# "Socialist" Country Comparisons **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 17, 2008, 3:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/socialist-country-comparisons/468325 "2008-10-17T03:07:17Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2008, 11:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/socialist-country-comparisons/468325/81 "2008-10-18T23:03:42Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > It’s not clear to me what he’s talking about when he refers to “your statement” In fact, I thought about asking him to quote my “statement,” but it seemed easier to ask the question the way I did. > > Anyway, it should be easy enough for him to verify his serious skepticism. I do not believe that your statement that > [@brazil84](#): > > members of the underclass are more likely to engage in risky, promiscuous sexual behavior than others. I doubt it. I do not believe it is true. I do not believe that you can provide a cite for it to show that your statement is a factual representation of reality. Is that clear? Cite, please. ---
**Author:** ![Cat\_Whisperer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cat_whisperer/32/4839_2.png) [@Cat\_Whisperer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cat_Whisperer)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2008, 11:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/socialist-country-comparisons/468325/82 "2008-10-18T23:11:57Z")
Why don’t both of you listen to the OP and take your conversation elsewhere? ETA: That’s speaking as someone who’s trying to discuss the subject at hand, not trying to Junior Mod. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2008, 11:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/socialist-country-comparisons/468325/83 "2008-10-18T23:40:21Z")
> [@featherlou](#): > > Why don’t both of you listen to the OP and take your conversation elsewhere? > > ETA: That’s speaking as someone who’s trying to discuss the subject at hand, not trying to Junior Mod. I wasn’t aware that I had been asked to take my conversation elsewhere. In any case, the conversation would already be over if **brazil84** would have just posted a cite for his statement. That’s all I have asked for (a couple of times now). ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2008, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/socialist-country-comparisons/468325/84 "2008-10-18T23:55:44Z")
> [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](#): > > Really, I’m having a harder and harder time distinguishing between untrammeled capitalism and feudalism. What do Constitutional rights mean when they do not cover your relationship with the entity that has the most direct power over you? Count me as another who is having difficulty seeing how unfettered capitalism and feudalism are much different. What areas of my life are off-limits to an employer, legally speaking?\* \*This might be better off with it’s own thread, eh. So [here it is](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=10332081#post10332081). ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2008, 12:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/socialist-country-comparisons/468325/85 "2008-10-19T00:53:38Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > We are not on your blog. This is not your website. Your rules do not apply here. Of course they do . . . if you don’t follow my rules, I won’t engage with you. Just as you are perfectly free to make your own rules about who you will and won’t engage with. > [@](#): > > Please provide a cite to back up your statement re: risky, promiscuous sexual behaviours of the underclass. High Risk Sexual Behavior: Interventions with Vulberable Populations, E. Becker et al, Plenum Publishing (1998) at page 2. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2008, 12:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/socialist-country-comparisons/468325/86 "2008-10-19T00:57:39Z")
> [@Euphonious\_Polemic](#): > > **brazil84** , as I am the creator of the OP, I wonder if I might be so bold as to request that you now refrain from further posting in this thread. I think we now all understand your thesis that a genetically inferior racial underclass is responsible for the problems in the USA. That’s not what I have argued here, but anyway, your OP asked a specific question: In essence, you asked, since socialism works in Canada, why would Americans fear it? I proposed an answer and am prepared to defend it. So there was no hijack, just normal debate. If you find my answer “repulsive,” you are free to ignore it. I would point out, however, that there is no guarantee in life that the truth won’t be “repulsive.” ---
**Author:** ![Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spectre_of_pithecanthropus/32/12343_2.png) [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2008, 2:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/socialist-country-comparisons/468325/87 "2008-10-19T02:09:55Z")
> [@msmith537](#): > > Now I generally agree with Same Stone. Simply redistributing wealth creates disincentives. Why study hard and go to college to get a better paying job when you can just cruise and collect gubment handouts? > > OTOH, why study hard and go to college so you can be saddled with crushing student loans for the next decade while trying to eek out an existance busting your ass for some CEO making $50 million a year until he decides to outsource your job? I can appreciate your point of view (and Sam’s), but if this board is anywhere near as left-leaning as is claimed, then I’m not alone in disagreeing fundamentally in what constitutes a reasonable re-allocation of wealth and what doesn’t. Because, unless we’re–ahh–stupid we all accept that _some_ re-allocation is essential. Nobody gripes about the city taking their money to build traffic signals or fund the police department. In some ways our system does not work, or does not work well, the number of uninsured and underinsured Americans being, IMO, the great shame of our country. Another thing that everyone seems to be missing, although Obama did touch on it today, is that it _isn’t_ all about the entrepreneur, or the homeowner. (Or even about the middle class, actually, but that’s a whole other kettle of fish.) Someone’s got to punch the clock, and we can’t all be entrepreneurs. Homeownership doesn’t necessarily fit into everyone’s life or budget either, not even well-educated professionals with advanced degrees. Your point about the starting salary of engineers compared with lawyers is a good one, and a perfect example of when the system goes awry. The people who design things, and the people who actually make them, go begging for jobs. The litigious, on the other hand, make out like bandits. In saying this I’m not trying to condemn the legal profession. We need lawyers. But we also need to encourage technology in this country. We need manufacturing capacity and engineering know-how, and the current economic climate doesn’t encourage these things. ---
**Author:** ![squeegee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/squeegee/32/14537_2.png) [@squeegee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/squeegee)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2008, 4:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/socialist-country-comparisons/468325/88 "2008-10-19T04:59:03Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > The effective top tax bracket in the U.S. will be almost 50%, vs 41% in Canada. Please explain this statement – Obama’s proposals would let the Bush tax cuts expire on the top two tax brackets, which would return to 36% and 39.6%, Clinton era rates. Where do you get 50% from? Perhaps I’m misunderstanding your use of [“effective” tax rates](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_rate#Effective). ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2008, 5:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/socialist-country-comparisons/468325/89 "2008-10-19T05:34:20Z")
> [@squeegee](#): > > Please explain this statement – Obama’s proposals would let the Bush tax cuts expire on the top two tax brackets, which would return to 36% and 39.6%, Clinton era rates. Where do you get 50% from? Perhaps I’m misunderstanding your use of [“effective” tax rates](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_rate#Effective). From the [Tax Foundation Tax Policy Blog](http://taxfoundation.org/blog/show/23491.html) > [@](#): > > **Top tax rate:** Senator Obama would raise the top individual tax rate back to 39.6 percent, impose an additional 2 to 4 percent tax on earnings for some over the existing Social Security wage cap, and bring back the phase-out of the personal exemption and certain itemized deductions for higher-income taxpayers. When added up, the top effective marginal tax rate rises by 12 to 14 percentage points, from 37.9 percent to roughly 48 to 50 percent. “High” is in the eye of the beholder, but these are tax rates not seen since before the Tax Reform Act of 1986. > > ``` > Note: These calculations work as follows: (1) 37.9 percent equals the current 35 percent top income tax rate plus the current 2.9 percent Medicare tax rate; and (2) 48 to 50 percent equals Obama's 39.6 percent top income tax rate plus the 2.9 percent Medicare tax rate plus his additional 2-to-4 percent hike in the Social Security tax rate plus an additional roughly 4.5 percent for the phase-out of personal exemption and certain itemized deductions. > > ``` As he says, this will be the highest marginal rate the U.S. has had since 1986. > [@msmith537](#): > > The problem is that IMHO, the current system doesn’t reward hard work and productivity. It rewards people with the wherewithall, connections and forsight to go into fields like investment banking, law or consulting. We are quickly becoming a nation that doesn’t make or invent anything and just pays a lot of money to people who push numbers around a spreadsheet or write rules for pushing those numbers around. > > Half my engineering class didn’t become engineers after graduation. They went to work for Accenture (then Andersen Consulting). Why even study engineering anyway when a starting associate at Jones Day law firm makes like $160,000 out of law school? And short of becoming a professional baseball player, what industry besides I-banking could you become a millionare by age 30? Again, when you have an imbalance like this, where it seems we have might have a glut of lawyers and financiers and a shortage of engineers and scientists and doctors and such, you have to look at the incentives. You go through