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKL Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 "Those on government assistance on an ongoing, not temporary, basis?" How about "those whose life occupation is arranging to receive government assistance"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julie in Austin Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 Who pays? Go to this link: http://www.kff.org/insurance/snapshot/oecd042111.cfm and look at "Exhibit 10." What you will see will completely depress you: the US govt is already paying as much for health care as countries with UHC, we then spend that amount *again* through the private sector, and still don't cover everyone. :001_huh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mommaduck Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 (edited) 1,000 apologies to those better than me :001_smile: How does "welfare people" work? Better:D Great way to make those that need help and don't have much choice feel like cr@p. :glare: FYI: There are families on this board that are on food stamps, SSI, and section 8 that are pretty decent people and do what they are capable of. Edited July 17, 2012 by mommaduck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astrid Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 How about "those whose life occupation is arranging to receive government assistance"? Or "those who know no other way of life and are unable to break the cycle of poverty and abuse of many varieties into which they were born, and who despite living in the richest nation in the world are single parents and are so overwhelmed by life circumstances that they become hardened, defensive and downright resentful of the disdain that they KNOW the "haves" are flinging their way, so they hold their heads up to preserve some basic dignity and pride, which can appear to be arrogance to those who look from the outside, and in the absence of a true way out they continue in the only life they know." Or whatever. astrid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astrid Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 Great way to make those that need help and don't have much choice feel like cr@p. :glare: And after only 53 posts! (See my alternative terminology above) astrid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carpe Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 Canada does not have a VAT. We do have GST/HST though which is a federal tax on goods and services (the H is harmonized for the provinces that had their own sales tax previously, the T is tax) Healthcare is paid from provincial revenues. In Alberta it is a 'flat' 10% of income (the first 15K per adult is not taxed at all). We also pay federal income tax. Other provinces have HST and the GST portion remains with the federal government, and the remainder is added to provincial revenues. Each province also sets their own income tax rates. IIRC Quebec has the highest income tax rates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colleen in NS Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 Income tax in the UK. Those who earn more, pay more. Our total taxes in the UK are less than would be taxes plus health insurance in the US. Pretty much the same in Canada - GST/HST plus income taxes. And even with what we pay, it's still less than insurance premiums in the States. Most European countries and Canada have what's called a "value-added tax". It's kind of like a sales tax but it's levied at every step along the way of the manufacturing process. Most countries' VAT is very high, in the 20-25% range. About Canada, not quite... Canada does not have a VAT. We do have GST/HST though which is a federal tax on goods and services (the H is harmonized for the provinces that had their own sales tax previously, the T is tax) Healthcare is paid from provincial revenues. In Alberta it is a 'flat' 10% of income (the first 15K per adult is not taxed at all). We also pay federal income tax. Other provinces have HST and the GST portion remains with the federal government, and the remainder is added to provincial revenues. Each province also sets their own income tax rates. IIRC Quebec has the highest income tax rates. And the HST rates are nowhere near the 20-25% range - provinces vary from 5-15%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justLisa Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 :001_wub: Or "those who know no other way of life and are unable to break the cycle of poverty and abuse of many varieties into which they were born, and who despite living in the richest nation in the world are single parents and are so overwhelmed by life circumstances that they become hardened, defensive and downright resentful of the disdain that they KNOW the "haves" are flinging their way, so they hold their heads up to preserve some basic dignity and pride, which can appear to be arrogance to those who look from the outside, and in the absence of a true way out they continue in the only life they know." Or whatever. astrid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pixjen Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 I'm curious about the OP's original question too. For whatever reason, approx. 50% of Americans each year are not paying income taxes. How would it be possible to cover everyone with UHC (assuming it was supported via current tax structures) if only half the population is contributing? Additionally, do countries with UHC have everyone pay into their system no matter what their income? Is it a flat % rate based on income or some other calculation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
