Solution to the oil problem

[Andy]

The 21st Century is ushering in a new type of energy system for the United States. You can either be on that boat, or stay on the Titanic.

Smart people will soon be boarding the life rafts to reboard the Good Ship "Alternatives".

Odd, Exxon just posted record profits which is doing wonders for my 401K. If I pulled my money out of Exxon and put it in "alternatives" I'd be sinking like the titanic... No thanks.

 

[BigRob]

Odd, Exxon just posted record profits which is doing wonders for my 401K. If I pulled my money out of Exxon and put it in "alternatives" I'd be sinking like the titanic... No thanks.

They did miss expectations though. Oil has been great to me as well lately, but make sure you get out at the right time.

 

[UShadItComing]

Last night on AC360- Extreme challenges for the next 4 years, it was mentioned that Ontario, Canada is now producing more cars than what was once the center of production, Detroit, Michigan. It was claimed that the industry has moved to Canada because it costs an employer $800 a year to provide healthcare for a worker in Ontario and $6500 a year in the US.

I didn't know Ontario had now taken the lion's share and I certainly didn't know that there was that much difference in providing healthcare insurance for a worker in that industry. Could it perhaps not be true?

This is only one of the issues posed in this great and informative program which everyone simply must see if they are interested in the politics of the next 4 years.

 

[Andy]

Last night on AC360- Extreme challenges for the next 4 years, it was mentioned that Ontario, Canada is now producing more cars than what was once the center of production, Detroit, Michigan. It was claimed that the industry has moved to Canada because it costs an employer $800 a year to provide healthcare for a worker in Ontario and $6500 a year in the US.

I didn't know Ontario had now taken the lion's share and I certainly didn't know that there was that much difference in providing healthcare insurance for a worker in that industry. Could it perhaps not be true?

This is only one of the issues posed in this great and informative program which everyone simply must see if they are interested in the politics of the next 4 years.

It is true. Since Canada has socialized medicine, the cost to employers is far lower. Of course the health care system in Canada is horrible compared to the US, but then... you get what you pay for. You pay less, you get less. We pay more, we get more.

 

[UShadItComing]

It is true. Since Canada has socialized medicine, the cost to employers is far lower. Of course the health care system in Canada is horrible compared to the US, but then... you get what you pay for. You pay less, you get less. We pay more, we get more.

If it is true that you get more, and I'm not suggesting that it is, the main point is that you can't afford to continue as you are doing. The fact that your car industry is going to Canada is the reason why but it's just the tip of the iceberg Andy. The main point of the discussion was not to compare healthcare systems but to illustrate that you must change and very soon. It was also stated that a president couldn't do it because it would have to be a non-partisan effort where both parties accepted the huge costs of changing. Did you watch the program? If not then please try to catch it even though it's not going to be an enjoyable time spent.

This is the stuff we should be talking about here!

p.s. and for what it's worth, Canada's healthcare system is rated higher than the US system.

 

[Andy]

If it is true that you get more, and I'm not suggesting that it is, the main point is that you can't afford to continue as you are doing. The fact that your car industry is going to Canada is the reason why but it's just the tip of the iceberg Andy. The main point of the discussion was not to compare healthcare systems but to illustrate that you must change and very soon. It was also stated that a president couldn't do it because it would have to be a non-partisan effort where both parties accepted the huge costs of changing. Did you watch the program? If not then please try to catch it even though it's not going to be an enjoyable time spent.

This is the stuff we should be talking about here!

p.s. and for what it's worth, Canada's healthcare system is rated higher than the US system.

The rating was based on access. If you have less, but have full access to it (aka free access) then you get a higher rating.

Anyway, back to the point. You are correct, the socialist policies meant to help people, have instead driven away jobs. Minimum wage, union demands, taxes, government mandated payroll deducations have raised the cost of labor to the point that it is no longer economically viable to build cars in the US.

I propose the following: Reduce taxes, reduce the minimum wage, cut payroll deductions, end oppressive union controls. If we remove these socialist hinderances, the US auto industry could actually cut wages while workers get more real take home pay. They will cut the cost of building cars, make it more economically viable to build them in the US, instead of Canada or Mexico or South Korea (another Capitalist economy).

 

[UShadItComing]

The rating was based on access. If you have less, but have full access to it (aka free access) then you get a higher rating.

It was based on more than access Andy. I've read the report and it was also based on cost per capita /GDP.

Anyway, back to the point. You are correct, the socialist policies meant to help people, have instead driven away jobs. Minimum wage, union demands, taxes, government mandated payroll deducations have raised the cost of labor to the point that it is no longer economically viable to build cars in the US.

That isn't back to the point but that's o.k., I can go there briefly. If your problems with your healthcare system is due to socialism then you need to fix that too. It's a real stretch but I'll give you that one in the interest of bringing you back on topic. The 'point' was that you need to bring down the cost.

I propose the following: Reduce taxes, reduce the minimum wage, cut payroll deductions, end oppressive union controls. If we remove these socialist hinderances, the US auto industry could actually cut wages while workers get more real take home pay. They will cut the cost of building cars, make it more economically viable to build them in the US, instead of Canada or Mexico or South Korea (another Capitalist economy).

But Andy, Canada leads the US in:

Reducing taxes: Our taxes are lower.

Minimum wage: Ours is higher.

Cut payroll deductions: there's no appeciable difference.

Socialist hindrances: Isn't Canada more socialist than the US?

and now back to the point Andy. The point is that it appears to be true that to give a worker healthcare in the US auto industry it costs $6500 while it costs only $800 in Canada. That is a problem isn't it! I wonder what the others on this forum will think of that if they learn it's true. Must be especially galling to people like Rob and libs.

And Andy, did I mention that ours is rated higher than yours?

 

[BigRob]

It was based on more than access Andy. I've read the report and it was also based on cost per capita /GDP.

The study is based on the following things:

- The WHO judged a country's quality of health on life expectancy. But that's a lousy measure of a health-care system. Many things that cause premature death have nothing do with medical care. We have far more fatal transportation accidents than other countries. That's not a health-care problem.

- Similarly, our homicide rate is 10 times higher than in the U.K., eight times higher than in France, and five times greater than in Canada.

- When you adjust for these "fatal injury" rates, U.S. life expectancy is actually higher than in nearly every other industrialized nation.

- Diet and lack of exercise also bring down average life expectancy.

- The WHO judged countries not on the absolute quality of health care, but on how "fairly" health care of any quality is "distributed."

- The U.S. ranking is influenced heavily by the number of people, 45 million, without medical insurance.

- Thirty-seven percent of that group live in households making more than $50,000 a year, says the U.S. Census Bureau. Nineteen percent are in households making more than $75,000 a year; 20 percent are not citizens, and 33 percent are eligible for existing government programs but are not enrolled.

That isn't back to the point but that's o.k., I can go there briefly. If your problems with your healthcare system is due to socialism then you need to fix that too. It's a real stretch but I'll give you that one in the interest of bringing you back on topic. The 'point' was that you need to bring down the cost.

The problems stem from departures from free-market principles. The system is riddled with tax manipulation, costly insurance mandates and bureaucratic interference. Most important, six out of seven health-care dollars are spent by third parties, which means that most consumers exercise no cost-consciousness.

Reducing taxes: Our taxes are lower.

Lets say you make 150,000 in BC, if that is the case, you will pay 43% in income taxes alone. Add to that property taxes, and "sin" taxes.

Minimum wage: Ours is higher.

True, but I lived a summer in Canada, and also have been to PEI many times, and things are much more expensive up there than they are down here, so who is really better off?

and now back to the point Andy. The point is that it appears to be true that to give a worker healthcare in the US auto industry it costs $6500 while it costs only $800 in Canada. That is a problem isn't it! I wonder what the others on this forum will think of that if they learn it's true. Must be especially galling to people like Rob and libs.

And Andy, did I mention that ours is rated higher than yours?

