Page 22 of 25 FirstFirst ...
12
20
21
22
23
24
... LastLast
  1. #421
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    78,909
    Quote Originally Posted by Orlong View Post
    If the government would keep their hands out of it, or if the drug companies would take a stand and tell these socialist countries, you WILL pay what we say or you wont get the drugs, the free market would prevail. This way the cost for these drugs would come down for me since EVERYONE would share in the cost and Thats why its important for me!
    The prices in Canada for prescription drugs are the free market. The reason there's a difference is because the Government of Canada is a big customer, and is better able to leverage reduced prices. That's how the free market works.

    What you're talking about is actually a move against the free market, to strengthen producers at the expense of customers. Nobody's forcing them to sell us the drugs. We're offering a price, and the pharmacorps agree to it. It's totally open and free, and I have no idea why you're against it, with the stance you've taken. Unless you can't stand to accept that, just maybe, government's done something right for us.


  2. #422
    Quote Originally Posted by Diurdi View Post
    http://www.danskerhverv.dk/Nyheder/S...n-droppes.aspx
    Ny sukkerafgift droppes
    Regeringens og Enhedslistens plan om en ny afgift på en række sukkerholdige produkter er samtidig droppet.

    Annulleringen af udvidelsen af sukkerafgiften betyder dog intet for den ”gamle” chokolade- og sukkervareafgift, som fortsætter som hidtil – endog med afgiftsforhøjelser fremadrettet. Den første afgiftsforhøjelse sker allerede den 1. januar 2013.

    "New sugartax dropped
    The government and Unity List's plan of a new sugar tax on several products containing sugar is dropped.

    The annulment of the expansion of the sugar tax, however, means nothing for the "old" chocolate- and sugarproduct tax, which continues as usual - even with tax increases in the future. The first tax increase happens already the 1st of January 2013."

  3. #423
    Banned Orlong's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Class 1,000,000 Clean Room
    Posts
    13,127
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    The prices in Canada for prescription drugs are the free market. The reason there's a difference is because the Government of Canada is a big customer, and is better able to leverage reduced prices. That's how the free market works.

    What you're talking about is actually a move against the free market, to strengthen producers at the expense of customers. Nobody's forcing them to sell us the drugs. We're offering a price, and the pharmacorps agree to it. It's totally open and free, and I have no idea why you're against it, with the stance you've taken. Unless you can't stand to accept that, just maybe, government's done something right for us.
    No, what Im talking about is everyone paying an equal price instead of some countries being forced to pay more because of other countries refusing to pay the actual cost of an item.

  4. #424
    Quote Originally Posted by Orlong View Post
    No, what Im talking about is everyone paying an equal price instead of some countries being forced to pay more because of other countries refusing to pay the actual cost of an item.
    You arent forced to pay more to pay for the cost. The canadians pay for the cost of the item. Everyone does. They just found out they could gouge the American market. And they do it.

  5. #425
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Cattaclysmic View Post
    You arent forced to pay more to pay for the cost. The canadians pay for the cost of the item. Everyone does. They just found out they could gouge the American market. And they do it.
    No, it's not really like that at all. The US is the primary market. Without it, no one else would get most of these products. The only reason they sell in other markets is because the cost of producing more pills is almost zero and the actual cost was the research and development cost.

    It's like the DVD's being sold in the discount bin for $1 wouldn't be there if there weren't people paying $15 for the DVD or $10 to see the movie in theatres. Europe is the $1 dollar bin.

  6. #426
    Quote Originally Posted by Nuke1096 View Post
    And that about wraps up this discussion.

    Though I'm sure conservatards are gonna start blabbing all over this thread about how socialism doesn't work, despite mountains of empirical data that says otherwise.
    American speaking here.

    Want to shut them up?

    Ask them this question, it's one they never seem to have an answer to: If socialism is so bad, why are the countries with the highest standard of living socialist?

  7. #427
    Quote Originally Posted by Diurdi View Post
    No, it's not really like that at all. The US is the primary market. Without it, no one else would get most of these products. The only reason they sell in other markets is because the cost of producing more pills is almost zero and the actual cost was the research and development cost.