momto10blessings Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 My husband works his butt off for our family of 10, but we keep to a tight budget and do not have things like cable or satellite tv, smart phones, nice clothes or shoes, or even get our hair cut at a salon, etc. I do believe in helping out others who need assistance. I know the world is tough and some times you need a little help. But what I can not stand is when I am behind someone who buys all their food with foodstamps and WIC(Women, Infant, Children food assistance program), and then with their extra money, buys a case of beer and carton of cigarettes. I've been behind people like this who are on their smart phones, wearing designer clothing, have nice hair cuts and salon-colored hair:confused: And all I can think is, "If I could get on foodstamps I could have all this stuff too".. They obviously don't need government assistance if they can have all those things. I also went to a friend's house who is on WIC and she also has satellite tv. She told me they pay $120/month for a subscription. :confused: So they can afford to spend $120/month on satellite tv but not the same on milk, cheese and bread? Where are people's priorities? It sickens me that we think like this is this country. I also have a cousin who is on WIC, yet takes a 2 week vacation to Disney every year. I'd LOVE a 2 wk vacation every year, but since we have to feed our family... I wish we could somehow just give it to the people who need the assistance, the ones who actually are living at a minimum and pinching pennies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKL Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 My husband works his butt off for our family of 10, but we keep to a tight budget and do not have things like cable or satellite tv, smart phones, nice clothes or shoes, or even get our hair cut at a salon, etc. I do believe in helping out others who need assistance. I know the world is tough and some times you need a little help. But what I can not stand is when I am behind someone who buys all their food with foodstamps and WIC(Women, Infant, Children food assistance program), and then with their extra money, buys a case of beer and carton of cigarettes. I've been behind people like this who are on their smart phones, wearing designer clothing, have nice hair cuts and salon-colored hair:confused: And all I can think is, "If I could get on foodstamps I could have all this stuff too".. They obviously don't need government assistance if they can have all those things. I also went to a friend's house who is on WIC and she also has satellite tv. She told me they pay $120/month for a subscription. :confused: So they can afford to spend $120/month on satellite tv but not the same on milk, cheese and bread? Where are people's priorities? It sickens me that we think like this is this country. I also have a cousin who is on WIC, yet takes a 2 week vacation to Disney every year. I'd LOVE a 2 wk vacation every year, but since we have to feed our family... I wish we could somehow just give it to the people who need the assistance, the ones who actually are living at a minimum and pinching pennies. :iagree: but you're probably going to get slammed for telling it like it is. :leaving: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Audrey Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 I read all 38 pages of the healthcare thread. I see the points in favor of NHC/UHC in other countries but I am wondering though.....who foots the bill? I understand that you pay through your taxes. However not everyone pays taxes here in the states. I'm from an area where welfare queens are the norm. Generations abusing the system. They don't have jobs, own homes/property. They live in public housing and collect their welfare checks. They are not paying their "fair share". Does that make sense? So I'm wondering who pays and how. Sales tax? Property tax? Income tax? Thanks for you info! Stephanie I think you have to first understand that the idea of "paying your fair share" is irrelevant in many countries outside the US, and irrelevant to a discussion of UHC to those in a UHC country. It is simply not part of the equation. This is a very different way of thinking about fellow countrymen than your approach to the argument is implying. I find it useless to have discussions on UHC from a UHC perspective when someone has the mentality of "fair shares" clouding them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crimson Wife Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 I'm curious about the OP's original question too. For whatever reason, approx. 