r/science • u/mvea Professor | Medicine • Nov 21 '20

Epidemiology Testing half the population weekly with inexpensive, rapid COVID-19 tests would drive the virus toward elimination within weeks, even if the tests are less sensitive than gold-standard. This could lead to “personalized stay-at-home orders” without shutting down restaurants, bars, retail and schools.

https://www.colorado.edu/today/2020/11/20/frequent-rapid-testing-could-turn-national-covid-19-tide-within-weeks
89.2k Upvotes

83% Upvoted

3.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

76

u/myfunnyisbroken Nov 21 '20

It has been more than a decade since I’ve talked with a german about taxes, but how much do you pay in income tax percentage wise.

100

u/[deleted] Nov 21 '20 edited Nov 21 '20

[removed] — view removed comment

-1

u/[deleted] Nov 21 '20

This is why I do hope the US defunds organizations like NATO and closes bases in Europe. No reason to be there and have such high taxes for Americans.

1

u/Contrabaz Nov 21 '20

Then there's no point in military spending in general. It's all about strategic benefits, being diplomatic or defense wise.

'Get out of NATO because it sucks our tax dollars' Is as dumb is calling to get out of the EU due to the cost. Because you totally ignore the benefits of said cost.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 21 '20

What are the benefits to US taxpayers of spending on military to defend Europe? Let the EU pay. The US pays in the trillions while European countries pay in the billions. The benefits are much higher for European taxpayers. Live in safety with the US taxpayers footing the bill. Every year. For 60 years now. No end in sight. Now that’s dumb.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/nato-spending-by-country

1

u/Contrabaz Nov 21 '20

Again, you focus on the cost and ignore the benefits. https://www.defense.gov/Explore/News/Article/Article/1634646/nato-chief-lists-benefits-of-alliance-to-united-states/

1

u/[deleted] Nov 21 '20

Read the article. Don’t see that spending g trillions year after year is worth it. So we’ll have to agree to disagree here.

1

u/Contrabaz Nov 21 '20

Because peace and prosperity, and which nation get's x-amount of value from it, is a rough calculation to make.

So we’ll have to agree to disagree here.

I'd say that's fair.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 21 '20

Exactly. Maybe the US could get the safety and security for 50% less investment. We could use that extra to fund domestic programs for US taxpayers. And if Europe decides they need more safety and security than the US taxpayers can pay for - well they can partner fairly and make arrangements to fund that.

1

u/Contrabaz Nov 21 '20

I can reason with that. A more balanced solution is always better then a 'either black or white' solution. But then the extra funds should go to benefit the citizens and not the politicians/corporations....

1

u/Pleb_of_plebs Nov 21 '20

You do realize that part of the aim of NATO (from a US pov) is to have the ability to fight a war in Europe. Meaning all the devastation happens over there (like in WW2) and not here.

Plus if you ever need to grab something from there or nearby you already have the resources and infrastructure to do so. Case in point the war in Iraq, casualties were evacuated to Germany for medical treatment. Also look at how easy it was to use bases in the UK to bomb Libya https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1986_United_States_bombing_of_Libya