I did not see your program you keep talking about, so I did not see the argument or the points that were made. I do not know if it is true or not, I have not looked into it. I will assume for the moment that it is. The reason that it is this way (if it is) is government interference and bureaucracy that needs to be done away with.

 

[Sihouette]

Odd, Exxon just posted record profits which is doing wonders for my 401K. If I pulled my money out of Exxon and put it in "alternatives" I'd be sinking like the titanic... No thanks.~Andy

So your postion is that in spite of knowing the political trends and the dwindling supply and inevitable changeover where stocks right now in alternatives will be affordable vs worth a lot later on..all these things tell you to hold onto your oil stock?

Remind me not to hire you as my broker..

Let me guess, if you were born in the late 1800s, you would've been investing heavily in the horse and buggy when Ford announced it's weird and unweildy "motor carraige".

Brilliant!

 

[UShadItComing]

No Rob, Andy was closer to right when he said that the rating was based on access alone. In any case neither of you are right but who the hell cares now.

You wrote:

Lets say you make 150,000 in BC, if that is the case, you will pay 43% in income taxes alone. Add to that property taxes, and "sin" taxes.

I really wish you would stop saying things that aren't true because it's a waste of my time to rebut them. Anyone who doesn't have their head firmly implanted in their as-hole would know that income tax is much more complicated than that. First you deal with exemptions and then a dozen more issues when you calculate income tax.

Read my lips Rob, taxation is lower in Canada than it is in the US. That's got to be because of socialism in the US, right?

But if you want to have taxation lower in the US then you can have that too if it will shut you up for a while and get you to be sensible.

 

[BigRob]

No Rob, Andy was closer to right when he said that the rating was based on access alone. In any case neither of you are right but who the hell cares now.

Actually no, I am right, because I took that information right off the WHO report.

I really wish you would stop saying things that aren't true because it's a waste of my time to rebut them. Anyone who doesn't have their head firmly implanted in their as-hole would know that income tax is much more complicated than that. First you deal with exemptions and then a dozen more issues when you calculate income tax.

So I assume you mean that we get no exemptions in the United States on income tax either? If you want to rebut the percents I took them right from the Canadian Revenue Agency, but by all means please attempt. I suppose they are just a bias organization right?

So, you now backtrack and want to claim your tax is lower based on deduction, but fail to add any US deductions to any US taxpayer, interesting tactic.

Read my lips Rob, taxation is lower in Canada than it is in the US. That's got to be because of socialism in the US, right?

But if you want to have taxation lower in the US then you can have that too if it will shut you up for a while and get you to be sensible.

I took my comments and numbers from the WHO and the Canadian Revenue Agency. You brought up the WHO report, I simply told you how it gets measured, and the Canadian Revenue Agency is your government organization.

So don't tell me to shut up and be sensible when your government and the report you brought up agree more with me. You are claiming that Canadian taxes are lower in the US based on deductions, and ignore every US deduction that there is.

 

[UShadItComing]

Actually no, I am right, because I took that information right off the WHO report.



So I assume you mean that we get no exemptions in the United States on income tax either? If you want to rebut the percents I took them right from the Canadian Revenue Agency, but by all means please attempt. I suppose they are just a bias organization right?

So, you now backtrack and want to claim your tax is lower based on deduction, but fail to add any US deductions to any US taxpayer, interesting tactic.



I took my comments and numbers from the WHO and the Canadian Revenue Agency. You brought up the WHO report, I simply told you how it gets measured, and the Canadian Revenue Agency is your government organization.

So don't tell me to shut up and be sensible when your government and the report you brought up agree more with me. You are claiming that Canadian taxes are lower in the US based on deductions, and ignore every US deduction that there is.

There ya go again Rob, making assumptions for me. No Rob, I know that you have exemptions. No Rob, I'm not going to try to say the taxation rates you got are not correct. No Rob, the WHO said more than you quote and you should get your act together with Andy on that. Talk privately so I won't be a part of it.

No Rob, I won't get into arguing that Canada pays less in income tax or taxes in general because it's accepted widely that that's the facts.

