Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 22nd Mar 2013 09:56 UTC
In the News If you don't live in the US, this is a pretty common source of irritation: US companies charging crazy markups on products sold in Europe, Asia, Australia, South America, and the rest of the world. The Australian government has had enough of this practice, and started an inquiry into the matter. Yesterday (or today? Timezones confuse me) Apple, Microsoft, and Adobe had to answer questions in a public hearing.
Thread beginning with comment 556437
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Costs more
by mikeinohio on Sun 24th Mar 2013 14:13 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Costs more"
mikeinohio
Member since:
2010-02-21

Australia is a socialist democracy, so in Australia one does pay higher taxes as an individual, but company taxes aren't so high. Companies do pay company tax, however.

For your taxes in Australia, you do get roads and infrastructure, water, sewage and electrical distribution, public transport, education, welfare and decent health care for all citizens largely paid for from the public purse.


I do not disagree with that. I am just saying that government is a zero sum game at best. If the government gives you free or subsidized something; it is driving up the cost of something else to pay for it.

This takes soooooo much away from ones wages that Australian standard of living ends up only second best in the world (to Norway in one survey and Sweden in another), all things considered.


I am not sure how to explain that without giving the politically correct a heart attack. Let me just say that if the United States had the same demographics as the countries you mention, it would be in first place.

So much for American theories of "small government low taxes". It turns out that that policy is meant to benefit only the top 1% of rich people and the large corporations.


Actually the small government low taxes model worked quite well in United States until the beginning of the 20th century. The problem is that the one percenters or the elite political ruling class as I call them are using the power of government through taxes and regulations to secure their positions and enrich themselves. Or, to put another way, the 1% are using big government to their own benefit and to the detriment of the 99%.

If consumers do indeed value their standard of living, I would contend that Australia has got it right and America has not:

http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/03/04/its-official-australia-is-the-n...


Again, If you factor in the demographic differences between the countries, you will reach a different conclusion.

America might be a better place to operate if you are a large corporation, but that fact demonstrably has very little to do with the standard of living for consumers.


I would disagree. I would say that the lower prices afforded by the small government/ low tax model leaves the consumer with more money for the necessities and luxuries of life.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: Costs more
by lemur2 on Mon 25th Mar 2013 03:36 in reply to "RE[3]: Costs more"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

Actually the small government low taxes model worked quite well in United States until the beginning of the 20th century. The problem is that the one percenters or the elite political ruling class as I call them are using the power of government through taxes and regulations to secure their positions and enrich themselves. Or, to put another way, the 1% are using big government to their own benefit and to the detriment of the 99%.


... which fact is more than just incidentally related to the thread topic.

"America might be a better place to operate if you are a large corporation, but that fact demonstrably has very little to do with the standard of living for consumers.


I would disagree. I would say that the lower prices afforded by the small government/ low tax model leaves the consumer with more money for the necessities and luxuries of life.
"

And I would disagree with you. A large percentage of Americans lives well below the poverty line, and they have no money "for the necessities and luxuries of life". Certainly not for the luxuries, and a goodly percentage of the population have not enough for the necessities. At least if America followed the more socialist Australian model, that large number of people would be immensely better off, since the government provides a decent proportion of the necessities (health care, education, welfare, public infrastructure) to everybody, so that consumers don't have to pay for them with wages (which in some cases people are not getting).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=QPKKQnijnsM

Meanwhile, America has apparently reached a wage inequality dystopia already.

Edited 2013-03-25 03:38 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2