    It's like the DVD's being sold in the discount bin for $1 wouldn't be there if there weren't people paying $15 for the DVD or $10 to see the movie in theatres. Europe is the $1 dollar bin.
    Discount bin contains stuff they cant sell anymore - which they just want to have the cost of production of the said item covered. This is different.
    If the companies tried to use the same prices on the other markets they would probably just plain refuse. And suddenly those companies would get a lot of competitors. So as long as they keep the price low in those countries they dont have to fear that competition while being able to stamp out any domestic one.

    ---------- Post added 2013-01-22 at 02:05 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by ewhenn View Post
    American speaking here.

    Want to shut them up?

    Ask them this question, it's one they never seem to have an answer to: If socialism is so bad, why are the countries with the highest standard of living socialist?
    The usual answer is: WELL THE TAXES ARE TOO HIGH - THERE IS NOT FREEDOM BECAUSE OF THAT!

  8. #428
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    78,909
    Quote Originally Posted by Orlong View Post
    No, what Im talking about is everyone paying an equal price instead of some countries being forced to pay more because of other countries refusing to pay the actual cost of an item.
    Oh, you want price controls.

    Just so you're aware, what you're talking about is the kind of thing seen under communist regimes, not capitalist ones. You're arguing against fundamental principles of the free market.

    ---------- Post added 2013-01-21 at 08:23 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Diurdi View Post
    No, it's not really like that at all. The US is the primary market. Without it, no one else would get most of these products. The only reason they sell in other markets is because the cost of producing more pills is almost zero and the actual cost was the research and development cost.
    That's not it at all.

    Prices, like anything, are based on what people can negotiate. Americans are not trying to negotiate for lower prices, not in a way that makes the pharmacrops take notice. It's not that the US is "the primary market", it's that the US customers are getting charged egregiously high prices and aren't negotiating to have them lowered.

    They're sold at a reasonable profit in Canada, and significant markup in the US.

    It's like the DVD's being sold in the discount bin for $1 wouldn't be there if there weren't people paying $15 for the DVD or $10 to see the movie in theatres. Europe is the $1 dollar bin.
    That only makes sense until you understand how marketing and pricing works.

    There's a reason those particular products are in the $1 bin. Because they won't sell at full price. It's not comparable to the pharma prices, because Canadians are getting the newest drugs at the lower rates, too. We're not buying the "Ernest Goes to Camp" of drugs.

    The actual difference is, Canada's buying at wholesale prices. Americans are paying the retail markup. It's like going in to buy a new car; Canada dickers with the car company to buy a fleet of cars, and gets a price that's about $300 over the cost-to-produce, since we're buying so many it still means hundreds of thousands in profits to the car company. Americans aren't buying in bulk, they're each going in and paying the +50% retail markup on the manufacturer suggested retail price of the vehicle, because they're not trying to negotiate anything, and the pharmacorps don't see any need to drop prices for a sale or two here or there.
    Last edited by Endus; 2013-01-22 at 01:26 AM.


  9. #429
    Quote Originally Posted by Orlong View Post
    No, what Im talking about is everyone paying an equal price instead of some countries being forced to pay more because of other countries refusing to pay the actual cost of an item.
    Again, if it wasn't profitable to sell their drugs in Canada they just wouldn't sell them in Canada. Don't talk about markets.

  10. #430
    22 Pages and the amount of posts who actually contain SOME form of knowledge could fit on just one. No wonder the world seems to get dumber every day, it takes a whole week to disprove the bullshit that some can come up with in just 5 minutes.

  11. #431
    Quote Originally Posted by ewhenn View Post
    American speaking here.

    Want to shut them up?

    Ask them this question, it's one they never seem to have an answer to: If socialism is so bad, why are the countries with the highest standard of living socialist?
    "standard of living" is a subjective term. A conservative might make low taxes, less government, and freedom the criteria to judge standard of living. A leftist might favor health care, not because they particularly like health care, but because they can spin the health care ranking to "prove" that countries with the highest stand of living are socialist.

