Welcome to one of the most active flamenco sites on the Internet. Guests can read most posts but if you want to participate click here to register.
This site is dedicated to the memory of Paco de Lucía, Ron Mitchell, Guy Williams, Linda Elvira, Philip John Lee, Craig Eros, Ben Woods, David Serva and Tom Blackshear who went ahead of us.
We receive 12,200 visitors a month from 200 countries and 1.7 million page impressions a year. To advertise on this site please contact us.
I must admit, I love the films, the music and literature that's come out of the USA , but I think you've really gotta be born there to survive...
Why man? It's not that bad. I got to study here and then found a job and stayed. There are things I miss about home but generally I think it's a great place with opportunities for those who are willing to work and rewards for it. That's why it worries me when the Obama maniacs cry change. Makes you wonder what kind of change? I like things just the way there are. I'm not rich, not poor. But I can do things I always wanted to and help my family. Wouldn't be able to do it back home.
Oh and I keep my AC on moderate 78 in summer and cool 65 in winter. But the great thing is I have an AC.
Hey Bogdan, That's great that you've adjusted, but when you wrote a post a few months ago about needing a car to get anywhere, since there were no footpaths or pavements, put me in mind of Dallas. We were staying at the Holiday Inn and I'd run out of toothpaste. No prob, since there was a shopping centre just across the road. Problem was...there was no way to cross the road, except take the Lincoln Continental (which we had been lent) and drive a couple of miles to the nearest underpass.
The States is great...but it's just a bit too much for me personally to live there on a 24/7 basis for years. Everything is so much bigger, louder and faster than what I've been used to. I used to come back totally exhausted!
Some folk I know who have gone there thrive on it and love it, but I wouldn't be able to handle it myself Just a personal thing. I love the place for a holiday though!
The States will always be much more right-wing than any European "centre politics" setup. It's in the nature of the people, from their pioneering heritage and no politician will ever change that IMO.
Well, decision time is here for you guys!
I saw the news tonight and I've still got to admit, Obama is a bloody damn good orator! Inspiring!
Still, that could just mean he's a damn good salesman. Only time will tell.
One thing I would say though is that any black folk voting for him purely on the colour of his skin may be in for a big disappointment.
A lot of people here in the UK voted for Maggie Thatcher as our first woman Prime Minister, mistakenly thinking that she'd do lots of things for women's issues and child care and the more "touchy feely" things.
A lot of people here in the UK voted for Maggie Thatcher as our first woman Prime Minister, mistakenly thinking that she'd do lots of things for women's issues and child care and the more "touchy feely" things.
Amongst other charming attributes she was good friends with Pinochet (see dictator photos above - the guy on the right) and "in a novel and bewildering interpretation of history", thanked him for "bringing democracy to Chile".
Problem was...there was no way to cross the road, except take the Lincoln Continental (which we had been lent) and drive a couple of miles to the nearest underpass.
Oh man I am with you on that. That drives me nuts. It's something I've experienced in Louisiana a lot. I have never seen a sidewalk start and randomly end without getting anywhere. It's a sad thing that I have to drive everywhere. We have just moved to a town in New England area. Much better, we can walk places. GI bill and baby boomers, their fault.
Obama is a better speaker than McCain, but that won't be the reason. It's funny someone said today, regardless of who becomes president we will only know in the end of 4-year term who really won. And hopefully checks and balances will account for and smooth the extremes.
Why man? It's not that bad. I got to study here and then found a job and stayed. There are things I miss about home but generally I think it's a great place with opportunities for those who are willing to work and rewards for it. That's why it worries me when the Obama maniacs cry change. Makes you wonder what kind of change? I like things just the way there are. I'm not rich, not poor. But I can do things I always wanted to and help my family. Wouldn't be able to do it back home.
Oh and I keep my AC on moderate 78 in summer and cool 65 in winter. But the great thing is I have an AC.
everything is cool as it is. Taht's great but what if you get serieously ill? Like cancer of something else similar. These are things totally out of your control and they ruin your life and all of your savings.
In belgium, we take care of the sick people and the people in need. So that they can still have a decent life. For exemple myself. I have Crohn's disease = chronic for the rest of my life. I have to take heavy medication and it is expensive. But in Belgium I pay 0 euro for that. All my medical bills are paid by the taxpayers (including myself) so that this disease doens't ruin me.
I 've learned that you only really appreciate our social system the day you really need it. If that day never comes, very good. But for most of us one day we or someone you love will need it.
You should be glad you have to pay taxes. If you do you are actually one of the lucky guys. It's a kind of a privellege you have. (At least if you look at it for its principle) Of course how the state spends it is an other discussion.
You should be glad you have to pay taxes. If you do you are actually one of the lucky guys. It's a kind of a privellege you have.
That is only if the tax is flat. If richer pay more, that's not a privelege but punishment. Those of us who spend years in school and then years climbing the ladder or starting and growing own business are punished for their achievements because tax is proportional. In US we had rates as high as 70% for some brackets. So if you make $100 you only get $30 to bring home. Privilege???
Did you guys know that in US ER is obligated to treat if you don't have insurance? So if I am rushed to ER with something they can't say no? Also there are charity hospitals, free...but much less comfortable that others.
I think (as I said before) health care needs attention in US because there is no reason for MRI to cost $2500. But we don't need an extreme case of a candidate to tackle this issue. Besides this is not the only and not the most important issue in this day and age in view of international events.
That is only if the tax is flat. If richer pay more, that's not a privelege but punishment. Those of us who spend years in school and then years climbing the ladder or starting and growing own business are punished for their achievements because tax is proportional. In US we had rates as high as 70% for some brackets. So if you make $100 you only get $30 to bring home. Privilege???
So by this logic, the tax breaks that have been given to the wealthy for the last 2 presidential terms are unfair? What's more, I hate to be the one to tell you this, but everyone's taxes are going to go up. Didn't really matter who one the presidential campaign. The 700 bill. we're on the hook for is going to cost us in increased taxes. Also, a flat tax is not the system we are currently using. It's a percentage of income. So, essentially, you make more, you pay more. Except, for, like I said, since Bush has been in office. A break from this current system is the change everyone wants, not the extremist socialization that has been spewing from the Anti-Obama rhetoric. Face it, in a system where Warren Buffet pays less income tax than his secretary, there's is something very wrong! What's more, the increase in tax that those making more than 250K USD is going to be marginal compared to the 250K they will earn, trust me, they can afford it. You, I get the impression, don't fit into that category, but I could be wrong.
quote:
Did you guys know that in US ER is obligated to treat if you don't have insurance? So if I am rushed to ER with something they can't say no? Also there are charity hospitals, free...but much less comfortable that others.
Doesn't mean that it will be free. Just the opposite is true, you'll be stuck with not only the overpriced ER bill, but also additional fees for not having pre-approved insurance.
So by this logic, the tax breaks that have been given to the wealthy for the last 2 presidential terms are unfair? What's more, I hate to be the one to tell you this, but everyone's taxes are going to go up
quote:
So by this logic, the tax breaks that have been given to the wealthy for the last 2 presidential terms are unfair? What's more, I hate to be the one to tell you this, but everyone's taxes are going to go up
You are obviously not following the logic. The flat tax means equating the ratios people with various incomes pay. In other words when you give the "rich" a tax cut their bracket is brought nearer to what others pay. A step closer to flat tax.
Also tax cuts that go to businesses and their owners are not always used to buy personal goodies as you may think. Job creation 101 (you should look into it) says that business tax cuts provide much needed funds to funnel to R&D, new product development, new market segments exploration, aka new jobs. Now that Obama is in office, those cuts will be gone, and fines will be in place for various reasons. So when your job is first to go to cut corporate spending, don't go complaining
Everyone's taxes will go up? How about those that don't pay income tax? 40% in America by all accounts. Some here choose to not make much so they can enjoy leisurely life.
ER fines? Wrong again man. Health coverage is not yet mandated by law so no fines possible. What is mandated by law is that ER cases (extreme cases that require immediate treatment) must be treated regardless of whether the patient has a plan or not.
And for the conclusion here is a funny take on taxes for you. Chew.
Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:
The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that's what they decided to do.
The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20." Drinks for the ten now cost just $80. The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free.
But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?'
They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.
And so:
The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).
The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).
Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.
"I only got a dollar out of the $20,"declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man," but he got $10!"
"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I got"
"That's true!!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!"
"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison. "We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!"
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill! And that, ladies and gentlemen, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.
David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics
University of Georgia
For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.
That's an amusing anecdote Bogdan, but inequality seems to be inbuilt to the capitalist system.
Scotland is an oil producing country yet I pay about $11 a gallon for gasoline... you pay what? $2 to $3?
Savarez strings are made in France, sold here for about $17 a set and sold in the States for about $10
DVDs, Electronic Gizmos etc can usually be bought in the States for the same in dollars as for pounds here (ie something at £100 here is $100 there roughly). That's why some folk get a cheap flight/hotel package from the UK for a weekend's shopping in New York.