Shut up Rob or produce the WHO report for us right from the source. And you may want to check back with Canada revenue to see how much our exemptions are and then find out what yours are. (or as a last resort ask me) ;-)

One thing for sure Rob, if it turns out that Canada pays the most tax then we must be more socialist but if it turns out that the US pays the most tax then your country must be the most socialist. I can live with it either way but I think I would prefer to be the most socialist and pay a little more tax. Only thing is Rob, I think that's not so. Damn!!

 

[BigRob]

There ya go again Rob, making assumptions for me. No Rob, I know that you have exemptions. No Rob, I'm not going to try to say the taxation rates you got are not correct. No Rob, the WHO said more than you quote and you should get your act together with Andy on that. Talk privately so I won't be a part of it.

No Rob, I won't get into arguing that Canada pays less in income tax or taxes in general because it's accepted widely that that's the facts.

The amount of taxes people pay in both countries will vary. There will be many Canadians who pay less than Americans, and there will be many Americans who pay less than Canadians. To make the claim that Canadians will pay less is dishonest and a half-truth.

Shut up Rob or produce the WHO report for us right from the source. And you may want to check back with Canada revenue to see how much our exemptions are and then find out what yours are. (or as a last resort ask me) ;-)

I have a copy of the report sitting on my desk right now. As for from the source, I got it from the WHO, so unless there is some other source for this report, I have it from the "source".

One thing for sure Rob, if it turns out that Canada pays the most tax then we must be more socialist but if it turns out that the US pays the most tax then your country must be the most socialist. I can live with it either way but I think I would prefer to be the most socialist and pay a little more tax. Only thing is Rob, I think that's not so. Damn!!

As I said, it will again vary from person to person and your blanket statements do not show the real situation.

"In Canada total tax and non-tax revenue for every level of government equals about 37% of GDP, compared to the U.S. rate of 27%" Canada has a national goods and services tax of 5% on all purchases. In Ontario, for example, where the provincial sales tax (PST) is 8%, consumers must pay a total of 13% sales tax on top of the purchase price. (Wikipedia)

 

[UShadItComing]

The amount of taxes people pay in both countries will vary. There will be many Canadians who pay less than Americans, and there will be many Americans who pay less than Canadians. To make the claim that Canadians will pay less is dishonest and a half-truth.

I'm not making the claim. It's the overall average we are looking for isn't it. Forget it if you think you've already been given a licking on your claims.

I have a copy of the report sitting on my desk right now. As for from the source, I got it from the WHO, so unless there is some other source for this report, I have it from the "source".

Then scan it and produce it for me or find it on the internet somewhere. I know what the report says, and you're a little liar. blahhhhhhh.

As I said, it will again vary from person to person and your blanket statements do not show the real situation.

You're the one who is making the stupid claims young man.

"In Canada total tax and non-tax revenue for every level of government equals about 37% of GDP, compared to the U.S. rate of 27%" Canada has a national goods and services tax of 5% on all purchases. In Ontario, for example, where the provincial sales tax (PST) is 8%, consumers must pay a total of 13% sales tax on top of the purchase price. (Wikipedia)

So does this mean that overall Canadians pay more in taxes than in the land of the gun. Spit it out boy! I keep hearing from you muricans that we pay less. Although I would be quite plesed to hear that we pay more because I'm a socialist who doesn't jerk off over such things as how much tax we pay.

 

[BigRob]

Then scan it and produce it for me or find it on the internet somewhere. I know what the report says, and you're a little liar. blahhhhhhh.

I am not going to waste my time scanning the report so you can read it. Go find it yourself. You clearly do not know what the report says, or how they define their measurements and methodology.

World Health Report 2000

You can find the other reports if you are interested.

So does this mean that overall Canadians pay more in taxes than in the land of the gun. Spit it out boy! I keep hearing from you muricans that we pay less. Although I would be quite plesed to hear that we pay more because I'm a socialist who doesn't jerk off over such things as how much tax we pay.

Yes, more taxes are paid in the land of entitlement than in the land of the gun. At least your true colors are out, some of us actually believe that we should keep what we earn.