the tax code, you compare your industries to other countries, and you figure out what the forces are causing this. For one thing, if you have a highly regulated society, the net result of that is that you’re going to have a lot of demand for lawyers. You’re going to have a lot of accountants. Sarbanes-Oxley could have been called the accountant full employement act. And a lot of bureaucrats. And this puts upwards pressure on wages in these industries as players in the market bid up the value of the finite supply of lawyers and accountants. This makes lawyering and accounting more attractive, and it grows at the expense of other fields. It may also be that the legal system is over-rewarding lawyers. Perhaps tort reform would help cull the herd a bit, so to speak. It may also be that high corporate taxes push manufacturing jobs out of the country, resulting in less demand in the technical and industrial career paths. It could be many other things too, some cause by government, or some caused by societal pressure (i.e. the citizens of the country live lives complex enough that there’s just a lot of need for a lot of financial people, lawyers, accountants, etc). ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2008, 9:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/socialist-country-comparisons/468325/90 "2008-10-19T09:45:43Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > South Africa. Higher murder rate; higher HIV rate; etc. I haven’t checked the statistics, but I bet illiteracy and illegitimacy are higher there too. And that personal savings are lower. South Africa is a developing nation/third world country by most metrics. Not an industrialised nation by any means. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2008, 11:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/socialist-country-comparisons/468325/91 "2008-10-19T11:36:31Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > Is the US subsidizing the rest of the world in terms of development of technology, productivity techniques, etc.? When it comes to, say, prescription drugs, other countries with nationalized health care system will force drug manufacturers to sell at a lower price - they get away with this because the marginal cost of producing more pills is so low that it’s better to sell them more cheaply than not at all, and because the US, where drugs fetch higher prices, is funding the R&D for the drugs. Essentially, the superior productivity and more free market of the US is exploited by those other countries. > > If the US leans more towards socialism and our level of innovation and productivity drops, could the level of technological development and quality of life across the world decline since the US will be doing less of the R&D lifting for everyone else? And what makes you think that capitalism has anything to do with it, and not the research done at universities ? Or otherwise funded by the government ? Corporations are more interested in pouring money into advertising campaigns, and repackaging old drugs under new names. And America isn’t especially productive either; just large and full of workaholics who make up for lower productivity with longer work hours. ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2008, 12:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/socialist-country-comparisons/468325/92 "2008-10-19T12:25:07Z")
The drug issue was just an example. Earlier in the thread it was proposed that the US output of producitivity and innovation was higher than more socialized nations and that seemed to go unchallenged. I was raising the point with that as an assumption. ---
**Author:** ![squeegee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/squeegee/32/14537_2.png) [@squeegee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/squeegee)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2008, 4:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/socialist-country-comparisons/468325/93 "2008-10-19T16:23:45Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > From the [Tax Foundation Tax Policy Blog](http://taxfoundation.org/blog/show/23491.html)From the Tax Foundation Tax Policy Blog > > > [@Tax Foundation Tax Policy Blog](#): > > > > Top tax rate: Senator Obama would raise the top individual tax rate back to 39.6 percent, impose an additional 2 to 4 percent tax on earnings for some over the existing Social Security wage cap, and bring back the phase-out of the personal exemption and certain itemized deductions for higher-income taxpayers. When added up, the top effective marginal tax rate rises by 12 to 14 percentage points, from 37.9 percent to roughly 48 to 50 percent. “High” is in the eye of the beholder, but these are tax rates not seen since before the Tax Reform Act of 1986. > > > > Note: These calculations work as follows: (1) 37.9 percent equals the current 35 percent top income tax rate plus the current 2.9 percent Medicare tax rate; and (2) 48 to 50 percent equals Obama’s 39.6 percent top income tax rate plus the 2.9 percent Medicare tax rate plus his additional 2-to-4 percent hike in the Social Security tax rate plus an additional roughly 4.5 percent for the phase-out of personal exemption and certain itemized deductions. These numbers only add up if the cap on payroll taxes were eliminated; to my best knowledge, Obama has not proposed doing so, but supports raising the cap. Isn’t this a pretty important distinction for the Tax Foundation to have left out? Without this hand-waving, the 48-50% “top tax rate” is far lower, in the range of the tax rates during the Clinton presidency. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2008, 5:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/socialist-country-comparisons/468325/94 "2008-10-19T17:38:27Z")
> [@squeegee](#): > > These numbers only add up if the cap on payroll taxes were eliminated; to my best knowledge, Obama has not proposed doing so, but supports raising the cap. Isn’t this a pretty important distinction for the Tax Foundation to have left out? Without this hand-waving, the 48-50% “top tax rate” is far lower, in the range of the tax rates during the Clinton presidency. If the cap on SS is only raised, but the height of the cap is higher than the start of the top marginal tax rate, then it still holds that the marginal rate will increase to 50%. All you’re adding with a cap is saying that it comes back down again by 2-4 points at whatever magical income point Obama chooses for the new ceiling. It seems to me that your 39.6% number is the true hand-waving value, since it ignores the removal of deductions and changes to the basic personal exemption. With just those two factors added in, you’re already at 45%. Add in the 2.9% for the Medicare tax, and you’re at 47.9% - far closer to the 50% I quoted than to the 39.6% you’re claiming. And in any event, even at 45%, the U.S. will have a higher effective marginal rate than will Canada. As a Canadian, I suppose I should welcome all this. Finally, we’re about to have some serious competitive advantages against the United States when it comes to tax policy and social incentives, after years of seeing Americans earn more and have higher standards of living. Go Obama! ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2008, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/socialist-country-comparisons/468325/95 "2008-10-19T18:51:15Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > Of course they do . . . if you don’t follow my rules, I won’t engage with you. Just as you are perfectly free to make your own rules about who you will and won’t engage with. > > High Risk Sexual Behavior: Interventions with Vulberable Populations, E. Becker et al, Plenum Publishing (1998) at page 2. One of my rules is that I don’t do your research for you, nor do I go hunting for your cites. No link so your cite is rejected. You fail. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2008, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/socialist-country-comparisons/468325/96 "2008-10-19T18:56:56Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > One of my rules is that I don’t do your research for you, nor do I go hunting for your cites. :shrug: I did the research. You asked for a cite, and I gave you a cite. All you have to do is check on google books. I’ll even try to give you a link if you ask nicely. But somehow I doubt you are interested in actually reading the cite I provided. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2008, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/socialist-country-comparisons/468325/97 "2008-10-19T19:06:17Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > :shrug: I did the research. You asked for a cite, and I gave you a cite. All you have to do is check on google books. I’ll even try to give you a link if you ask nicely. > > But somehow I doubt you are interested in actually reading the cite I provided. You provided nothing. No link, so no cite. That’s one of my rules. You fail. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2008, 7:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/socialist-country-comparisons/468325/98 "2008-10-19T19:16:00Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > You provided nothing. > > No link, so no cite. That’s one of my rules. Haha. Looks like your “rules” are conveniently set up so that you can avoid looking at evidence which might contradict your position. But my offer still stands: Ask for a link and I will try to give one to you. Somehow I doubt you will ask, though. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2008, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/socialist-country-comparisons/468325/99 "2008-10-19T20:04:16Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > Haha. Looks like your “rules” are conveniently set up so that you can avoid looking at evidence which might contradict your position. > > But my offer still stands: Ask for a link and I will try to give one to you. > > Somehow I doubt you will ask, though. Done with you. You have nothing. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2008, 8:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/socialist-country-comparisons/468325/100 "2008-10-19T20:09:58Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > Done with you. You have nothing. Bye. And by the way, if anyone else in this thread cares to request a link to my cite, I will be happy to provide it. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/socialist-country-comparisons/468325.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/socialist-country-comparisons/468325.md?page=6)