The article doesn't even contain the word subsidy, liar. This is yet another case of YOU trying to put YOUR words in and pretend an article agrees.You are the only one who thinks so. Read the article.
And how much of that $20 is clawed back in taxes?In Denmark, an employee at Macdonald over 18 years of age is paid the standard union pay for restaurant and hotel workers: Dkr 174.73 pr. hour. That is about $20 per hour.
Who thinks unions are bad?
Nothing is clawed back.And how much of that $20 is clawed back in taxes?
You're telling us that on an approximate income of 206,880 Dkr* this person owes no tax?Nothing is clawed back.
I fucking love a cradle to grave nanny state. So do the people who live in them. Try taking state owned medicare away from Canadians? Good luck.You're telling us that on an approximate income of 206,880 Dkr* this person owes no tax?
Something isn't right since by my calculations he/she should be paying out 45 percent of their income in tax (not including any deductions). Further this person is I presume paying a 25 percent VAT on most of their purchases.
At that rate with 51 percent of the Danish GDP going to taxes damn straight I'd want a cradle to grave nanny state!
* Dkr 174.73 x 37 x 32 = rounding down Dkr 206,880
The USA will end up as Sweden in social policy, they are just slow learners.I fucking love a cradle to grave nanny state. So do the people who live in them. Try taking state owned medicare away from Canadians? Good luck.
You're telling us that on an approximate income of 206,880 Dkr* this person owes no tax?
Something isn't right since by my calculations he/she should be paying out 45 percent of their income in tax (not including any deductions). Further this person is I presume paying a 25 percent VAT on most of their purchases.
At that rate with 51 percent of the Danish GDP going to taxes damn straight I'd want a cradle to grave nanny state!
* Dkr 174.73 x 37 x 32 = rounding down Dkr 206,880
Don't ask me what on earth table you are using for that, I come up with over double that. But the point remains the same a great deal of this persons income goes right back to the Danish State in taxes.PS: somebody making Dkr 206,880 will pay about Dkr 15,000 in tax, if he has no deductions.
You are now so desperate that you are debating with yourself?The USA will end up as Sweden in social policy, they are just slow learners.I fucking love a cradle to grave nanny state. So do the people who live in them. Try taking state owned medicare away from Canadians? Good luck.
Why would I ask you? I used the schedules from SKAT.Don't ask me what on earth table you are using for that, I come up with over double that. But the point remains the same a great deal of this persons income goes right back to the Danish State in taxes.
25 percent VAT.Why would I ask you? I used the schedules from SKAT.
Firstly, you are completely misunderstanding the issue. None of this persons income goes back to the danish state, for the simple reason, that it did not come from the danish state.
Secondly, how in the world can you claim that Dkr 15,000 out of Dkr 206,000 represents a great deal. It is probably less than what the average american pays in health insurance.
It also means that Finland doesn't have large numbers of minorities or large numbers of immigrants. 93 percent Finnish, 5 1/2 percent Swedish, 0.1 percent Sami (Lapp), 0.5 percent Russian. (Swedish is, however, one of the two national languages)Child poverty rate:
Finland 5%
Canada 12%
USA 20%
This is what low taxes means.
But Canada does, and with the Canada's tax rate between the two more polar rates, it shows it has nothing to do with minorities, since we are well represented there.It also means that Finland doesn't have large numbers of minorities or large numbers of immigrants. 93 percent Finnish, 5 1/2 percent Swedish, 0.1 percent Sami (Lapp), 0.5 percent Russian. (Swedish is, however, one of the two national languages)
Aboriginals are 4% of the population and they are not all poor.In Canada, I bet those poverty rates are driven up by native families. An issue denmark and Sweden don't have.
Which of course has nothing whatsoever to do with the argument but speaks to the poster's anti immigrant bias, the people who built America, "Give us your tired your huddles masses....."It also means that Finland doesn't have large numbers of minorities or large numbers of immigrants. 93 percent Finnish, 5 1/2 percent Swedish, 0.1 percent Sami (Lapp), 0.5 percent Russian. (Swedish is, however, one of the two national languages)
Oh good we can cancel all that spending on aboriginal poverty.Aboriginals are 4% of the population and they are not all poor.
No, it does not. It speaks to Finland having made policy changes to support children. Something you would be virolently against.It also means that Finland doesn't have large numbers of minorities or large numbers of immigrants. 93 percent Finnish, 5 1/2 percent Swedish, 0.1 percent Sami (Lapp), 0.5 percent Russian. (Swedish is, however, one of the two national languages)