When I worked as an Engineer for an American company, I was paid less than half than my American counterpart at the same job grade. In fact the new young American trainee I was training was getting paid more than me.
They did this by employing the American staff through the Dallas head office and we UK people through the London head office. The company said their pay scales were adjusted for local pay and expectations, even though we were both doing the same job together in places like Africa, South America, Europe or Far East... Although it always seemed at it's most unfair when we found ourselves working together on the same job in Galveston Tx, or Gt.Yarmouth, UK.
You're best not thinking about all this equality stuff Bogdan, you'll just get yourself depressed and give yourself a headache.
Everyone's taxes will go up? How about those that don't pay income tax? 40% in America by all accounts. Some here choose to not make much so they can enjoy leisurely life.
hehe yeah they are poor just to p*s you off arrogant pr*cks !!when theyr boss offers them a raise and promotion they scream ..." Are you nuts ? dont u watch the news ? " Everynight around the diner table while sharing a can of spagetty they must be louging theyr ases off at you guys..
"Ha ! the sucker acros the road with the black bmw and big house paid more tax then us this year "
homeless.!.. they get it the best they pis me off too...they are just sponging of society..they need to find a way to tax the homless...maybe charge alot for carton boxes..they somehow manage to escape undetected under the radar
just cause they dont have a home dosent mean that they dont use the roads (probably more then us cause they there 24 hours a day) police, ER..( they spend alot more time in jail and hospital then me)
And instead of spending all this funding on stupid deseas we should come up with a medicine that temporarely wakes up coma victims long enough to pay theyr taxes...its all to eazy for them..." OH Oh its taxtime il just go and have a coma "
Disgusting
Dont Even get me started on the dead...like thats some great achivement
Posts: 2277
Joined: Apr. 17 2007
From: South East England
RE: America - George Carlin's take on it (in reply to Ricardo)
My bad, I had never taken the time to listen to any of his stuff before. Clever and funny. Thanks for posting those Ricardo.
Many years ago I took a course on world economics. The thinking at that time was that all westernised countries were responsible for poverty in developing countries, because of the unequal balance of trade. So it's not just America screwing over poor countries, Europe is right in there too. Well, thinking may have changed since then tho....
That said, I've always loved visiting the States. I can understand why Americans are so proud of their country.
I've never heard of him before, Ricardo....great stuff!
For some reason it put me in mind of the late Alan Clark.
Born into a very rich family, (his father was a famous Oxford Historian), his main hobbies were shagging, vintage sports cars and fine wines.
In fact the shagging got so much, that by his forties, he stopped making excuses to his wife anymore and just plead guilty as a serial shagger. She adored him and their riches and the 12th Century castle that they lived in and decided that it was just one of Alan's naughty habits she'd have to live with.
Clark, after coming through the usual Eton College and Oxford University system and after a time in business and having fun, decided that life was getting a bit boring, so decided to "give something back" by getting into politics. He joined the Thatcher Government and was appointed at a senior level to the Department of Trade and Defence.
After being shown to his top floor executive office and closing the door, one of his first acts was, (in front of a friend), when needing a pee, was just to open the window and p*ss out onto the London commuters walking below, just for a laugh.
On one ocassion, after a £500 a bottle wine tasting "lunch"before an important statement, he arrived in Parliament completely p*ssed and unable to deliver his speech and just laughed it off as just one of those things that happen and couldn't see why everyone was getting so upset over it.
Oh...and he was getting paid very well by the taxpayer to do that too.
And he had the title of "Honorable" too, since his father was a Lord.
In other words when you give the "rich" a tax cut their bracket is brought nearer to what others pay.
Really? Is that how Buffet is able to pay less income tax than his secretary? Do you not see anything wrong with this scenario?
quote:
So when your job is first to go to cut corporate spending, don't go complaining
I always enjoy speaking w/ ppl who presume to know more than they actually do. Trust me my friend, even if the economy cratered, and the dollar's value reaches that of the Reichsmark in the early 1920's, I'll still be fine! I might have to do without the internet, but as it's turning out, that might not be such a bad thing.
quote:
Everyone's taxes will go up? How about those that don't pay income tax? 40% in America by all accounts. Some here choose to not make much so they can enjoy leisurely life.
It would confound you to know how much of this percentage are made up of ppl who claim residency in the US, and are worth millions. I know a couple. Yet, I gather, your assumption is that a majority are those lazy do-nothings living off of welfare that you have referred to in the past?
quote:
ER fines? Wrong again man. Health coverage is not yet mandated by law so no fines possible. What is mandated by law is that ER cases (extreme cases that require immediate treatment) must be treated regardless of whether the patient has a plan or not.
