I was referring to Canada, which does have a substantial social safety net,
though the guage is getting larger so that more people can fall through.
And as far as the progressiveness of taxes goes, I owed a lot for the last
tax year, so the marginal rate seemed very high to me. Thank God it wasn't 80%!
Ed Weick
>Steeply progressive income taxes ? My understanding is that the top US
>rate is 37% and in the UK it is 40% compared with 80% plus in the 60s and
>70s when there was real economic growth. Moreover, the really well off
>seem to be able to pay tax as an option, given the availability of an
>enormous range of tax avoidance schemes. I was also under the impression
>that the US doesn't really have a general social safety net at all. In the
>UK there certainly is one, but not for young people under 18 (the source
>of much of our youth homelessness) and at a very meagre level.
>
>David Byrne
>Dept of Sociology and Social Policy
>University of Durham
>Elvet Riverside
>New Elvet
>Durham DH1 3JT
>
>0191-374-2319
>0191-0374-4743 fax
>
>On Wed, 6 May 1998, Ed Weick wrote:
>
>> >
>> >
>> >Socializing losses and privatizing profits. Interesting sort of
>> >asymmetrical market economy.
>> >
