US Companies Only Pay 1/3 Corporate Tax Rate

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
121

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote] Zeppelin795 wrote:

you have failed to give an answer as to why government run sectors of healthcare in this country operate more efficiently than the private sector.[/quote]

This is useless because you are completely dislodged from the reality we all live in, but I am going to ask once:

How do you define “efficiency” in the context of what I just quoted you as saying? Specifically. I want details. What is the measure or are the measures of the efficiency of which you speak, within the context you are speaking? Name all that apply. [/quote]

Why don’t you explain why our healthcare costs so much and why it drives the public into BK? Is this efficient? I want details. So people can see how stupid you really are.

122

[quote]NickViar wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
Really,government programs do not cost less? What are the private healthcare costs in this country compared to the government run sectors? And why do other industrialized countries pay about half as much when they have some form of government run healthcare? [/quote]

No, they can’t. The cost of healthcare is the cost of healthcare. If you argued taxpayer-paid healthcare costs less for the recipients, then you would have a point.

I’m not sure what private healthcare costs are compared to government healthcare costs. Why don’t you tell me? While you’re at it, please explain why and how “other industrialized countries pay about half as much when they have some form of government run healthcare.”[/quote]

Here you go douchebag!

http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/06/23/us-usa-healthcare-last-idUSTRE65M0SU20100623

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2012/10/health-costs-how-the-us-compares-with-other-countries.html

http://www.healthnewsreview.org/2012/03/comparing-health-care-costs-in-us-and-8-other-countries/

123

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
Here you go douchebag!

http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/06/23/us-usa-healthcare-last-idUSTRE65M0SU20100623

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2012/10/health-costs-how-the-us-compares-with-other-countries.html

http://www.healthnewsreview.org/2012/03/comparing-health-care-costs-in-us-and-8-other-countries/

http://www.brookings.edu/research/opinions/2012/08/07-healthcare-costs-burtless[/quote]

Once again, YOU explained nothing. You only posted links. However, none of them make a comparison that’s relevant to what I said.

-One article compared healthcare SPENDING.
-The next article compared healthcare SPENDING.
-The third came closer to the comparison you are looking for, but still fails because it only compares the cost of healthcare in the U.S. to the cost of healthcare in other countries. I think you would find that most things are cheaper in U.S. dollars in the third world vs. the U.S. It doesn’t even show the average cost of procedures as a percentage of average per capita income.
-The fourth covers spending again.

Now, if you want to argue that our spending on healthcare is ridiculous, then I’ll agree. I have zero faith in doctors’ abilities to fix anything other than traumatic injuries. I believe modern medicine is something like witchcraft. Whatever you want to argue for, at least have some understanding of it before doing so.

124

Nickvair, notice how he also threw the nice insult in there too?

I noticed he likes doing that when you counter him with facts.

That or he just ignores the factual counter points against his opinions.

The relevance to a comparison of what you said means nothing to him.

He has his agenda.

125

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
^

“Premature birth is a factor in more than two-thirds of infant deaths. From 2000 to 2005, the U.S. preterm birth rate went up from 11.6% to 12.7%.”

So 66% of infant mortality is tied to premature birth, what does that have to do with the healthcare system?

[/quote]

Then the question is why is this not happening in other developed countries?[/quote]

I agree, that’s a good question.

Again, though, what does infant mortality have to do with our healthcare system?[/quote]

Poster was alluding to the heavy cost of healthcare is determined by heart disease. What happens to infant mortality rates, is this determined by heart disease? Plenty of things wrong with this country’s healthcare especially considering the amount of money paid for services. To spend this kind of money and be ranked 29th in the world in regards to infant mortality is a travesty.
[/quote]

No he wasn’t. Just never mind. [/quote]

So what is your assessment as to the outrageous costs of U.S. healthcare?[/quote]

I think the fact that we are fat as fucking is one of if not the # 1 reason our health care costs so much.

Infant mortality, what you brought up, has almost zero to do with health care cost espceially since 66% of these death are attributable to premature birth. [/quote]
Is this why we spend twice as much as any other industrialized nation in the world? And even if infant mortality rates are not a significant contributor to high costs that says nothing about the imbalance of money spent vs. out come.[/quote]

Do we supposedly spend twice as much in total or per capita?

If infant mortality rates are not a significant contributor to high costs, why did you bring it up?

126

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
^

“Premature birth is a factor in more than two-thirds of infant deaths. From 2000 to 2005, the U.S. preterm birth rate went up from 11.6% to 12.7%.”

So 66% of infant mortality is tied to premature birth, what does that have to do with the healthcare system?

[/quote]

Then the question is why is this not happening in other developed countries?[/quote]

I agree, that’s a good question.

Again, though, what does infant mortality have to do with our healthcare system?[/quote]

Poster was alluding to the heavy cost of healthcare is determined by heart disease. What happens to infant mortality rates, is this determined by heart disease? Plenty of things wrong with this country’s healthcare especially considering the amount of money paid for services. To spend this kind of money and be ranked 29th in the world in regards to infant mortality is a travesty.
[/quote]

No he wasn’t. Just never mind. [/quote]

So what is your assessment as to the outrageous costs of U.S. healthcare?[/quote]

I think the fact that we are fat as fucking is one of if not the # 1 reason our health care costs so much.

Infant mortality, what you brought up, has almost zero to do with health care cost espceially since 66% of these death are attributable to premature birth. [/quote]
Is this why we spend twice as much as any other industrialized nation in the world? And even if infant mortality rates are not a significant contributor to high costs that says nothing about the imbalance of money spent vs. out come.[/quote]

Do we supposedly spend twice as much in total or per capita?

If infant mortality rates are not a significant contributor to high costs, why did you bring it up?[/quote]

Infant mortality rates were just another show of how inefficient our healthcare system is. Why are we ranked so low with the amount of money we spend?

Some per capita info.

127

[quote]NickViar wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
Here you go douchebag!

http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/06/23/us-usa-healthcare-last-idUSTRE65M0SU20100623

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2012/10/health-costs-how-the-us-compares-with-other-countries.html

http://www.healthnewsreview.org/2012/03/comparing-health-care-costs-in-us-and-8-other-countries/

http://www.brookings.edu/research/opinions/2012/08/07-healthcare-costs-burtless[/quote]

Once again, YOU explained nothing. You only posted links. However, none of them make a comparison that’s relevant to what I said.

-One article compared healthcare SPENDING.
-The next article compared healthcare SPENDING.
-The third came closer to the comparison you are looking for, but still fails because it only compares the cost of healthcare in the U.S. to the cost of healthcare in other countries. I think you would find that most things are cheaper in U.S. dollars in the third world vs. the U.S. It doesn’t even show the average cost of procedures as a percentage of average per capita income.
-The fourth covers spending again.

Now, if you want to argue that our spending on healthcare is ridiculous, then I’ll agree. I have zero faith in doctors’ abilities to fix anything other than traumatic injuries. I believe modern medicine is something like witchcraft. Whatever you want to argue for, at least have some understanding of it before doing so. [/quote]
Why do I need to know the minutiae of healthcare to question the validity of the stats. Every other country has some form of government healthcare and they ALL pay about half as much. Does that not lead one to believe that it is the more efficient system? Your defense of this desiccated system will die the death of a thousand questions. What would be your reasons to keep this system vs government run healthcare?

I agree that western medicine is only good for acute issues and is very poor in treating disease. You have to go outside the mainstream to find movements in the healthcare field that confronts the cause and not the symptoms, try Functional Medicine. It uses food and other non-drug answers to help people. But this is not where big pharma cashes in, so it is not taught to doctors in med school. I would not doubt that big pharma has a lot to do with the reading material and study courses in med school.

128

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
Why don’t you show them the imbalance?[/quote]

Because they are pushing an agenda and shallow thinkers are eating it up. I don’t have the time or energy to help the willfully misinformed to be honest.

What are your qualifications in economincs?

And, seeing as I have only commented on the TAXATION portion of this thread, and according to every governing body in the US, qualified to speak about said taxation, I would say I’m not in any danger of being ignorant here.

[quote]I would argue that you are as you think micro has much more of an effect than macro in the overall economy. Even though the evidence has shown otherwise,
[/quote]

This is a bunch of words tossed together that have no meaning what-so-ever.

Nothing I’ve said in this thread has anything to do economics, you know this… Why do you insist on talking abotu irrelevant things?

129

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
This is a bunch of words tossed together that have no meaning what-so-ever.

Nothing I’ve said in this thread has anything to do economics, you know this… Why do you insist on talking abotu irrelevant things?[/quote]

Zep throws up smoke screens when he realizes he’s losing on facts.

Oh and expect name calling.

130

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
^

“Premature birth is a factor in more than two-thirds of infant deaths. From 2000 to 2005, the U.S. preterm birth rate went up from 11.6% to 12.7%.”

So 66% of infant mortality is tied to premature birth, what does that have to do with the healthcare system?

[/quote]

Then the question is why is this not happening in other developed countries?[/quote]

I agree, that’s a good question.

Again, though, what does infant mortality have to do with our healthcare system?[/quote]

Poster was alluding to the heavy cost of healthcare is determined by heart disease. What happens to infant mortality rates, is this determined by heart disease? Plenty of things wrong with this country’s healthcare especially considering the amount of money paid for services. To spend this kind of money and be ranked 29th in the world in regards to infant mortality is a travesty.
[/quote]

No he wasn’t. Just never mind. [/quote]

So what is your assessment as to the outrageous costs of U.S. healthcare?[/quote]

I think the fact that we are fat as fucking is one of if not the # 1 reason our health care costs so much.

Infant mortality, what you brought up, has almost zero to do with health care cost espceially since 66% of these death are attributable to premature birth. [/quote]
Is this why we spend twice as much as any other industrialized nation in the world? And even if infant mortality rates are not a significant contributor to high costs that says nothing about the imbalance of money spent vs. out come.[/quote]

Do we supposedly spend twice as much in total or per capita?

If infant mortality rates are not a significant contributor to high costs, why did you bring it up?[/quote]

Infant mortality rates were just another show of how inefficient our healthcare system is. Why are we ranked so low with the amount of money we spend?

Some per capita info.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_the_United_States[/quote]

Again, 66% of infant morality is due to premature birth according to your own link, what does this have to do with the healthcare industry?

I’ll look at the per capita info when I have more time.

131

[quote]BlueCollarTr8n wrote:

[quote]atypical1 wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
Big banks need to be broken up, [/quote]

This I agree with and agree that more large monopolies and oligopolies need to be broken up. We need competition and we’re not getting it.

Corporate tax rates are immaterial. We shouldn’t base our entire economy on hand outs in the form of taxes. It should be driven by trade but I suppose that I’m stuck in the 1700’s and that’s a discussion for a different day.

james[/quote]

When I was 25 there were more than twenty major banks; now there are four. Same for oil companies and so on…the change is not a reflection of the competitive free market at work. Imagine what the NFL, MLB, NBA, etc would be like if there were only four teams.
[/quote]

I’m not sure what this whole discussion is about, but there’s currently 21 primary dealers; not sure where 4 came from. The number fluctuates somewhere in the teens to 30.

132

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
^

“Premature birth is a factor in more than two-thirds of infant deaths. From 2000 to 2005, the U.S. preterm birth rate went up from 11.6% to 12.7%.”

So 66% of infant mortality is tied to premature birth, what does that have to do with the healthcare system?

[/quote]

Then the question is why is this not happening in other developed countries?[/quote]

I agree, that’s a good question.

Again, though, what does infant mortality have to do with our healthcare system?[/quote]

Poster was alluding to the heavy cost of healthcare is determined by heart disease. What happens to infant mortality rates, is this determined by heart disease? Plenty of things wrong with this country’s healthcare especially considering the amount of money paid for services. To spend this kind of money and be ranked 29th in the world in regards to infant mortality is a travesty.
[/quote]

No he wasn’t. Just never mind. [/quote]

So what is your assessment as to the outrageous costs of U.S. healthcare?[/quote]

I think the fact that we are fat as fucking is one of if not the # 1 reason our health care costs so much.

Infant mortality, what you brought up, has almost zero to do with health care cost espceially since 66% of these death are attributable to premature birth. [/quote]
Is this why we spend twice as much as any other industrialized nation in the world? And even if infant mortality rates are not a significant contributor to high costs that says nothing about the imbalance of money spent vs. out come.[/quote]

Do we supposedly spend twice as much in total or per capita?

If infant mortality rates are not a significant contributor to high costs, why did you bring it up?[/quote]

Infant mortality rates were just another show of how inefficient our healthcare system is. Why are we ranked so low with the amount of money we spend?

Some per capita info.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_the_United_States[/quote]

Again, 66% of infant morality is due to premature birth according to your own link, what does this have to do with the healthcare industry?

I’ll look at the per capita info when I have more time. [/quote]
Why is the premature birth rate so high in the U.S. as compared to other countries?

133

[quote]johnnytang24 wrote:

[quote]BlueCollarTr8n wrote:

[quote]atypical1 wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
Big banks need to be broken up, [/quote]

This I agree with and agree that more large monopolies and oligopolies need to be broken up. We need competition and we’re not getting it.

Corporate tax rates are immaterial. We shouldn’t base our entire economy on hand outs in the form of taxes. It should be driven by trade but I suppose that I’m stuck in the 1700’s and that’s a discussion for a different day.

james[/quote]

When I was 25 there were more than twenty major banks; now there are four. Same for oil companies and so on…the change is not a reflection of the competitive free market at work. Imagine what the NFL, MLB, NBA, etc would be like if there were only four teams.
[/quote]

I’m not sure what this whole discussion is about, but there’s currently 21 primary dealers; not sure where 4 came from. The number fluctuates somewhere in the teens to 30.[/quote]

The 4 he is referring to are BOA, Wells, Citi and Chase. They are by and far the 4 biggest banks in the U.S. Bigger now than when they were too big to fail. Makes a lot of sense.

134

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote] Zeppelin795 wrote:

you have failed to give an answer as to why government run sectors of healthcare in this country operate more efficiently than the private sector.[/quote]

This is useless because you are completely dislodged from the reality we all live in, but I am going to ask once:

How do you define “efficiency” in the context of what I just quoted you as saying? Specifically. I want details. What is the measure or are the measures of the efficiency of which you speak, within the context you are speaking? Name all that apply. [/quote]

Cost is a major issue. The fact that the U.S. pays about twice as much as the rest of the world and it is the major cause of BK in this country. You think this is a system that needs to be emulated? Why aren’t the populations of other countries clamouring for U.S. style healthcare?[/quote]

You restated talking points. You did not answer the question–you have already said cost is a problem several times and you have already said the U.S. pays more than twice as much as the rest of the world several times. I asked for ways you personally measure and define “efficiency” because you have made a claim that the “government run sectors of healthcare operate more efficiently than the private ones”

You simply took what you have already said and said it again. You did not offer any measurements of efficiency that you compare from public to private sectors. You did not offer any metrics at all by which you personally judge operating efficiency between the two nor did you define measures that you consider reliable. This was the same problem when I asked for news sources you considered reliable–you had no answer other than “non corporate owned”. I was asking for examples then and I am asking for metrics now.

I also made no comments on emulating this system you speak of. In fact, I made no comments on the healthcare in this country AT ALL, I only asked you a question, hoping you would actually answer it instead of dodge the difficulty.

I am not going to bother casting pearls before swine by answering your insulting “comeback question” if you cannot put forth a cogent argument to the question I asked you. It is a waste of my time. So cowboy the fuck up or stop wasting our time if you’re going to regurgitate talking points with less than a surface understanding of the issue.

Measures of efficiency you consider reliable for judging efficiency between private and public sectors of healthcare in THIS country, ready…Go.

135

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
Why is the premature birth rate so high in the U.S. as compared to other countries?[/quote]

That’s a great question; however, it still has nothing to do with healthcare.

136

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
Why is the premature birth rate so high in the U.S. as compared to other countries?[/quote]

That’s a great question; however, it still has nothing to do with healthcare. [/quote]

Says who?

137

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
Why is the premature birth rate so high in the U.S. as compared to other countries?[/quote]

That’s a great question; however, it still has nothing to do with healthcare. [/quote]

Says who?
[/quote]

Says me, can you convince me otherwise?

Premature births are a function of our health not our healthcare system, imo.

138

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote] Zeppelin795 wrote:

you have failed to give an answer as to why government run sectors of healthcare in this country operate more efficiently than the private sector.[/quote]

This is useless because you are completely dislodged from the reality we all live in, but I am going to ask once:

How do you define “efficiency” in the context of what I just quoted you as saying? Specifically. I want details. What is the measure or are the measures of the efficiency of which you speak, within the context you are speaking? Name all that apply. [/quote]

Cost is a major issue. The fact that the U.S. pays about twice as much as the rest of the world and it is the major cause of BK in this country. You think this is a system that needs to be emulated? Why aren’t the populations of other countries clamouring for U.S. style healthcare?[/quote]

You restated talking points. You did not answer the question–you have already said cost is a problem several times and you have already said the U.S. pays more than twice as much as the rest of the world several times. I asked for ways you personally measure and define “efficiency” because you have made a claim that the “government run sectors of healthcare operate more efficiently than the private ones”

You simply took what you have already said and said it again. You did not offer any measurements of efficiency that you compare from public to private sectors. You did not offer any metrics at all by which you personally judge operating efficiency between the two nor did you define measures that you consider reliable. This was the same problem when I asked for news sources you considered reliable–you had no answer other than “non corporate owned”. I was asking for examples then and I am asking for metrics now.

I also made no comments on emulating this system you speak of. In fact, I made no comments on the healthcare in this country AT ALL, I only asked you a question, hoping you would actually answer it instead of dodge the difficulty.

I am not going to bother casting pearls before swine by answering your insulting “comeback question” if you cannot put forth a cogent argument to the question I asked you. It is a waste of my time. So cowboy the fuck up or stop wasting our time if you’re going to regurgitate talking points with less than a surface understanding of the issue.

Measures of efficiency you consider reliable for judging efficiency between private and public sectors of healthcare in THIS country, ready…Go.[/quote]
cost efficiencies between the 2 since cost is what I have brought up.

Outcomes vs cost

139

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
Why is the premature birth rate so high in the U.S. as compared to other countries?[/quote]

That’s a great question; however, it still has nothing to do with healthcare. [/quote]

Says who?
[/quote]

Says me, can you convince me otherwise?

Premature births are a function of our health not our healthcare system, imo. [/quote]

I say it can have something to do with the shoddy healthcare system we have. Can you convince me otherwise?

140

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Zeppelin795 wrote:
Why is the premature birth rate so high in the U.S. as compared to other countries?[/quote]

That’s a great question; however, it still has nothing to do with healthcare. [/quote]