Pick one

As long as y’all keep insinuating that every nation with universal healthcare is a socialist society. Including countries with higher capitalism scores than the USA. Such as Canada, Australia, Netherlands, and UK. I’m gonna keep calling you out on your propaganda

 

I’m not surprised you have no problem with this one. Why do you feel the US has any responsibilities toward Chinese prostitutes? Especially when there’s a huge human trafficking market for sex workers here in the US. Underaged ones at that. Shouldn’t that funding be going to protect and rescue sex workers in America?

But this is the thing about the left. They seldom question the government’s wasteful spending habits.

 

These countries are mixed economies too. Not sure who's calling them predominantly or wholely socialist? They do have socialist aspects succesfully implemented in their society.

 

Lol

Pathetic... Why pose it as such? The left leaning citizen also cares about wasting government money. Which only makes sense as they wanna use it on more things than the average right leaning citizen, so you have to spend (even more) wisely.

 

Oh cool, Sanders said he wanted to nationalize banks and public utilities over 40 years ago. You got me there

I've never once said they're socialist. I've always called them mixed economies.
You're the one that likes to misrepresent the programs these countries have as socialist when it's convenient for you. And turn around and tout how capitalistic they are when it's convenient.

I actually echo what asmo said earlier...I am really starting to question your motives in doing so. Are you just stupid or doing this intentionally? If intentional, then why?

 

I've always called them what they are: social democracies. You're the only one on Hip Forums who keeps raising the bugbear of Socialism and trying to define it as Communism.

 

Socialism?! Universal healthcare is the opposite of socialism!

 

The United States government has a responsibility to sponsor research in the public interest through such agencies as NIH,NSF, National Endowmnent for Humanities, DARPA. DOE, USDA, etc. Chinese prostitutes might seem remote to our government's legitimate concerns, but the study is funded by NIH for the purpose of understanding transmission of STDs, which fits under its public health mandate. Like the Proxmire golden fleece awards of yore, such studies always make an easy target for politicians on the right eager to convince the public that they are fighting the good fight against government spending--while supporting leaders who are getting us deeper in hock by wasteful military spending and tax breaks for the filthy rich.

 

Citation needed.

Meanwhile, in the real world, wanting to spend less on the military budget and shift money to education and healthcare proves that the left absolutely questions the spending habits of the government. But like I said, that's in the real world...

 

Why.??
The tax the workers pay, will be roughly equivalent to the tax the company would pay if they declared the money as part of their net profit, then the government get even more as soon as the workers spend their additional salary.

When people condemn companies for paying low taxes, they tend to forget that about 40% of the money they pay in salaries returns to the government within 4 weeks.
When taxing profits, rather than allowing the company to expand and employ more staff, they are to some extent shooting themselves in the foot.

It is a difficult balancing act, particularly when you consider the cost to the government of unemployment.
Jane ran the payroll for a major company and the tax deducted from employees every month sometimes exceeded the company tax for the whole year..

 

I think the real outcome is a lower rate of pregnancy for that dataset/demographic; lower rate of HIV or other STIs. I'm not looking at it as a sort of enabling the criminality. The immorality of prostitution is a drawback, but I don't think that it should prevent compassion for prostitutes; illegal or not.

There without a doubt should be funding for this, and it should be a higher priority for us than educating the prostitutes. If this were my game of Assassin's Creed and I had only enough gil (or whatever currency Assassin's Creed has...) to educate prostitutes or rescue child sex slaves, I would rescue the slaves. I think that we probably need legislation/finance that does both.

 

There is more accountability if the companies are forced to pay taxes and the workers are compensated practically by the government spending on their health coverage or other social welfare styled benefits. I like it better with government in life.

 

It works better when people are employed and pay tax. Unemployment benefit is one of the largest drains on government money.

Consider Tesco's, for example. They employ 450,000 people directly, providing £1.5 billion in tax revenue from employees. Add contractors, transport and security companies, bringing the figure to £2.0 billion. Within 4 weeks, as these people spend their money. the figure reaches nearly £3.0 billion.

1,000 of those people made redundant and drawing benefits will swallow up £3.0 million, while employing 1.000 additional staff will save the government the same amount of money.

A capitalist system works on it's citizens self funding. Following WW2, rebuilding Germany, with skilled people earning good salaries, Germany became one of the richest countries in the world.

Today, importing goods from China has made them one of the richest country's. AT OUR EXPENSE.!!!!!

 

Here’s something to ponder. Corporations never pay taxes. Consumers pay corporate taxes. The higher the taxes, the higher the cost of goods. By the time a .5 cents per widget tax gets to the consumer, you may me paying an extra .20 cents, to .25 cents more per widget, or more. The tax has to be recouped by the corporation, middle men, and retailers alike.
Higher corporate taxes aren’t the answer to punishing corporations. Stop being a consumer of corporate goods if you feel the need to punish them.
Like it, or not, corporations are beholden to investors. And, just like everyone of us would, if investors aren’t seeing the return on their money that they expect, they’ll take their dollars elsewhere.

 

When they pay more taxes, we the consumer pay more for their products/services.

cut spending

 

Many American consumers are fine with that. There is a reason that the free range animal Trader Joe's market exists. The milk costs more but it's worth it. People see that as a humble brag. You know those east coast liberals who can afford that. We here in rural Republican country have to struggle to feed our kids. But that market can exist too. Right now that market takes pride in "real" farming like their fathers did. In general social change is seen as a Democratic view and the same old thing because it word for their fathers a Republican one. Half the market does not want new products.

Can you really say a company like Amazon is hurting for money? Corporations can often afford higher wages for the same products costs but share holders get mad when profit id only 10 billion when it could be 20.

 

America is not a Democracy .... it's a Plutocracy that's has been slowly turning into a Corporate Kleptocracy.

Corporations own the Law, Religion, Politics, Media and Socially engineered peoples beliefs .

Wealth Inequality, since Ronald Reagan, is an American virtue .