the jimmymac attack!

Like so many things the American Republicans have wrong it seems tax cuts do more harm than good. At least more harm for the country as a whole. Maybe that is not something they actually care about.
A study by The Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives has shown that high tax Nordic countries perform better than low tax Anglo American countries in social performance. http://www.policyalternatives.ca/

Some of their findings include:

Nordic countries have significantly lower
rates of poverty across almost all social
groups;


Poverty is widespread(in the US). A greater
percentage of Americans, and in particular
children and the elderly, live in poverty
in the United States than in any other
industrialized country in the world.


In Nordic countries; as an indicator of how well a country
protects the vulnerable, the elderly have
significantly higher pension income
replacement rates in Nordic countries
and the income received by those with
disabilities relative to the population is
much higher;
• income is distributed significantly more
equally in Nordic countries;
• on every measure we examine there is
significantly more gender equality in
Nordic countries;
• Nordic workers have significantly more
economic security;
• in terms of health outcomes, infant
mortality rates are significantly lower
and life expectancy is longer in Nordic
countries;
• in terms of educational outcomes, a greater
percentage of the population completed
secondary school and university in Nordic
countries and 15-year old students score
higher on math tests;

In the USA:
• Living conditions are shockingly unequal.
By any measure, income is distributed
more unequally in the United States than
in every other industrialized country. In
2004, America’s richest 1% held more of the
nation’s wealth than the bottom 90% (34.7%
versus 29.9%).
• Ordinary workers in the United States have
less economic security than workers in any
other industrialized country (as shown by a
comprehensive index of economic security
developed by the International Labour
Organization).
• As an indication of gender inequality,
women in the United States still hold a
relatively small percentage of positions
in the professions, legislative bodies, and
senior civil service.

There are many other disparities including lower homicide rates in the high tax Nordic countries. It really makes one wonder why a country would favour tax cuts over improved social programs. It also makes it abundantly clear why and how the debacle of the Hurricane Katrina 'rescue' happened. And why the worlds richest country has so many citizens living in poverty.
For the complete report go to http://www.policyalternatives.ca/documents/National_Office_Pubs/2006/Benefits_and_Costs_of_Taxation.pdf

Less poverty found in high-tax countries

Nordic states are thriving, report says
OTTAWA -- The high-tax Nordic countries score better both socially and economically than low-tax Anglo-American countries, especially the United States, according to a Canadian social and economic policy think-tank.

Low taxes are not necessarily a good thing

That was fun! This is what a CNN anchor person said today after interviewing two 'experts' on Iraq. I guess the Iraq war is reality TV for America. It's not fun for the Iraqi people or the young Americans being killed and blown to pieces. But the people running things in the US do not have to face the reality. For them its just a TV show.

During the Ming dynasty in China there was an emperor who ruled for less than one year. It's unfortunate Zhu Gaozhi died at the young age of forty-six in 1425. He was a revolutionary thinker when it comes to social planning. He had the unusual idea that ordinary people should be taken care of. Some bureaucrats balked at his ideas and he responded by saying, "Relieving people's poverty ought to be handled as though one were rescuing them from fire or saving them from drowning. One cannot hesitate." It's a beautiful idea.
There use to be a city on the Persian Gulf called Hormuz. Now the city is gone but the Strait of Hormuz remains today. In 1414 the Chinese Admiral Zheng He sailed to the Persian Gulf city. He found a very wealthy prosperous society. He reported that there were no poor people in Hormuz because "if a family meets with misfortune resulting in poverty, everyone gives them clothes and food and capital, and relieves their distress." It was a rich and prosperous city and they took care of every citizen. Ever notice how like attracts like? Poverty and need usually exist where it is accepted and tolerated. If it's not accepted and a society takes action against it then it does not exist.

* these facts come from "When China Ruled the Seas" by Louise Levathes

Many people do not think money and resources should be spent on helping people living in poverty. They will say that they do not want their tax dollars used to help lazy people who wont work. In Vancouver my very unscientific assessment estimates that about 50% of the population would like to help poor people. The other 50% would like to hire more police and put the homeless in jail. The difference lies in a very fundamental belief about human nature. However no matter what your beliefs about human nature I would argue that the hardline approach is not economically sound. Hiring more police is very expensive and ultimately it also is not effective.
Here are other ways in which the present approach is not only not working but it is also expensive and a waste of tax dollars. The policy of letting poor and homeless and addicts fend for themselves just creates more problems and expense for everybody.
The cost of poverty for us all:
1. Health: People living in poverty have more health problems and cost the health system more. They will use hospital and emergency services much more than other people. For example I am a healthy person and have never been taken to hospital by ambulance. An ambulance call costs the health system at least $1000 a trip. Some people living in poverty will call an ambulance once a month or once a week when they're sick. I'm sure there are many calls every day in a big city like Vancouver. Healthy people use the medical services less and cost taxpayers less. Physical health is directly related to economic health.
2. Crime: In Vancouver the amount of property crime is 3 times higher than in Toronto. Why? Because the drug problem is so much worse. Drug addicts will do anything to get the money for drugs. Cars and houses are broken into every day. Stores and offices and people are robbed every day. This costs people and businesses. It also costs taxpayers because the police must respond to the crime. It costs people and business because bars and security must be put on doors and windows. Private security services are one industry that is doing well in this environment.
3. Housing: You would think having people sleeping on sidewalks would not cost taxpayers anything. It's free accommodation isn't it? This situation leads to the existence of homeless shelters. Shelters are not cheap. To have one person in a shelter for one night costs the government $80. So to house a person this way for one month costs $2400. A person could rent a very nice apartment for that price. Three or four people could be housed in modest apartments for what it costs to keep one person in a shelter.