    And then it comes down to both sides acting confident in their own subjective measures of standard of living, and both sides attempt to discredit the other sides methodology and criteria, no-one listening to each other, and lies being spewed everywhere. You know, politics.

  12. #432
    Probably pointed out already by others in a similar situation...I have "socialized healthcare" and I pay less in taxes, both income and sales tax, than most Americans do today.
    "You six-piece Chicken McNobody."
    Quote Originally Posted by RICH816 View Post
    You are a legend thats why.

  13. #433
    Honestly, the biggest point any American could make about their flavor of freedom is that, under the Constitution, America went from some backwater colony to the world's superpower in under 200 years. It accomplished that before FDR, before the New Deal, before there was massive federal social programs.

    Since then, the United States has moved in a different direction, to add regulations, federal bureaucracy, and corrupted bloat to government. Social Security, medicare, medicaid, Obamacare, all serve to make it more expensive to do business in the United States. And that, in the end, makes the country go downhill.

    What's annoying about all of this is when leftists think they can blame Bush or the republicans for a bad economy, a bad economy is very important. But when presented with the fact that social programs hurt the economy, suddenly the economy isn't an important issue, social welfare becomes a more important issue. Which is paradoxical because social welfare would improve with a better economy.

    ---------- Post added 2013-01-21 at 09:30 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by TradewindNQ View Post
    Probably pointed out already by others in a similar situation...I have "socialized healthcare" and I pay less in taxes, both income and sales tax, than most Americans do today.
    Many countries, like those in Europe, effectively have their military budget subsidized by the United States.

    Take for example Mali. Obama is going to provide free military service to the French. He will

    1. Ferry french troops to North Africa for free.
    2. Supply free drones, free surveillance aircraft, free refueling of french jets

    Of course, these things aren't really free. The design, production, expertise, and implementation of such free military items was paid for by US taxpayers.

    A better arrangement would be for France to pay for these services. If they would pay for it, maybe the extra money could be used to help improve health care in the US. Instead, you have French people who happily accept the freebies from the US, and then mock the US for having worse social programs.

  14. #434
    Quote Originally Posted by Grummgug View Post
    Honestly, the biggest point any American could make about their flavor of freedom is that, under the Constitution, America went from some backwater colony to the world's superpower in under 200 years. It accomplished that before FDR, before the New Deal, before there was massive federal social programs.
    No. The US became a superpower because all the other countries that had a strong manufacturing base had those facilities damaged, if not utterly destroyed, in two world wars. Meanwhile the US Interstate Highway System is a huge source of our success and founded in the '50s.
    Since then, the United States has moved in a different direction, to add regulations, federal bureaucracy, and corrupted bloat to government. Social Security, medicare, medicaid, Obamacare, all serve to make it more expensive to do business in the United States. And that, in the end, makes the country go downhill.

    What's annoying about all of this is when leftists think they can blame Bush or the republicans for a bad economy, a bad economy is very important. But when presented with the fact that social programs hurt the economy, suddenly the economy isn't an important issue, social welfare becomes a more important issue. Which is paradoxical because social welfare would improve with a better economy.
    /yawn. A government that allows its citizens to become serfs of monopolistic corporate interests isn't representing its citizens, but rather corporations.

  15. #435
    Quote Originally Posted by TradewindNQ View Post
    Probably pointed out already by others in a similar situation...I have "socialized healthcare" and I pay less in taxes, both income and sales tax, than most Americans do today.
    The average income tax for Americans is about 10% I think. You pay less than that?

  16. #436
    Quote Originally Posted by Grummgug View Post
    Many countries, like those in Europe, effectively have their military budget subsidized by the United States.

    Take for example Mali. Obama is going to provide free military service to the French. He will

    1. Ferry french troops to North Africa for free.
    2. Supply free drones, free surveillance aircraft, free refueling of french jets

    Of course, these things aren't really free. The design, production, expertise, and implementation of such free military items was paid for by US taxpayers.

