So Let's See What Happens

[blaknoize]

So you add the actual tax burden into my whole message? Obviously the country isn't a poor country nor are its citizens. Norway isn't concerned with everyone elses views on "taxes" and assuming the GDP and PPP are correct ($88,600 and $53,000 respectively) the citizens "burdened" by this high "taxation" nor are they poor, none of them are. Because they get the idea of helping each other and helping oneself. As I stated once before a strong workforce creates a strong economy and not worrying about getting sick helps that even further. I mean, in Norway, your wife can have a baby and devote a full year to that baby, with PAY and then return to her employer, relaxed, organized and prepared to put her all back into her role in the countries health because the country looked after her.

Also, Norway isn't a purely Socialist country, its more of a mixed market; with lots of free market activity and government presence to keep it all together and on the right track. Considering they're standard and cost of living is nearly 30% higher than the US and they have a balanced budget AND are leaning more toward energy independence there are no negatives you can put to make this argument stand. From the lowest or nearly lowest crime rates, lowest death rates, very high infant mortality rates, high income, high productivity and it is even a creditor to other countries, it doesn't NEED you to give it oil or lend it money. You know why? Because they are responsible and are healthy and are preparing themselves for the future not for the right now.

[BanginJimmy]

So you add the actual tax burden into my whole message?

David took care of the rest in his post. I just pointed out the huge tax burden that pays for mediocre health care.

Obviously the country isn't a poor country nor are its citizens. Norway isn't concerned with everyone elses views on "taxes" and assuming the GDP and PPP are correct ($88,600 and $53,000 respectively) the citizens "burdened" by this high "taxation" nor are they poor, none of them are. Because they get the idea of helping each other and helping oneself. As I stated once before a strong workforce creates a strong economy and not worrying about getting sick helps that even further. I mean, in Norway, your wife can have a baby and devote a full year to that baby, with PAY and then return to her employer, relaxed, organized and prepared to put her all back into her role in the countries health because the country looked after her.

Whats with the quotes around the word taxes?

The rest of the quote is jibberish. Why should a company pay for someone to do nothing that benefits the company?

Also, Norway isn't a purely Socialist country, its more of a mixed market; with lots of free market activity and government presence to keep it all together and on the right track. Considering they're standard and cost of living is nearly 30% higher than the US and they have a balanced budget AND are leaning more toward energy independence there are no negatives you can put to make this argument stand. From the lowest or nearly lowest crime rates, lowest death rates, very high infant mortality rates, high income, high productivity and it is even a creditor to other countries, it doesn't NEED you to give it oil or lend it money. You know why? Because they are responsible and are healthy and are preparing themselves for the future not for the right now.

That is all fine and dandy but really offers nothing new to this thread. It isnt hard to look at statistics and draw a conclusion from it. That doesnt make the conclusion correct though.

Most of the highest crime rates and lowest incomes in the country are controlled by democrat politicians, therefore you can a assume that any area with a heavy democrat voting base will be a low income, crime infested area.

How much does that really tell us about the problems? Absolutely nothing and there is nothing you can say that will make the statement untrue. It is absolutely true, but using stats without context and real knowledge of the situation is misleading at best.

[blaknoize]

The rest of the quote is jibberish. Why should a company pay for someone to do nothing that benefits the company?

What do you mean why should a company pay? Why should a company pay for you if your injured on the job if your not benefiting the company? Why should a company pay u overtime for doing nothing more than what u were doing in the first place? That woman is an employee, hired by the employer, she is an asset. Norway understands that relaxation and family time is just as important as working. It's more than just money its the principal, you have a child.

That is all fine and dandy but really offers nothing new to this thread. It isnt hard to look at statistics and draw a conclusion from it. That doesnt make the conclusion correct though.

Um, clearly statistics have to give a conclusion. You all will use hospital statistics to prove my information wrong, this is solid statistics and prove my point especially with the fact that the country is a creditor. My jibberish isnt clogged with what other people tell me on TV, it's only jibberish to you because the idea of working with each other is beyond your scope because it isn't just for your benefit. Your idea is all about the amount of $$ involved and how u can make more of it. No one worries about just how much more $ they can con out of one another (as it seems) over there.

Most of the highest crime rates and lowest incomes in the country are controlled by democrat politicians, therefore you can a assume that any area with a heavy democrat voting base will be a low income, crime infested area.

Wrong, because Norway itself has a lower crime rate than even the highest concentration of crime in that said area.

How much does that really tell us about the problems? Absolutely nothing and there is nothing you can say that will make the statement untrue. It is absolutely true, but using stats without context and real knowledge of the situation is misleading at best.

Of what problems, our countries or theirs? That they have virtually no real problems or that we have many problems because our country is owned by companies? Because the US puts its faith in a healthcare institution? Do you not understand that a corporation must maximize profits so... in turn if the health institute is insuring you, you must be deemed "healthy" because u cost less than if u are actually someone that needs help. Which is backwards as the ones who need the healthcare are the ones that arent healthy.

Money makes us treat each other as items or customers not as humans. When you walk into an American hospital your asked first "are you insured" or "how are you paying" then... "how can we help you." vs anywhere that isn't using privatized healthcare you may generally hear "how can we help" or "what amatter."

Also, I quoted taxes because if we weren't raised with the idea that taxes are bad then taxes wouldnt matter. Our taxes go to nothing, their high "tax" is circulated in most ever aspect of their country and used for benefits not to pay off the banking system or finance a campaign.

[BanginJimmy]

Why should a company pay for you if your injured on the job if your not benefiting the company? Why should a company pay u overtime for doing nothing more than what u were doing in the first place? That woman is an employee, hired by the employer, she is an asset. Norway understands that relaxation and family time is just as important as working. It's more than just money its the principal, you have a child.

Workers comp cases are covered under separate laws. OT pay is a benefit, not a requirement, just ask exempted salaried workers.

Do you also think a company should pay you for a 40 hour work week even if you miss a day and dont have any vacation time? Cause, you know, sometimes you just dont feel like going to work that day.