Brits and Americans have opposite attitudes about the morality of taxation - Polidicks

[t]http://imgkk.com/i/ejl8.png[/t] [url]http://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/11/06/unlike-brits-americans-dont-think-tax-morally-righ/[/url] [quote]Compared to the United States, people in Britain enjoy a far wider range of public services. For example, here the NHS covers the entire country but in America 41 million people are uninsured and live without regular healthcare. The welfare state isn't cheap, however, and people in Britain pay for it. In the United States the tax burden is 25.1% of GDP, but in Britain taxes consume 35.5% of the total economy. The latest research from YouGov shows that most Americans (53%) say that your right to keep the money you earn is a stronger moral argument than a duty to contribute towards public services, something only 37% of Americans feel is the stronger moral issue. The situation is reversed in Britain, where 63% of people say that your duty to contribute is a stronger moral argument than your right to keep the money you earn.[/quote] Also: [t]http://imgkk.com/i/-a5-.png[/t]

It's basically "Use your money when you need it and where you need it, even if it may be ill timed or placed" Versus "Help us help you help us all, despite potentially helping 'wrong' kinds of people".

This would probably be the case if you compared the US to any similarly well-off country. Different strokes I guess

This image really does help illustrate the point when people say our liberals are the rest of the world's conservatives. [thumb]http://imgkk.com/i/-a5-.png[/thumb]

If I see a rich guy sipping champagne in his yacht while people working full time have no money to heat up food from food banks, I frankly couldn't care less about the poor rich guy's "earnings".

Wasn't this kind of the point of the Revolutionary War?

[QUOTE=Ardosos;46427998]Wasn't this kind of the point of the Revolutionary War?[/QUOTE] No, that was because the colonies were tired of taxation from England.

[QUOTE=Ardosos;46427998]Wasn't this kind of the point of the Revolutionary War?[/QUOTE] Not exactly. The taxation issue was that England was using the colonies to pay for its war efforts and had steep taxes on them, while they weren't getting effective representation in the English government. Hence the saying "No taxation without representation."

[QUOTE=MegaJohnny;46427956]If I see a rich guy sipping champagne in his yacht while people working full time have no money to heat up food from food banks, I frankly couldn't care less about the poor rich guy's "earnings".[/QUOTE] who's asking you to care about his earnings though how do you know that man doesn't donate millions to charities every year? those are some pretty absurd assumptions to make

The anti-tax attitude is a recent one, it cites the American Revolution, but they're not the same context at all. The Revolution was because "Our money is benefiting Britain" and "We have no voice in your Government". The Republican attitude is "It's MY money, get your own".

what the fuck is wrong with my country?

More Americans would probably be inclined to think approvingly of taxation if we weren't as aware of how much it is wasted on unneeded and absolutely massive expenditures while many issues that are demanded rectified don't get enough.

If I had free healthcare and had peace of mind that the money wouldn't go to some politician that would abuse it for another term I'd be more inclined to fork my money over to the government.

A shame UK people are so deep under the jackboot that they don't see any better alternative.

Maybe we wouldn't mind paying taxes if we didn't have shit tier Gov't services. Almost 40% of our annual taxes go straight into SS, Medicare/caid, and National Defense After that, we're paying the salaries for some of the shittiest politicians on the planet.

OR, or... Wait, hear me out... We tax the people who have loadsamone in a higher %, and tax less on the people who most likely have 2 jobs at once? Ofc, that will never happen.

I think Americans tend to see themselves as individuals first, members of society second. If you're an individual then everything that you have is yours, and you don't owe anyone anything. This means you can feel less inclined to pitch in(ie pay taxes). So it's a case of "I'll take care of myself, you take care of yourself and don't expect me to help." The thing is no one is doing it by himself or herself. The Bill Gates/Mark Zuckerbergs of this country only can accomplish what they've accomplished because of everyone else helping to keep the US a functional nation.

[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;46427936]This image really does help illustrate the point when people say our liberals are the rest of the world's conservatives. [thumb]http://imgkk.com/i/-a5-.png[/thumb][/QUOTE] and some americans still call obama a socialist/communist :v: , i can't help but imagine how the US would react if you guys ended up with something like a social democrat as president due to some happenstance.

[QUOTE=Nitro836;46427831]It's basically "Use your money when you need it and where you need it, even if it may be ill timed or placed" Versus "Help us help you help us all, despite potentially helping 'wrong' kinds of people".[/QUOTE] who cares who it helps? all of the money goes to a good cause even helping drug addicts who the states would rather charge for their problems

[QUOTE=The fox;46428466]A shame UK people are so deep under the jackboot that they don't see any better alternative.[/QUOTE] But you're Swedish.

[QUOTE=Vasili;46428625]But you're Swedish.[/QUOTE] Haven't you been listening to him He is constantly going on about how much he hates the Swedish government

[QUOTE=The fox;46428466]A shame UK people are so deep under the jackboot that they don't see any better alternative.[/QUOTE] Lmao what? What's this supposed to be implying?

[QUOTE=The fox;46428466]A shame UK people are so deep under the jackboot that they don't see any better alternative.[/QUOTE] Yes, so unfortunate they're stuck under the oppressive jackboot of not going into debt every time there's a medical emergency

[QUOTE=MegaJohnny;46427956]If I see a rich guy sipping champagne in his yacht while people working full time have no money to heat up food from food banks, I frankly couldn't care less about the poor rich guy's "earnings".[/QUOTE] So what if he actually pays his taxes like he's suppose to[which tend to be higher anyway], and is using his extra money to give him some satisfaction in his ability to make money?

[QUOTE=Rocâ„¢;46428532]OR, or... Wait, hear me out... We tax the people who have loadsamone in a higher %, and tax less on the people who most likely have 2 jobs at once? Ofc, that will never happen.[/QUOTE] It already happens and because of that the rich pay 70% of federal taxes [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax_in_the_United_States[/url]

And brits wonder why we threw all that good tea off the sides of a ship :P

I've bullshitted up this shitty ass mildly interesting unscientific chart showing UK income tax bands vs US federal income tax bands [img]http://imgkk.com/i/7gtj.png[/img] So there you go. Can't figure out an easy way to add in state taxes so whatever

dirty hippies [editline]7th November 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Helix Snake;46428236]what the fuck is wrong with my country?[/QUOTE] The entire world has been asking that since about 1963.

[QUOTE=smurfy;46429224]I've bullshitted up this shitty ass mildly interesting unscientific chart showing UK income tax bands vs US federal income tax bands [img]http://imgkk.com/i/7gtj.png[/img] So there you go. Can't figure out an easy way to add in state taxes so whatever[/QUOTE] Nice-axis labels.

[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;46428148]Not exactly. The taxation issue was that England was using the colonies to pay for its war efforts and had steep taxes on them, while they weren't getting effective representation in the English government. Hence the saying "No taxation without representation."[/QUOTE] Well, the taxes were to pay for a war the colonists have heavily contributed to starting, and the reason for ineffective representation is that Benjamin Franklin (the representative) lied to both sides, deliberately provoking trouble as a means to gain power from the ensuing conflict... He literally went and told the British Government that the Colonists were OK with the taxes while said Colonists were bitterly protesting these taxes to him, then told the Colonists that London was ignoring him.