Because Taxes.  Personally, as an American, I'd be fine with paying a little extra in taxes if it meant I didn't have to worry about going into debt over a major surgery. 

Wouldn't we all pay for it and who wouldn't use it?  Since it would be payed for through Taxes anyone that's working would fund it and anyone that visits a Doctor or takes Prescription Medication would make use of it.  Rich, Poor, or Unemployed we would all make use of it. 

As an American, I wouldn't mind paying a bit more in taxes if it meant my company could pay me what they were paying the insurance carriers instead.  Because fuck those guys. 

'Twas a cutlass swipe or an ounce of lead
Or a yawing hole in a battered head
And the scuppers clogged with rotting red
And there they lay I damn me eyes
All lookouts clapped on Paradise
All souls bound just contrarywise, yo ho ho and a bottle of rum! 

As an American, I wouldn't mind paying a bit more in taxes if it meant my company could pay me what they were paying the insurance carriers instead.  Because fuck those guys. 

That's how I feel mostly.  I mean... why are you complaining about taxes going up?  It would just be a lateral move on your paycheck is all.. from the insurance to the government.  Theoretically you shouldn't see a change at all in your check... or possibly getting some money BACK since it would be theoretically cheaper.  /shrug

"Tell them only that the Lich King is dead... and that World of Warcraft... died with him..."

Originally Posted by BenBos

That's the ONLY reason you would post 9600 posts over 3 years: a mission of hate. 

Yeah we're talking huge differences in proportion.  Our military is in the ballpark of 50-70 times what the canadian one is, particularly in terms of what we spend on it.  Also, far fewer Canadians are on food stamps, and are generally embarrased to go on them.  The US sees them as a right. 

America is not the only first world country, and it certainly isn't the country where most scientists come from (they do employ the most scientists tough, but more then half of them are recruited outside US). 

They are recruited to the US because they arent able to do the research in their own countries due to lack of funding due to the governments overseas dictating where the socialist money will be spent so they cant afford to develop drugs overseas. 

Oh look, that gem again.  In the proud NTU tradition of cherrypicking, they conveniently only look at income taxes and skip the other half of federal revenues from FICA taxes. 

Also, pray tell, what percentage of the income do that top 10% make?  Is it greater than, less than, or equal to the 70.5% of income taxes they pay? 

I dunno why that made you so angry.  The answer to your question is less than.  This is because they pay a higher effective tax rate than the lower brackets.  For instance if the tax rate were flat then whatever money the top 10% of earners made would be taxed at the same percentage.  So let's say the top 10% made 70.5% of the United States' total income.  This would mean that the top 10% would also pay 70.5% of the income tax because the income tax is a flat rate. 

However we don't use a flat rate we use a graduated system.  So as you earn more, you pay more as well.  So they pay more in income taxes than the percentage of America's income that they represent. 

No, its done by drug manufacturers who are then forced to recuperate that money by charging $90 per pill in the US because other countries like Canada say we are only paying you $10 per pill regardless of what it actually costs, so instead of EVERYONE paying $50 per pill, the US pays $90 per pill and everyone else gets it for $10

No, its done by drug manufacturers who are then forced to recuperate that money by charging $90 per pill in the US because other countries like Canada say we are only paying you $10 per pill regardless of what it actually costs, so instead of EVERYONE paying $50 per pill, the US pays $90 per pill and everyone else gets it for $10

This is mostly due to US patent laws and healthcare laws.  If the americans didn't pay $90 per pill, no one would be getting the pill in the first place, because you can't charge Europeans for $50. ( otherwise drug companies would charge $90 in the US and $50 in Europe). 

It's a bit like the Indian versions of college books.  Without the Americans paying shitloads for them, there wouldn't be any über cheap versions in India, because writing them wouldn't be worth it.  They're just getting some pocket change on the side from India, because it doesn't really cost much to print more books.  The cost and effort is in the writing. 

To clarify: biomedical research.  Not research about healthcare marketing or things like that. 

Im still gonna need some data on that.  Spending doesn't really say much.  You can throw money at the wall all day but that wont mean it sticks. 

---------- Post added 2013-01-21 at 11:39 PM ----------

Originally Posted by Orlong

No, its done by drug manufacturers who are then forced to recuperate that money by charging $90 per pill in the US because other countries like Canada say we are only paying you $10 per pill regardless of what it actually costs, so instead of EVERYONE paying $50 per pill, the US pays $90 per pill and everyone else gets it for $10

I find it mildly amusing that you only seem to care about others when you try to defend a stance that is to your own detriment. 

The top 10% of earners pay 70.5% of the total income tax for the United States and the top 50% pay 97.7% of total income.  Even if somebody making 500k a year paid only 25% income tax that would be 125k.  Somebody making even 125k a year will not be paying half of their income in taxes.  So the wealthy definitely put forth much more than twice the amount of others. 

I agree that socialized systems and private systems aren't mutually exclusive, but this debate to me is about how much money you put into socialized medicine. 

I made a clear distinction betwen INCOME TAX and SOCIAL SECURITY TAX, those two are filed apart and are handled apart.  One is used to pay for one thing the other for others.  SOCIAL SECURITY TAX goes into Social Services which includes Healthcare and revenue from INCOME TAX is used for other things such as infrastructure, military expenses etc. 

