A Usenet persona calling itself BCITORGB wrote:

Michael says:
============
Wow! Forty-eight percent of income for health care that you can't get
when
you need it. What a bargain!

Bull**** from weiser once again. He obviously can't read or think.
==============

Further, Weiser has difficulty with math... even using his figures, I
reckon that's 40% of 48%.... but, hey, that wouldn't sound as dramatic.

You're nitpicking. Forty percent is still a lot to pay for somebody else's
health care.

What a twit!

Wassamatta, I **** you off again?


But I just don't get the point of his post. He's living in paradise and
happy about it. And we're living with a system that we clearly like so
much that we voted (well, I didn't, but apparently many Canadians did)
Tommy Douglas the most important Canadian personage (living or dead),
on a TV poll. [Info for Scott: Tommy Douglas = father of Canadian
universal medicine]

Why does Scott worry about how much tax we pay?

I don't. If you want to pay 48% of your income, with 40% going to socialized
health care so that you're paying for everybody else's bad health even if
you don't need it, that's fine with me. My argument is merely that it's a
stupid system that I don¹t want to see exported to the US because people
refuse to look at the warts and failures of socialized medicine. You're
entitled to ride your own petard just as high as it pleases you to fly.

Debunking the deliberate avoidance of the failures of socialized medicine
helps to keep such idiotic ideas from taking root down here.

As far as I can tell,
Americans pay between 35% to 40% in taxes, depending on the state.
First, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that it cost
much more money to govern 30+ million spread out over a huge country as
opposed to 300+ million spread over a merely big country.

Well, that's a particularly silly statement, given the fact that the vast
majority of your "huge country" is uninhabited and uninhabitable.

So likely our
tax bills ought to be somewhat higher. And look, on top of everything,
our guys throw in healthcare. What do the Yanks get thrown in?

Freedom.

--
Regards,
Scott Weiser

"I love the Internet, I no longer have to depend on
friends, family and co-workers, I can annoy people WORLDWIDE!" TM

© 2005 Scott Weiser

Weiser as smarty-pants:
==============
Well, that's a particularly silly statement, given the fact that the
vast
majority of your "huge country" is uninhabited and uninhabitable.
===============

And that's a particularly stupid statement gven that your system (your
whole country, relative to Canada) has economies of scale (or is that
an unknown concept to you?).

It basically matters not what we're talking about -- healthcare,
railways, highways, telecommunications, etc -- the per capita cost of
providing services in Canada will be higher -- significantly higher --
than similar costs in the USA.

So my point remains: even at similar levels of service, Canadian costs
(hence taxes) will be higher. .

frtzw906

On 21-Mar-2005, Scott Weiser wrote:

You're nitpicking. Forty percent is still a lot to pay for somebody else's
health care.

Yer still both math and fact challenged. Why don't you give up, dickhead?

Mike

A Usenet persona calling itself Michael Daly wrote:

On 21-Mar-2005, Scott Weiser wrote:

You're nitpicking. Forty percent is still a lot to pay for somebody else's
health care.

Yer still both math and fact challenged. Why don't you give up, dickhead?

Because poking Netwits like you through the bars of your cage is so much
fun!
--
Regards,
Scott Weiser

"I love the Internet, I no longer have to depend on
friends, family and co-workers, I can annoy people WORLDWIDE!" TM

© 2005 Scott Weiser

On 22-Mar-2005, Scott Weiser wrote:

Because poking Netwits like you through the bars of your cage is so much
fun!

Exactly - you play games without any concern for truth. Give it
up asshole.

Mike