Oh boy, talk about missing the logic. The fines I'm referring to specifically are accrued by not pre-enrolling and presenting your insurance provider information. You see, when you pay with insurance, the hospital knows that only a percentage of the price for each procedure is going to be reimbursed by the insurance carrier. So, what they do is to charge for each procedure at the pre-agreed price (between the hospital and insurance provider). When you don't have an insurance company representing you, you get charged 'full' price for each procedure essentially. Not a fine by definition, but on some level it is a hidden penalty. So, no! Not free! Far from it.
quote:
And for the conclusion here is a funny take on taxes for you. Chew.
Not much to chew on really. Kind of 'folksy', or should I say 'Palin(y)'? The flaw is that you are presuming that each drank the same amount of beer, but applying your analogy in the realm of income, not everyone is 'imbibing' the same amount of income. You drink more, you pay more. That's the way it is. Sorry!
Much respect. Despite the tonality, I enjoy discussing these issues. Sincerely, Francisco
P.S. Where's JBash? He always had some interesting thing to say about such matters.
I always enjoy speaking w/ ppl who presume to know more than they actually do. Trust me my friend, even if the economy cratered, and the dollar's value reaches that of the Reichsmark in the early 1920's, I'll still be fine! I might have to do without the internet, but as it's turning out, that might not be such a bad thing.
So along the same lines then the current crisis is not a problem? You are contradicting yourself in a way by making this statement. You talk about how this country needs change and then say that economic downturn is not going to hurt you. Apparently it is hurting many people right now otherwise why vote socialism?
Again you focus on a specific rather than seeing a big picture. You talk about Warren Buffet as if, like Bush, he is an impersonation and epitome of all evil out there. Tax loopholes are not a great thing but don't you think they exist because of the unfair tax system? Plus again you are missing the point. The money that is not spent on taxes are often put to good use. Let's say you are running a company and you get a tax break. Now you can expand your company, create new business lines, enter new markets, and hire more people. In other words, ultimately the rich capitalist will do much more good in the community then the welfare recipient who relies on his reproductive capabilities to get more from the government. And if I understand you correctly from the previous post you think the bailout was a bad idea (if so we agree). But at the same time you think that bailing out the rest is a good idea. This is ultimately what this election is all about. It is historic in a sense that finally an entitlement has prevailed over personal responsibility.
In terms of ER. The charges are very frequently waived because the patients have nothing to show for. It is the same process that works for uninsured motorist. You get hit by someone, go the hospital, he makes $800 a month. You can sue him and the court will work out a plan for you where you'll collect $10 a month from him to pay for Your medical bills. Same way you are paying in taxes for those that choose not to afford health coverage.
And come on, we are not going to get into how much "beer they consumed", that's infantile. It amazes me that the rich is always seen as the evil and the poor is glorified. Apparently the 1917 in Russia, French revolution, and similar events don't teach us much. I will take “Paliny” any day over empty rhetoric heard from the opposite camp.
So along the same lines then the current crisis is not a problem? You are contradicting yourself in a way by making this statement.
Um, well, I do tend to contradict myself, but it's not the case here. The current crisis is a huge problem. It's not going to correct itself by throwing more money at essentially the same people that got us in this mess (Gubment). When I say that I'll be alright,what I mean is that me and my immediate family could sustain ourselves for a while. Our standard of living would not be anywhere near what it is currently, but at least we could feed ourselves. That's what I mean when I say "I'll be ok!" There are extended family, friends and a lot of people in general that would be in a dire situation if we experienced an economy crisis similar to what happened in Germany in the early 20s.
quote:
You talk about how this country needs change and then say that economic downturn is not going to hurt you. Apparently it is hurting many people right now otherwise why vote socialism?
The country does need change! The change I was hoping for was was in the form of Ron Paul being elected. I'm not into making predicitons, but I don't suspect Obama will change the direction of this country as much as people may think. I will say tho, lately I have been having some difficulty understanding wrapping my brain around the boolean logic that seems to permeate from every nook and cranny these day. As if one who votes against the 'conservative' party must be pro socialist. Or, anyone that espouses any socialist ideology must be socialist. Here's something you can chew on (as you would say), the last 3 republican presidents have been more socialist than the last 3 democratic presidents. The problem as I see it, is that they have been socialist for the rich instead of the poor. Giving more to those that don't need it is another approach I can not understand.
quote:
You talk about Warren Buffet as if, like Bush, he is an impersonation and epitome of all evil out there.