50% of Americans each year are not paying income taxes. How would it be possible to covereveryone with UHC (assuming it was supported via current tax structures) if only half the population is contributing? Additionally, do countries with UHC have everyone pay into their system no matter what their income? Is it a flat % rate based on income or some other calculation? If there is a country that has socialized medicine and doesn't have a VAT (or whatever the similar tax that PP said Canada has), I'm not aware of it. Not to say that there isn't one somewhere, but I cannot think of one off the top of my head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Audrey Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 Most European countries and Canada have what's called a "value-added tax". It's kind of like a sales tax but it's levied at every step along the way of the manufacturing process. Most countries' VAT is very high, in the 20-25% range. On one hand, it's fairer than the U.S. system because it's based on consumption and everybody who consumes the same amount pays the same tax. You don't have all the "free riders" like there are here in the U.S. The more affluent typically pay a higher total tax because they consume more, but like sales taxes, it's a flat percentage of the cost of the good. There are still income taxes on top of the VAT, however. Some countries, like France, additionally have a "wealth tax" on total net assets (including primary residences and businesses) exceeding a certain amount. Canada does not have a VAT. We do have a GST (General Sales Tax) which is 5%, and provinces have PST (Provincial Sales Taxes) which vary, but average around the 7% mark, IIRC. We also pay Federal and Provincial income taxes, just like you do in the US. The argument that Canadians are paying beaucoup de dollars in taxes more than Americans is fallacious. And, if you figure in what Americans pay for health insurance premiums, then we are a far cheaper nation tax-for-service wise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laura Corin Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 (edited) Additionally, do countries with UHC have everyone pay into their system no matter what their income? Is it a flat % rate based on income or some other calculation? You can look up what proportion of general taxation goes to the National Health Service, the armed forces, education.... People who don't earn enough to pay tax don't contribute to the NHS, the armed forces, education.... except through VAT on purchases. Laura Edited July 17, 2012 by Laura Corin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
momto10blessings Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 :iagree: but you're probably going to get slammed for telling it like it is. :leaving: I figured I might, but I tried to make it clear that I believe in helping out those in need, just not those who are not really in need... And I try not to be judgemental, but how can I not notice these things Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mommaduck Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 *sigh* Not slamming as there are some like this. On the other hand, it's presumptuous. People do sometimes receive things from family members, get handed down NICE brand name clothing (used, but nice or bought, but never worn), and some people do scrimp in some areas to make sure that they can get a nice haircut for WORK, because it's required that they keep a certain appearance. People in poverty may occasionally have a few extra bucks and they spend it on something nice. It doesn't affect their food stamps, their income does and an increase one week of a few bucks doesn't change the amount...it has to be a significant amount at the time of their review. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laura Corin Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 If there is a country that has socialized medicine and doesn't have a VAT (or whatever the similar tax that PP said Canada has), I'm not aware of it. Not to say that there isn't one somewhere, but I cannot think of one off the top of my head. Prices are quoted inclusive of VAT. When I lived in California, I had to add sales tax to the prices stated in the shops. Total tax is still lower in the UK than tax plus insurance premiums in the US. Laura Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKL Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 I would venture a guess that when those more socialist countries were talking about "universal healthcare" and preparing to implement it, there wasn't 100% agreement there, either. Now, they are used to it, and their pro opinion is probably also fueled by patriotism (understandably). Just because they accept their status quo does not mean they are better people than we are. A possible parallel would be how we discuss women's rights in comparison to a country where girls are not allowed to go to school. Or where they don't have universal public education. There probably were dissenters here at one time or another, but now we think we're better people because this is our status quo. I always come across on these boards as not caring about others, but that's not true. I would love for our country to solve this problem so everyone has reasonable access to health care. I think there are ways to address the real problems (and keep what's good) without wholesale change. I agree that we can't intelligently discuss this until we can separate the "how" from the "why." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crimson Wife Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 Prices are quoted inclusive of VAT. When I lived in California, I had to add sales tax to the prices stated in the shops. Laura Not all U.S. states have sales tax. California does have a very high sales tax, but that is because the state has chosen to keep property taxes for many homeowners very low (many of our neighbors are paying 1/3 the property taxes we are just because they've owned their houses for 25 years). My dad lives in New Hampshire where there is no sales tax but he's paying ridiculously high property taxes and they have increased every single year even when the assessed value fell. It's a tradeoff because the tax revenue has to come from somewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts