At Least the Economy is Doing Well

[ericb]

Gotta say however, after visiting some relatives in England this summer, we're getting hosed over here regarding health care. I brought up the subject numerous times with relatives, neighbors, and their friends. No one had a bad story. They were appalled about hearing the costs involved in care over here and that there are so many folks without coverage.

 

Even went to the clinc and pharmacy with my cousin. She's 65 and on several medications for diabetes. No charge for the checkup, about $10 charge for a months worth of insulin that included her insulin meter pipettes.

 

Neighbors had a baby, no charge; friend had heart surgey, no charge; broken ankle, no charge. I didn't see MM's "Sicko" until I got back. Man we are being swindled big time by the insurance companies. Duh - why do you think we're the only industrial country not to have a universal system.

 

Sad to say it will not come from Hillary - take a look at her donar list these days.

 

My Irish citizenship papers are in the works (will have dual) and as part of the EU that keeps options open.

 

Did you ask them about what they were paying in taxes...you might have been equally as shocked if you had. How do you think they pay for there health care system?

 

Income tax - 40% on earnings over ~ $70K USD (20% below)

National insurance tax - 11%

Value Added Tax (on goods and services) 17.5%

[Jim]

Don't know where you're getting your information but here is a good comparison of average tax rates.

 

An extensive spreadsheet table comparing income tax "wedges" (as theyare called by the OECD) from member countries can be found here:

 

http://www.oecd.org/LongAbstract/0,2546,en_2649_201185_1942475_1_1_1_1,00.html

 

in a title repeated no less than three times on the same page:

 

"Average personal income tax and social security contribution rates on

gross labour income".

 

The detailed breakdowns (federal tax, local taxes, social security)can be seen in the table itself. The "bottom line" figures for the countries you are interested in are:

 

UK

 

The total tax wedge is 29.7% for the average wage earner

 

("average" wage is found in the 100% column -- tax wedges for lower and higher wage earners are found in the adjacent columns)

 

Denmark

 

The total tax wedge is 44.2% for the average wage earner

(*ouch* -- but they do have GREAT social benefits in Denmark).

 

Germany

The total tax wedge is 50.7% for the average wage earner

(double *ouch*)

 

France

The total tax wedge is 48.3% for the average wage earner

 

US

The total tax wedge is 30.0% for the average wage earner

 

 

In talking to folks over there I'd say they pay a bit more taxes with VAT but the income tax is comparable. And there is no worry about going broke because of medical bills

[Jim]

Not a snide comment - but did you discuss the economic reforms that the Irish have made over the past ~20 years with any Irish people, since it sounds like you have some connections there?

 

In general I got the impression that they are glad the economy is moving along better, but a bit winsome for the older days when things were at a slower pace. Other than Dublin, Galway, and some of the other larger cities it's still a very rural country. Dublin real estate has gotten very expensive, comparable to NYC. Overall I'd say the people I spent time with admire the US and its people, hate the foreign policy of date, and would never want to trade their position for ours. Particularly regarding health care. The ones I spoke to feel strongly that their health care system works well and they are taxed fairly.

 

It seemed to me they lived good lifes, drove decent cars, had nice houses - all a bit smaller in scale to the US and that was just fine. Money seems less of an issue in their lives.

[Peter_Puget]

Don't know where you're getting your information but here is a good comparison of average tax rates.

 

An extensive spreadsheet table comparing income tax "wedges" (as theyare called by the OECD) from member countries can be found here:

 

http://www.oecd.org/LongAbstract/0,2546,en_2649_201185_1942475_1_1_1_1,00.html

 

in a title repeated no less than three times on the same page:

 

"Average personal income tax and social security contribution rates on

gross labour income".

 

The detailed breakdowns (federal tax, local taxes, social security)can be seen in the table itself. The "bottom line" figures for the countries you are interested in are:

 

UK

 

The total tax wedge is 29.7% for the average wage earner

 

("average" wage is found in the 100% column -- tax wedges for lower and higher wage earners are found in the adjacent columns)

 

Denmark

 

The total tax wedge is 44.2% for the average wage earner

(*ouch* -- but they do have GREAT social benefits in Denmark).

 

Germany

The total tax wedge is 50.7% for the average wage earner

(double *ouch*)

 

France

The total tax wedge is 48.3% for the average wage earner

 

US

The total tax wedge is 30.0% for the average wage earner

 

 

In talking to folks over there I'd say they pay a bit more taxes with VAT but the income tax is comparable. And there is no worry about going broke because of medical bills

 

 

Great data Jim -

 

Would you please reference the tab and cells showing where you values come from.

 

Cheers

Edited August 30, 2007 by Peter_Puget

[ericb]

Don't know where you're getting your information but here is a good comparison of average tax rates.

 

An extensive spreadsheet table comparing income tax "wedges" (as theyare called by the OECD) from member countries can be found here:

 

http://www.oecd.org/LongAbstract/0,2546,en_2649_201185_1942475_1_1_1_1,00.html

 

in a title repeated no less than three times on the same page:

 

"Average personal income tax and social security contribution rates on

gross labour income".

 

The detailed breakdowns (federal tax, local taxes, social security)can be seen in the table itself. The "bottom line" figures for the countries you are interested in are:

 

UK

 

The total tax wedge is 29.7% for the average wage earner

 

("average" wage is found in the 100% column -- tax wedges for lower and higher wage earners are found in the adjacent columns)

 

Denmark

 

The total tax wedge is 44.2% for the average wage earner

(*ouch* -- but they do have GREAT social benefits in Denmark).

 

Germany

The total tax wedge is 50.7% for the average wage earner

(double *ouch*)

 

France

The total tax wedge is 48.3% for the average wage earner

 

US

The total tax wedge is 30.0% for the average wage earner

 

 

In talking to folks over there I'd say they pay a bit more taxes with VAT but the income tax is comparable. And there is no worry about going broke because of medical bills

 

I don't see anywhere where the "average wage" is given, but income tax is comparable for "average wage earners". If you look at the tax brackets and rates in the upper brackets, you can see that the high wage earners are paying much more relative to the average wage earners compared to the US.

[Jim]

health

 

Peter - that's what I get for cutting and pasting.

 

Let's look at 2006 - and UK vs US

UK actually pays a bit more taxes than US, but not much.

 

For .67, 100, 137, and 167% of income avg UK pays:

 

28%, 32%, 33%, 35%

 

US pays

27%, 27%, 32%, and 35%

 

So actually, there is less of a difference in the upper income taxes and a maximum difference of 5%. For free health care? I'll take those numbers anytime. I know, I know, they have to live without really good cruise missles.

[Peter_Puget]

Thanks for the correction! I too am puzzled by the phrase "average wage earner" please show me were that is used/defined in the source data.

 

Also,

 

I wonder if you would explain to me why you chose not to use this data:

 

http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/44/1/1942490.xls

 

 

Edited August 30, 2007 by Peter_Puget

[Jim]

Not sure what your point is but is average income a better phrase. And the spreadsheet I linked to had a good breakdown of income compared to the average.

 

Fair to say that the income taxes are a bit higher in the EU but then they don't have to worry about health care. And no one is left in the gutter or dropped off in front of a homeless shelter because they don't have medical insurance.

Edited August 30, 2007 by Jim

[ericb]

Not sure what your point is but is average income a better phrase. And the spreadsheet I linked to had a good breakdown of income compared to the average.

 

Fair to say that the income taxes are a bit higher in the EU but then they don't have to worry about health care. And no one is left in the gutter or dropped off in front of a homeless shelter because they don't have medical insurance.

 

I think PP's data shows that including deductions for children results in much lower taxes in the US. Also, if we assume the average wage in the UK is around $40K USD, even 167% of the AW would put them just at the $70K USD threshold where the income tax in the UK jumps from ~20% to ~40%....at that point, it sure would suck to be a yuppie.

[Jim]

The first point is true - but they don't show data on two income earners, which is the more likely scenario in the US. I don't see the second point - looks to me that at 167% the rates are pretty close.

 

The story line that the politicians are feeding you just don't add up. Go and travel a bit. Talk to people. From what I've seen in Ireland, Italy, France, UK, and Greece, people are quite satisfied with the health system and quite happy with the taxes they pay because they see the return on their investment. Here we're paying for the insurance company profits and redundancy of 100 insurance companies and their forms.

[tvashtarkatena]

The first point is true - but they don't show data on two income earners, which is the more likely scenario in the US. I don't see the second point - looks to me that at 167% the rates are pretty close.

 

The story line that the politicians are feeding you just don't add up. Go and travel a bit. Talk to people. From what I've seen in Ireland, Italy, France, UK, and Greece, people are quite satisfied with the health system and quite happy with the taxes they pay because they see the return on their investment. Here we're paying for the insurance company profits and redundancy of 100 insurance companies and their forms.

 

Nobody has yet mentioned the half a billion a year we blow on stealth bombers, aircraft carriers, ray guns, and Iraqi blast walls. That might warrant a tiny little cell on the spreadsheet.

[ericb]

The first point is true - but they don't show data on two income earners, which is the more likely scenario in the US. I don't see the second point - looks to me that at 167% the rates are pretty close.

 

The story line that the politicians are feeding you just don't add up. Go and travel a bit. Talk to people. From what I've seen in Ireland, Italy, France, UK, and Greece, people are quite satisfied with the health system and quite happy with the taxes they pay because they see the return on their investment. Here we're paying for the insurance company profits and redundancy of 100 insurance companies and their forms.

 

I have traveled a bit...on my most recent trip, the bartender was living without an ACL because the government health plan didn't consider it necessary unless he was a profession athlete.

[Jim]

Likely in Tacoma

[KaskadskyjKozak]

The story line that the Democrat politicians are feeding you just don't add up.

 

Now, that would be a sentiment I could agree with.

 

Keep up the Nationalize Healthcare rhetoric, and lose another election.

[Jim]

You're probably right about the election. Personally I don't get it. Why are we ok having multiple insurance companies fleece us, have 47 million w/o any health care, and not use the collective bargining power of the US just as Medicare does or the Veterans Administration does for more cost effective health care?

 

Excelent PR by the insurance companies backed up by politicians who are in their back pocket.

 

http://www.nchc.org/facts/coverage.shtml

[KaskadskyjKozak]

You're probably right about the election. Personally I don't get it. Why are we ok having multiple insurance companies fleece us, have 12 million w/o any health care, and not use the collective bargining power of the US just as Medicare does or the Veterans Administration does for more cost effective health care?

 

Excelent PR by the insurance companies backed up by politicians who are in their back pocket.

 

Because Government running our health care would be even worse.

 

How about this idea - the gov't sets up a nonprofit "insurance" system, and set of non-profit clinics in a few key places in the US. Anyone who wants to OPTIONALLY use the gov't system can - and pay out of pocket or through their employer just as they would now. And after 2-3 years, PROVE to me and anyone else that doubt the gov't will do a better job with lower cost to me, and I'll believe you then.

 

[ClimbingPanther]

Here we're paying for the insurance company profits and redundancy of 100 insurance companies and their forms.

 

There's no getting around that fact. That alone does make me wonder if we'd be better of as a society by nationalizing health care. The fewer costs involved in a doctor visit, the cheaper the service. I do fear a little for the proven ability of the government to waste money and lose that benefit, but hey, who knows. This is about math, and it doesn't take a genius to deduce that the more middlemen you have making profits, the more society as a whole pays for the service, one way or another.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

Here we're paying for the insurance company profits and redundancy of 100 insurance companies and their forms.

 

There's no getting around that fact. That alone does make me wonder if we'd be better of as a society by nationalizing health care. The fewer costs involved in a doctor visit, the cheaper the service. I do fear a little for the proven ability of the government to waste money and lose that benefit, but hey, who knows. This is about math, and it doesn't take a genius to deduce that the more middlemen you have making profits, the more society as a whole pays for the service, one way or another.

 

Government will find a way to waste just as much, if not more money, than any middle man charges us. I have no faith whatsoever in a federally-run health plan. Period.

 

This is a one-way deal here - nationalization that is. I say I want to see it done in a limited way first and PROVE that it is cheaper and we get the same benefits. Hell, start with some liberal stonghold first, say New York State - and see just how well it works.

 

[Jim]

But the most efficient providers of medical care in this country ARE run by the government - Medicare and the Veterans Administration.

 

Ok, we're smart here, we have money. Why can't we look at the way other countries run their programs and take the best ideas of those and put together our own? No way it would cost more than what we have to pay now with each insurance company's profit, advertising, and redundancy.

 

And you have to love those doctor's working for the insurance companies who are paid bonuses to keep the "tails" of the bell curve out of the system by delaying and refusing to provide needed care. That and 47 million uninsured. We can't do better than that?

[KaskadskyjKozak]

But the most efficient providers of medical care in this country ARE run by the government - Medicare and the Veterans Administration.

 

 

There is so much fraud in those programs, red tape, and total bureaucratic BS.

 

To wit: recently I was reading how Iraq veterans who have LOST A LIMB in BATTLE were unable to get reimbursed for treatment, while Vietnam-era veterans were getting paid for treatment of SYPHILLIS which they acquired on leave.

 

Once you get government involved GOOD LUCK getting treated, GOOD LUCK with all the red tape and other bullshit.

[ClimbingPanther]

Actually I've heard a few stories about the VA, but that's beside the point. I'm one conservative who's more than willing to consider this direction.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

Actually I've heard a few stories about the VA, but that's beside the point. I'm one conservative who's more than willing to consider this direction.

 

It's NOT beside the point at all.

 

The VA, medicare - service about as good as a trip to the DMV. In other words, total shit.

 

[Peter_Puget]

In short:

Jim presents data not in his supporting documentation.

Jim describes his data incorrectly

Jim cannot tell why he chose one data set over another.

 

Edited August 31, 2007 by Peter_Puget

[Fairweather]

Jim and his commie brethren want to impose their world on me. They will lie, cheat, and steal to do it. I will resist.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

Jim and his commie brethren want to impose their world on me. They will lie, cheat, and steal to do it. I will resist.

 

If life is so great in Ireland, Jim should move THERE. I'm sick of commie pinkos talking about how great Euroland is, while staying here. Hell, they speak English in Ireland, so there's no excuse.

 

And interestingly enough, far more people want to immigrate to America than to Ireland, France, or any other socialist EU utopia.