You're intent on misunderstanding me, or so it seems. I would not use both those guys' names in the same sentence other than to say they both start with 'B'. Buffet's a good guy. I know that it is in part greed that drives some of the more successful, but it seems that Buffet keeps it in check. I don't get the impression you watched the video I linked. No, he's not an epitome of all the evil out there, he's hope that not all those multi billionaire's are out to build bigger empire on the back of those less fortunate.
quote:
Plus again you are missing the point. The money that is not spent on taxes are often put to good use. Let's say you are running a company and you get a tax break. Now you can expand your company, create new business lines, enter new markets, and hire more people.
Missing the point? I guess. Depends on what point your referring to. You can go on believing that there are corporations that are going to 'do good' with the extra cash we're throwing at them, but I would hope that eventually someone that cares about you would invite you back to reality. Yea yea, they're spending on R&D, but the new developments are mainly produced with the intent to create more profit for the corporation. And, that's cool, I don't have a problem with that. They have to turn a profit to survive. I do have a problem with tactics like paying lobbyist to get certain bills passed that benefits the corporation at the cost of the little guy or the environment, or when they buy patents of competing technology that would provide society a cheaper more environmentally friendly alternative which would benefit he consumer, all in the name of profit for the corporation. But, yeah, whatever.
quote:
In other words, ultimately the rich capitalist will do much more good in the community then the welfare recipient who relies on his reproductive capabilities to get more from the government.
Uh, bull$hit! Trickle down economics doesn't work! Sorry. The rich get richer, and the poor get poorer! This isn't about welfare cases that take advantage of the system. It's about middle of the road people who are working more for less income than we did 30 years ago. Yea yeah, still not as bad as some developing countries. , But for those of us that have been here, and have seen the changes, let's just say that it's a trend that should not be allowed to continue. The norm back in the day, was single income families, where there was at least one parent that stayed with the children. Now, it takes 2 incomes for the average citizen to maintain the standard.
quote:
In terms of ER. The charges are very frequently waived because the patients have nothing to show for.
'Waived' is a bit of a misnomer. You're right. The ER is obligated to treat. They will charge you at an inflated rate, and you don't have to pay. But, it isn't 'free'. It still going to get paid for, or the hospital will no longer provide the service, once their profit margin isn't what the board thinks it should be. There's a problem with emergency department over burdened by patients that go to the ER because they don't have insurance, so they don't go to primary care clinics for what are essentially simple symptoms that do not require acute care. Relying on ERs to address the increasing number of those uninsured will be a grossly expensive approach.
quote:
And come on, we are not going to get into how much "beer they consumed", that's infantile.
Infantile? It's your analogy, not mine! The flaw in the reasoning used is apparent to anyone with at least two brain cells working in unison. Noone's making the rich out to be bad. There's a few good ones. Likewise, not all those taking advantage of certain social programs are not all lazy, worthless ppl looking for a hand out. Who's glorifying the poor? I just don't think they should all be lumped into one group, who are going to take advantage of what little hand out they can get. Note, I said not 'all'. There are some, sure, but there are also 'some' at the other end of the spectrum!
quote:
I will take “Paliny” any day over empty rhetoric heard from the opposite camp.
You see, I think this illustrates one of the problems with the current climate in politics. This polar perspective that keeps us at odds with each other over what are essentially non issues. I have noticed that because I espouse some socialist ideas then I'm pro socialism, and therefore I must be pro Obama and socialism. Likewise, when I espouse certain conservative ideas, then I'm a Bush lover. I want to help those less fortunate, and I'm a socialist. I would like fiscal conservatism, there for I'm a capitalist. If you want to talk about infantile, there is nothing more child like than this all or nothing mentality. There is a whole other realm of infinite possibilities, if you have a open enough mind. I don't have anything against Palin, and maybe my reference to her earlier was a bit unfair. But, she just embodies another serious problem that we have. Mr. Magenta eluded to it in another thread, whether he knew it or not. The problem is that there has been a somewhat serious dumbing down in this country for several decades now, or so it seems. We approach politics as if it's some sort of team sport. One team against the other. One a conservative team, the other liberal. We even give them their own colors. Then, assign the general public to one of two teams. All the while, the two teams don't really exist as we think we know them to exist. The red team is acting like the blue team. Etc,. That's infantile!
Printable Version
dont u watch the news ? 
" 
The flaw is that you are presuming that each drank the same amount of beer, but applying your analogy in the realm of income, not everyone is 'imbibing' the same amount of income. You drink more, you pay more. That's the way it is. Sorry! 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread