moody
Banned
Posts: 18,679
|
Post by moody on Jun 18, 2021 16:21:04 GMT -5
Most countries haven't counted deaths like the US - or were so bombarded they were unable to keep up. There is no way India's numbers are in the ballpark right - their total deaths have greatly exceeded the US. Russia, Brazil, Mexico - no way they are counting all their deaths. No way those countries had it better than the US. Canada locked down their border. It was easier for Canada to lock down the border. Businesses on the U.S. side benefit more from Canadians crossing the border to buy cheaper goods and pick up their Amazon deliveries without paying exorbitant international shipping charges. Canada paid people $2000 per month to stay home. Huge difference.
|
|
|
Post by AmeriCanvbdad on Jun 18, 2021 16:40:04 GMT -5
not surprised a conservative isn't aware of the most famous fact-checking website Nice dig PDG
|
|
|
Post by AmeriCanvbdad on Jun 18, 2021 16:49:04 GMT -5
"Canada paid people $2000 per month to stay home. Huge difference."
That money was paid because people lost work or because they HAD to stay home to care for their family. It wasn't a benevolent pay out.
I would highly caution anyone to pump their brakes before citing Canada as an example to follow.
Middle class was paying roughly 47% of their take home pay to taxes when we left 20 years ago.
Of course things have probably changed but not sure what direction they've gone.
|
|
|
Post by donut on Jun 18, 2021 17:00:02 GMT -5
not surprised a conservative isn't aware of the most famous fact-checking website Nice dig PDG Not a dig. Honest observation.
|
|
|
Post by donut on Jun 18, 2021 17:04:27 GMT -5
"Canada paid people $2000 per month to stay home. Huge difference." That money was paid because people lost work or because they HAD to stay home to care for their family. It wasn't a benevolent pay out. I would highly caution anyone to pump their brakes before citing Canada as an example to follow. Middle class was paying roughly 47% of their take home pay to taxes when we left 20 years ago. Of course things have probably changed but not sure what direction they've gone. You've made it clear you didn't like Canada, but Canada has the United States beat in most quality of life indicators, suggesting that if the United States is trying to provide the best quality of life for its citizens, Canada would be a good example to follow. Also not sure what tax rates have to do with COVID responses.
|
|
|
Post by mervinswerved on Jun 18, 2021 17:47:52 GMT -5
He was the wrong person for this crisis. But I also don't think it would have materially changed with another President. 100% agree. We have spent the last 50 years hollowing out American institutions and state capacity to the point where we are completely incapable of responding to a crisis like this.
|
|
|
Post by mervinswerved on Jun 18, 2021 18:02:30 GMT -5
President Hillary Clinton would have been marginally better (and that's an important margin!) but the overall result would have been very similar. Maybe 500k dead instead of 600k+, which isn't nothing.
|
|
|
Post by AmeriCanvbdad on Jun 18, 2021 18:17:11 GMT -5
"Canada paid people $2000 per month to stay home. Huge difference." That money was paid because people lost work or because they HAD to stay home to care for their family. It wasn't a benevolent pay out. I would highly caution anyone to pump their brakes before citing Canada as an example to follow. Middle class was paying roughly 47% of their take home pay to taxes when we left 20 years ago. Of course things have probably changed but not sure what direction they've gone. You've made it clear you didn't like Canada, but Canada has the United States beat in most quality of life indicators, suggesting that if the United States is trying to provide the best quality of life for its citizens, Canada would be a good example to follow. Also not sure what tax rates have to do with COVID responses. The money to pay those $2000 dollar pay outs come from the heavily taxed citizens of Canada.
|
|
|
Post by mervinswerved on Jun 18, 2021 18:20:01 GMT -5
You've made it clear you didn't like Canada, but Canada has the United States beat in most quality of life indicators, suggesting that if the United States is trying to provide the best quality of life for its citizens, Canada would be a good example to follow. Also not sure what tax rates have to do with COVID responses. The money to pay those $2000 dollar pay outs come from the heavily taxed citizens of Canada. Yes that's the point of a social safety net.
|
|
|
Post by donut on Jun 18, 2021 18:21:29 GMT -5
You've made it clear you didn't like Canada, but Canada has the United States beat in most quality of life indicators, suggesting that if the United States is trying to provide the best quality of life for its citizens, Canada would be a good example to follow. Also not sure what tax rates have to do with COVID responses. The money to pay those $2000 dollar pay outs come from the heavily taxed citizens of Canada. ... cool? Also you should do some tax rates research comparing the United States and Canada. I think you'll be very surprised.
|
|
|
Post by dc on Jun 18, 2021 18:52:16 GMT -5
You've made it clear you didn't like Canada, but Canada has the United States beat in most quality of life indicators, suggesting that if the United States is trying to provide the best quality of life for its citizens, Canada would be a good example to follow. Also not sure what tax rates have to do with COVID responses. The money to pay those $2000 dollar pay outs come from the heavily taxed citizens of Canada. Perfect conditioned response Mr Dog
|
|
|
Post by jayj79 on Jun 18, 2021 20:22:33 GMT -5
Middle class was paying roughly 47% of their take home pay to taxes when we left 20 years ago. Looking at tax rates alone isn't really a valid comparison. You'd also have to look at the benefits that those taxes provide, vs. what others have to pay for out-of-pocket. Paying $500 extra in taxes while saving $5000 in out-of-pocket medical expenses isn't a bad tradeoff. (just throwing out an example; I don't know how out-of-pocket medical expenses compare between the various countries)
|
|
|
Post by AmeriCanvbdad on Jun 18, 2021 21:50:17 GMT -5
Middle class was paying roughly 47% of their take home pay to taxes when we left 20 years ago. Looking at tax rates alone isn't really a valid comparison. You'd also have to look at the benefits that those taxes provide, vs. what others have to pay for out-of-pocket. Paying $500 extra in taxes while saving $5000 in out-of-pocket medical expenses isn't a bad tradeoff. (just throwing out an example; I don't know how out-of-pocket medical expenses compare between the various countries) I don't consider the 18 month wait for an MRI or a heart echo worth the trade off but I only lived there you guys obviously know more.
|
|
trojansc
Legend
All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017), All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team (2016), 2021, 2019 Fantasy League Champion, 2020 Fantasy League Runner Up, 2022 2nd Runner Up
Posts: 28,109
|
Post by trojansc on Jun 18, 2021 22:00:57 GMT -5
Looking at tax rates alone isn't really a valid comparison. You'd also have to look at the benefits that those taxes provide, vs. what others have to pay for out-of-pocket. Paying $500 extra in taxes while saving $5000 in out-of-pocket medical expenses isn't a bad tradeoff. (just throwing out an example; I don't know how out-of-pocket medical expenses compare between the various countries) I don't consider the 18 month wait for an MRI or a heart echo worth the trade off but I only lived there you guys obviously know more. A MRI that is in no way urgent for medical purposes, correct?
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Jun 18, 2021 22:34:25 GMT -5
18 months? Please supply documentation on that claim.
I've seen info that in Canada if you are in-hospital and you need an MRI, you get it just as fast as in the US. (But you don't pay for it.) On the other hand, if you are not in-hospital and the need is not deemed to be medically urgent, you may be waiting 3 months.
I'm in an HMO, and have been my whole life. It has its advantages and disadvantages, but I generally like the idea of salaried medical professionals who don't get paid by the procedure. On the other hand, in an HMO sometimes you need to be your own advocate for non-routine care.
As I understand it, in Canada the vast majority of doctors are still paid by procedure just like in the US, but the difference is that it is the government that pays them rather than their patients.
|
|