HiSTORY HAS BEEN MADE!!!!

Oh you mean income tax. I thought you meant the tax on goods.

Our taxes on sales vary by commodity type by state and county, often in an incremental way where each gets it's own share all the way down to the individual city in some cases. They're a torturous labyrinth of "who knows".

Federal is at least a little more clear, except those graphs are pre-medicare/medicaid, pre-fica, and pre-state tax so by the time you put it all together what started out a shiny 15% can run anywhere from 20% to 40%, easily.

Numbers and references please.

(Bonus points for an itemized list of what that money goes to and in what percents)

Can't really provide numbers for this as despite my attempts, I could not find a survey showing such. However, I DID find this, so I'll take back my previous comment.

New Zealand's tax will be 15% in May. It's currently 12.5%

The taxes on goods in the Netherlands are 19%, except for those on food (6%) and medicines (0%).

Everything here is taxed.

Can someone please explain to me what this means for a 21-year-old (still in college, working part-time) without insurance? I've been reading about this since morning but I don't really know how America works.

EDIT: I found this.

Dependent children: Your children will be covered until the age of 26.
"Children who are over 21 and may not have a job that pays their health insurance can still be on your policy," Borger said. "That's very important to a lot of families."

What exactly does this mean? Dependent kids in the family who can't pay for their own insurance yet can still get one? Is it free? Is it supported financially by some sort of fundings? How much is covered? Will it be taken away once said person hits 26 years old? Or will the person be forced to pay more money? What if they still can't afford to by then?

Americans would be so much more likely to pay taxes if the government calculated everything for them. =\

Vote for Paul Ryan if he ever tries a presidential run.
http://www.roadmap.republicans.budget.ho...sueID=8514
If he knows how to put fiscal conservativism before social conservativism, I'll be voting for him.

The taxes on goods in the Netherlands are 19%, except for those on food (6%) and medicines (0%).

In England it's 17.5% on most things, but 0% on food.

Like I said on Facebook-Goodbye America it was nice knowing you. Hello People's Republic of North America. RIP Freedom.

Do not praise this piece of legislation you economic illiterates. You only want immediate effects and fail to see the terrible long term results and secondary consequences.

Like I said on Facebook-Goodbye America it was nice knowing you. Hello People's Republic of North America. RIP Freedom.

Do not praise this piece of legislation you economic illiterates. You only want immediate effects and fail to see the terrible long term results and secondary consequences.

DERP.

It's republicans that got us into this mess. Clinton was a democrat and America was flourishing. Obama is a democrat. Do the math. :3

What exactly does this mean? Dependent kids in the family who can't pay for their own insurance yet can still get one? Is it free? Is it supported financially by some sort of fundings? How much is covered? Will it be taken away once said person hits 26 years old? Or will the person be forced to pay more money? What if they still can't afford to by then?

It used to be that dependent children were covered only until a certain age defined by the health care company they were receiving coverage, usually around 21. Once Obama signs this bill into law, it will be federally mandated that all companies have to insure dependent children under their parents' health care plan until they're 26. Essentially, anyone 26 or younger now is covered under their parents' plan, unless they want to buy their own plan. Also, to answer your final questions: while you won't be covered under your parents plan when you hit 26 (so yes, it will be taken away), you will be forced to buy a plan under this new bill (that's the basic point - everyone HAS to buy a plan, now). However, if you're unable to afford a plan, government subsidies are in place to help pay your premiums.

In other words, you're covered under your parents' plan until you're 26, but can purchase your own plan beforehand if you want. If you hit 26 and are still not in a place to afford a new plan, the government will help you pay for a new plan based on your income. Regardless, you will be covered, and you won't go bankrupt trying to get coverage .

Like I said on Facebook-Goodbye America it was nice knowing you. Hello People's Republic of North America. RIP Freedom.

Do not praise this piece of legislation you economic illiterates. You only want immediate effects and fail to see the terrible long term results and secondary consequences.

You make it sound like this is the end of democracy by means of slipping into communism. If anything, it'll be the end of democracy by means of a national debt which crushes the economy to the point of societal collapse. Get your ridiculous slippery slope outcomes straight. It'll be fun if de facto currency systems collapse in our lifetime. Gold and bullets are the next currency.

@ Mark
Which mess are you talking about? You're pinning an awfully vague problem on correlation without causation.

In other words, you're covered under your parents' plan until you're 26, but can purchase your own plan beforehand if you want. If you hit 26 and are still not in a place to afford a new plan, the government will help you pay for a new plan based on your income. Regardless, you will be covered, and you won't go bankrupt trying to get coverage .

I fail to see why the government forcing everyone to have healthcare is a good thing. When did it become a right to pay for a service? Also, what motivation to PAY for private healthcare if you can just leech off the government for the rest of your life. Good game social policy.

@ Mark
Which mess are you talking about? You're pinning an awfully vague problem on correlation without causation.

No jobs? Crap economy? People dying in Shifting Sand Land for oil?

I fail to see why the government forcing everyone to have healthcare is a good thing. When did it become a right to pay for a service? Also, what motivation to PAY for private healthcare if you can just leech off the government for the rest of your life. Good game social policy.

Are you trying to become a doctor or something? Private healthcare should be for those who can afford it, and if they can, then they will. Government healthcare is great for everyone who can't afford it. Calling them leeches makes you mighty ignorant, because everyone is paying for it, including them, which means they're just taking advantage of a service they've contributed to.

Also you're going on about how it's not right to pay for a service but you're in favour of private healthcare? I could see it if you wanted "free" healthcare like we get in Canada, but private healthcare is for doctors who care more about their car than their jobs.

Mine (on income) is cumulatively around 35% right now.

Isn't that quite the average world-wide?

Norway has roughly the same amount of taxes on income, but 25% on goods. And a lot of other taxes which are really weird. If you inherit something from family or something after they die, you have to pay 25% off that to the government and such. Basically, if you have a house and your parents die, you have to pay the government 25% of the price of that house. Messy.

But yay, seems like there's something good coming out of this, from my point of view.

I fail to see why the government forcing everyone to have healthcare is a good thing. When did it become a right to pay for a service?

It's not particularly different than requiring everyone to have automobile insurance.

Isn't that quite the average world-wide?

Wouldn't know, that's why I wanted to see his figures for comparison. If it's the average it invalidated his (now retracted) claim that we pay less (Unless his retraction was only to the part about complaining more).

I don't get what's wrong with this. It's like this in most countries in the world. Including 3rd world ones.

I don't get what's wrong with this. It's like this in most countries in the world. Including 3rd world ones.

Excepting the fundamental underlying flaws in our healthcare system itself that were unaddressed, such as the insanely frivolous malpractice laws (and related insurance) the over-charing for services and medication to cover the cost of lobbying and marketing and so forth.

[color="#000080"]

Excepting the fundamental underlying flaws in our healthcare system itself that were unaddressed, such as the insanely frivolous malpractice laws (and related insurance) the over-charing for services and medication to cover the cost of lobbying and marketing and so forth.

Well, pretty much makes sense. But I don't think these problems go hand to hand with the social healthcare system. I just think the things you mentioned shouldn't be overlooked and solved some point down the way. [/color]

I really don't know how I feel about this just yet, as I don't know how it's going to affect me.