    A better arrangement would be for France to pay for these services. If they would pay for it, maybe the extra money could be used to help improve health care in the US. Instead, you have French people who happily accept the freebies from the US, and then mock the US for having worse social programs.
    I'm pretty sure France is also getting the same deal from the UK, Russia and from Canada and have been for a few days now.
    "You six-piece Chicken McNobody."
    Quote Originally Posted by RICH816 View Post
    You are a legend thats why.

  17. #437
    Quote Originally Posted by Annapolis View Post
    The average income tax for Americans is about 10% I think. You pay less than that?
    Average household income is ~50,000 a year and that is in the 25% tax rate, although you most likely won't pay more than 20%.

  18. #438
    Quote Originally Posted by Annapolis View Post
    The average income tax for Americans is about 10% I think. You pay less than that?
    Are you accounting for state taxes in some situations and sales tax? The income tax rates are probably lower up front, though the brackets for low income in the US rise much earlier as well.


    Quote Originally Posted by Annapolis View Post
    The average income tax for Americans is about 10% I think. You pay less than that?
    Are you accounting for state taxes in some situations and sales tax? The income tax rates are probably lower up front, though the brackets for low income in the US rise much earlier as well. Not that I'm low income, my flat federal tax rate is a shade over 24% and then a 5% sales tax on the "non-essentials." That's with no real out of pocket additional expenses such as healthcare or private insurance as that's covered 100% by my employer. I also claim a boat load of that income tax back every year through my retirement contributions and other deductions.
    Last edited by Tradewind; 2013-01-22 at 05:43 AM.
    "You six-piece Chicken McNobody."
    Quote Originally Posted by RICH816 View Post
    You are a legend thats why.

  19. #439
    Quote Originally Posted by obdigore View Post
    Average household income is ~50,000 a year and that is in the 25% tax rate, although you most likely won't pay more than 20%.
    No. Average effective tax rate is about 11.81% for all of those filing to the IRS http://taxfoundation.org/blog/tax-ra...tional-average.

    ---------- Post added 2013-01-22 at 12:52 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by TradewindNQ View Post
    Are you accounting for state taxes in some situations and sales tax? The income tax rates are probably lower up front, though the brackets for low income in the US rise much earlier as well.




    Are you accounting for state taxes in some situations and sales tax? The income tax rates are probably lower up front, though the brackets for low income in the US rise much earlier as well. Not that I'm low income, my flat federal tax rate is a shade over 24% and then a 5% sales tax on the "non-essentials." That's with no real out of pocket additional expenses such as healthcare or private insurance as that's covered 100% by my employer. I also claim a boat load of that income tax back every year through my retirement contributions and other deductions.
    I didn't add in state or sales tax. Both differ by state. My state has no sales tax except for on places that prepare your food for you. We don't have income tax either except on interest and dividends. We do obviously have property tax though.

  20. #440
    Quote Originally Posted by Annapolis View Post
    No. Average effective tax rate is about 11.81% for all of those filing to the IRS
    Using that source is kind of a joke, no?



    How about marginal tax rates for 2012?

    Marginal tax rates for 2012
    Marginal Tax Rate[8] Single Married Filing Jointly or Qualified Widow(er) Married Filing Separately Head of Household
    10% $0 – $8,700 $0 – $17,400 $0 – $8,700 $0 – $12,400
    15% $8,701 – $35,350 $17,401 – $70,700 $8,701 – $35,350 $12,401 – $47,350
    25% $35,351 – $85,650 $70,701 – $142,700 $35,351 – $71,350 $47,351 – $122,300
    28% $85,651 – $178,650 $142,701 – $217,450 $71,351 – $108,725 $122,301 – $198,050
    33% $178,651 – $388,350 $217,451 – $388,350 $108,726 – $194,175 $198,051 – $388,350
    35% $388,351+ $388,351+ $194,176+ $388,351+
    That is really ugly. Anyway, as I said, single person making the average salary in teh US is listed at a rate of 25%, but won't pay more than 20%.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_..._United_States
    Last edited by obdigore; 2013-01-22 at 06:19 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •