Timeline for Why is the amount of training for police officers in the United States so low compared to other developed countries?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
19 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 1, 2020 at 21:57 | comment | added | PoloHoleSet | @qwr - I'd be happy to lay out "short-sighted" as well, and combinations of the two. I've at least offered SOMETHING. Which is more than you have. Feel free to contribute, other than "no it isn't." | |
| Jul 1, 2020 at 21:54 | comment | added | PoloHoleSet | @qwr - So what would be considered "evidence" for you? The party that controls almost all of the levers of government's #1 platform policy plank is that Americans are taxed too much. "Too much" is a nebulous term, so the best we can do is evaluate the relative measure against other nations and societies. So we have these true observations - the party that runs things is premised upon the idea that we are taxed too much. All evidence shows that, compared to other nations, our tax burden is, on average, one of the lighter ones. Nothing anecdotal about that. What do you have to refute it? | |
| Jul 1, 2020 at 21:43 | comment | added | qwr | How do you automatically believe your observation is a true statement? It is purely anecdotal and based on personal experience - nothing more. It doesn't matter how many "appeals to reason" you make. Your answer's conclusion as it stands is not supported by evidence. | |
| Jul 1, 2020 at 13:27 | comment | added | PoloHoleSet | @qwr - I'm citing it as a huge factor that's being overlooked - the unwillingness to make that fiscal investment. Now, if you feel that's not true, and have better reasons, you're also free to offer your own answer. If we have the resources readily available for more comprehensive screening, training, and recruitment, and, as you suggest, we are completely willing to make that investment, then what does that suggest about us that isn't worse? That we don't want a more highly qualified, better trained law enforcement function? Maybe I should take offense at that, as an American. | |
| Jul 1, 2020 at 13:23 | comment | added | PoloHoleSet | @qwr - I did speak for myself. And I am speaking for myself. I never claimed to speak for you. Regardless of who I am speaking for, I was making an observation about how we are, overall. I could add "childishly thin-skinned" if you'd like. I still wouldn't claim to be speaking for you, if I did. If I observed that Americans are notoriously ignorant of world events, overall, as a whole, you may not like that, but that's a true statement, as well. You not wanting it to be true doesn't change the fundamental nature of the characteristic being observed. | |
| Jun 30, 2020 at 22:51 | comment | added | qwr | " Not seeing it as derogatory. I'm an American. That's how we are, overall. " Speak for yourself. You don't speak for me or other citizens. | |
| Jun 30, 2020 at 22:50 | comment | added | qwr | You provide a source for saying Americans are not taxed as much, but then you draw the conclusion that American police officers receive less training because of "Americans being cheap and short-term focused" with ZERO evidence. | |
| Jun 30, 2020 at 14:05 | comment | added | Jared Smith | @PoloHoleSet I'm not talking about what you're saying, I'm talking about how. If I want to suggest to someone that their health might be best served by not weighing 400 lbs, there's a whole gamut of ways to convey that. Lose some ****ing weight, you ****ing fat *** is probably not the most constructive one. | |
| Jun 30, 2020 at 13:50 | comment | added | PoloHoleSet | @JaredSmith - Not seeing it as derogatory. I'm an American. That's how we are, overall. Yes, it is necessary. It is the core, the essence of why we don't have better trained, more professional, higher qualified police forces. We're unwilling to pay for it, which is both "penny-wise, pound foolish" and very short-sighted. | |
| Jun 30, 2020 at 13:47 | comment | added | Jared Smith | Your answer is well reasoned and well supported, but is that derogatory last line really necessary? That's going to rub a lot of people who otherwise agree with you the wrong way... | |
| Jun 30, 2020 at 13:41 | history | edited | PoloHoleSet | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Added references
|
| Jun 30, 2020 at 13:33 | comment | added | PoloHoleSet | @tstew - the richest and wealthiest Americans pay almost none of their income at the top marginal rate. They pay capital gains, 15%, in addition to using a slew of loopholes not available to regular wage earners to avoid those taxes. What do expert economists say about the US tax burden? Americans absolutely pay less in taxes than Canadians do. There is no dispute on this. And yet, you cite their lower top marginal rate. What does that say about the usefulness of using that as a metric? | |
| Jun 30, 2020 at 13:28 | comment | added | PoloHoleSet | @tstew - median income is the better measure for economic prosperity than per capita anything. You get a country like Saudi Arabia that has a pretty high per captia GDP, but it's all in the hands of a very few mega-wealthy people. Who are our peer nations, since you are disputing it, but aren't backing it up with anything? I think OECD is used because they all use the same reporting standards in sharing that info with the organization that can compare apples to apples. If I have a high marginal income tax rate, but almost none of the top wealth is taxed at that rate, what does that tell us? | |
| Jun 29, 2020 at 20:58 | comment | added | tstew | I don't deny that there are many countries that have higher rates, but it is not fair to say United States has "some of the lowest rates." The OECD is not representative of top-tier (economically) nations. It is missing countries with high GDP per capita and includes some with relatively low GDP per capita. | |
| Jun 29, 2020 at 20:58 | comment | added | tstew | It is hard to compare tax rates because of nuances in how they work in different places. I think that highest marginal tax bracket is a fair way to compare because it's usually representative of the lower brackets and the majority tax the government receives comes from people in the upper brackets. | |
| Jun 29, 2020 at 20:58 | comment | added | tstew | I don't think my argument is a strawman. There are countries besides Singapore that have lower tax rates than the US. Canada's highest federal marginal income tax rates is 33%. Mexico's is 35%. New Zealand, Poland, Qatar, and UAE are among others with a lower rate that the US. Many have rates just slightly higher than the United States. | |
| Jun 29, 2020 at 15:47 | comment | added | PoloHoleSet | @tstew - Singapore is one of the very few. Finding one single example of a lower tax rate does not, in any way, refute "some of the lowest rates." But excellent straw man. And, no, no one ever pays 51.8% since that is a MARGINAL rate that only kicks in after paying lower rates on all income before that point. "Total US tax revenue equaled 24 percent of gross domestic product, well below the 34 percent weighted average for other OECD countries" US ranks 33rd out of 36 OECD nations. It may be a simple answer, but, simply, there are political consequences to spending tax revenue. | |
| Jun 29, 2020 at 13:48 | comment | added | tstew | This answer is overly simplistic and contains information that is simply false. While there are many countries with highly developed economies that have higher tax rates than the the United States (particularly in Europe), there are also many that have lower tax rates. For example, Singapore's highest marginal income tax rate is 22%, while the United States highest federal marginal income tax rate is 37%. However with state income taxes, that can go as high as 51.8% in California. Singapore has a large and highly trained police force for it's size. | |
| Jun 29, 2020 at 13:16 | history | answered | PoloHoleSet | CC BY-SA 4.0 |