SOCIAL SECURITY TAX is a fixed summ of money that slightly varies depending on your Tax Bracket while INCOME TAX is a percentage of your income, and VALUE ADDED TAX (V.A.T) is a whole different beast.  INCOME TAX and V.A.T are used to fund all other operations that do not fall into the category of SOCIAL SERVICES. 

I'm currently living in Spain but before I have lived in Austria and France and this is the system used in those countries as well as in Spain.  But I have also lived in places like Hungary and Romania and that is why I mentioned that countries that aren't as prosperous as for exemple Western Europe or the U.S benefit greatly from their Socialized healthcare systems as the vast majority of the population could not afford healthcare if their pricing system would emulate the U.S one, that for some reason spends astronomic amounts per capita on a system that has poorer dollar/quality return then half the world. 

This is mostly due to US patent laws and healthcare laws.  If the americans didn't pay $90 per pill, no one would be getting the pill in the first place, because you can't charge Europeans for $50. ( otherwise drug companies would charge $90 in the US and $50 in Europe). 

It's a bit like the Indian versions of college books.  Without the Americans paying shitloads for them, there wouldn't be any über cheap versions in India, because writing them wouldn't be worth it.  They're just getting some pocket change on the side from India, because it doesn't really cost much to print more books.  The cost and effort is in the writing. 

That is actually rather incorect.  Almost all of early stage pharmaceutical research is done by Private Research Universities and it is funded 80% by Public funding (governament tax money).  6 out of the top 10 Pharmaceutical companies are European.  As much medical research they do in the U.S almost none of it is funded by private investment and almost none of it is paid by the cost of your pills. 

Some of us believe it's not fair that those of us who make good lifestyle choices (no smoking, no drinking, eating healthy, exercise, taking care of our bodies) should have to subsidize health insurance for those of us who do not.  Your surgery may or may not have been the result of poor lifestyle choices, but it was clearly funded by the taxpayer.  Other posters are saying "big deal?  it only amounts to 1 cent per taxpayer", but how many of these operations occur daily?  Monthly?  Yearly?  The pennies start to add up. 

That is actually rather incorect.  Almost all of early stage pharmaceutical research is done by Private Research Universities and it is funded 80% by Public funding (governament tax money).  6 out of the top 10 Pharmaceutical companies are European.  As much medical research they do in the U.S almost none of it is funded by private investment and almost none of it is paid by the cost of your pills. 

They are recruited to the US because they arent able to do the research in their own countries due to lack of funding due to the governments overseas dictating where the socialist money will be spent so they cant afford to develop drugs overseas. 

None of that is true.  They're recruited to the US because there are big pharmacorps that like US patent/research/tax laws, and they're willing to pay to recruit talented people.  It has nothing whatsoever to do with "socialist money" or not, and very little to do with government spending.  Plus, there's plenty working elsewhere in the world, for similarly big pharmacorps and other groups doing medical research. 

Besides which, there's plenty of medical research done outside of the US.  For instance, the US was dragging its feet with regards to stem cell research for years.  The reason there was so much pressure to lift those rules was precisely because big inroads were being made outside the US.  The first cloned mammal was a sheep named Dolly, and that was done in Scotland.  Is a lot of research also done in the US?  Sure; it's a huge economy and there's a lot of research funding to be had.  Is it the center of all medical research on the planet and necessary to the furthering of medical knowledge?  Absolutely not. 

What the graph doesn't tell you of course is that all those pharmaceuticals receive SUBSIDIES (usually in the form of tax breaks) to continue their research.  In the end the public pays for the research.  As it's always been. 

---------- Post added 2013-01-21 at 11:43 PM ----------

Originally Posted by Hiricine

Yeah we're talking huge differences in proportion.  Our military is in the ballpark of 50-70 times what the canadian one is, particularly in terms of what we spend on it.  Also, far fewer Canadians are on food stamps, and are generally embarrased to go on them.  The US sees them as a right. 

Fewer Canadians may be on food stamps but no single Canadian that I know on food stamps is embarrassed to go on them.  That's ludicrous.  Their also not embarrassed to use the food bank.  Or in general accept assistance from their fellow canadians.  That's a particular feature of the United States, where the notion of rugged individualism reaches levels of insanity. 

Last edited by Glorious Leader; 2013-01-21 at 11:44 PM. 

The hammer comes down:

Originally Posted by Osmeric

Normal should be reduced in difficulty.  Heroic should be reduced in difficulty. 
And the tiny fraction for whom heroic raids are currently well tuned?  Too bad,so sad!  With the arterial bleed of subs the fastest it's ever been, the vanity development that gives you guys your own content is no longer supportable. 

I made a clear distinction betwen INCOME TAX and SOCIAL SECURITY TAX, those two are filed apart and are handled apart.  One is used to pay for one thing the other for others.  SOCIAL SECURITY TAX goes into Social Services which includes Healthcare and revenue from INCOME TAX is used for other things such as infrastructure, military expenses etc. 

well this is very untrue, contrary to popular belief.  Social Security was at a surplus for a great many years, and was paying for overspending in other areas (military, gov programs, etc) while simply paying its own bills.  As long as the US is in any sort of debt it actually would make us LOSE money by holing up the Social security money, which basically goes in the same pot as the rest of the revenue.