Welcome to PatsFans.com

Who will pay for health care?

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by NEPatriot, Jul 15, 2009.

  1. NEPatriot

    NEPatriot Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2004
    Messages:
    7,839
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +11 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    Who will pay for health care? Not us | Steve Chapman

    This man speaks the truth. Obama's health care plan is too good to be true.:singing::singing::singing::singing: Trick or Treat ????:singing::singing::singing:
  2. Holy Diver

    Holy Diver Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    10,800
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    I'm actually paying for everyone....Its all good, don't worry about it.

    Holy Diver has got your back!

    I've made quite a living over the past few days earning interest on cigarette purchases in the greater Manchester, NH area.




    I will also be covering implants (but only for strippers and pornstars), and people can opt for eviro-friendly proceedures like having wings attached to cut down on pollution.


    you are all welcome!
  3. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,247
    Likes Received:
    17
    Ratings:
    +19 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    There are tradeoffs in everything. On the other hand, a new health care system will cause a lot of restructuring that will probably lead to a number new jobs, and perhaps people retiring out of the old system. The rich will have less to invest, but many of the superrich might step in, knowing that sooner or later the Republicans or libertarians will regain power and cut taxes. The superrich invest in 50 and 100 year time frames, which makes them far more immune to politics.
  4. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,225
    Likes Received:
    14
    Ratings:
    +15 / 0 / -2

    My Jersey:

    Most of the superrich are Dems (Gates, Buffett, Soros) who buy off the pols and never have to worry about the taxes aimed at small business.
  5. alvinnf

    alvinnf Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2008
    Messages:
    3,296
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    Yeah, this is a death sentence to small business. It's tough owning a business with few employees, and this will only make it harder. In the end we will all just end up working for someone else, the government. It's like straight out of a science fiction novel. Pass the soylent green?
  6. ljuneau

    ljuneau Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2007
    Messages:
    1,286
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    OMG. Funniest post of the day! Somehow screwing the rich out of their money, is magically going to produce new jobs! Love it! Do you live in Fantasy Land in Disney, Florida? What you described has never happened in history, never will. Can you provide a name of your so-called super rich that are immune to politics? - come on, just one example.
  7. alvinnf

    alvinnf Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2008
    Messages:
    3,296
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    How about Goldman Sachs........
  8. ljuneau

    ljuneau Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2007
    Messages:
    1,286
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    A perfect example of a corporation that is completely affected by the government, because now they are partners with it - along with GE, and some Al Gore "green" corps.
  9. alvinnf

    alvinnf Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2008
    Messages:
    3,296
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    In agreement accept I think you meant cause and effecting!
  10. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,247
    Likes Received:
    17
    Ratings:
    +19 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    You're mixing up politics and reality. You clearly don't know much about the economic history of the United States, but it would take too long for me to educate you about that. Briefly, consider that Ike had a 90% income tax bracket, Kennedy had a 70% income tax bracket, Clinton raised taxes, and you know what they all had in common? They had thriving economies. But, like I said, you confused politics with reality. Poor you.
  11. NEPatriot

    NEPatriot Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2004
    Messages:
    7,839
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +11 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    Nobody expects Obama to turn his health care plan into a none profit organization for the 'rich'. So far, we have heard Obama talking about taxing the 'rich'. I'm sure that he will pull another crap if the 'rich' isn't going to do it.
  12. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,088
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +40 / 2 / -0

    My Jersey:

    #24 Jersey
    Indirectly it will be the people who lose their jobs.

    Businesses Worry About New Burdens - WSJ.com

    ""It's going to cost jobs. It's pretty simple," said Bruce Josten, executive vice president of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which represents three million employers and opposes both the House and the Senate bills."
  13. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    24,998
    Likes Received:
    32
    Ratings:
    +39 / 0 / -5

    My Jersey:

    That 90% you often refer to did not mean our wealthiest citizens paid 90% of their income to the gov't. They were taxed at varying levels that ended with them paying anything over $XMM at 90%.
  14. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,225
    Likes Received:
    14
    Ratings:
    +15 / 0 / -2

    My Jersey:



    Also there were numerous tax exemptions for the rich, who do you thin contributes all that $$$ to the pols.
  15. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,088
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +40 / 2 / -0

    My Jersey:

    #24 Jersey
    Two other points also :

    1) We have more taxes now. All taxes have been going up. State Income tax, Gas Tax, Property Tax is crazy in some parts now. I'm not saying we didn't have those taxes back then but they're going up and the Sin Taxes have gone WAY up.

    2) We didn't have to compete globally back then the way we do now. Some people will leave. Many businesses will go overseas to avoid high corporate taxes. That wasn't an issue back then.
  16. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,225
    Likes Received:
    14
    Ratings:
    +15 / 0 / -2

    My Jersey:

    Very true look at government at all levels as a % of GDP now as opposed to back in the 50's huge difference.
  17. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,247
    Likes Received:
    17
    Ratings:
    +19 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    Yeah, that goes without saying. Personally I think we should bring it back for all income over, say, $10 million.
  18. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    24,998
    Likes Received:
    32
    Ratings:
    +39 / 0 / -5

    My Jersey:

    Gov't controlled salary ceiling? No, I don't think so Patters. What we need is some common sense from share holders and boards of directors.

    See, here's the thing Patters. What we NEVER want to see is more and more money coming in to fund the growth of the federal gov't. Next you'll be supporting home ownership & automobiles for everyone.:rolleyes:

    For the last time, everyone doesn't deserve to have the same. Yes, the system isn't totally fair, but neither is life. Make it fairer WITHOUT spending money.
    Last edited: Jul 17, 2009
  19. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,225
    Likes Received:
    14
    Ratings:
    +15 / 0 / -2

    My Jersey:

    Good articles in the WSJ and IBD today on taxes to pay for the destruction of the health care system... Worth a read.

    BTW they are trying to rush through the nationalization of health care before the CBO has a chance to score it. IOW they have no idea what this will cost. Sorta like the stimulus bill that was going to cap the unemployment # at 8%.
  20. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,247
    Likes Received:
    17
    Ratings:
    +19 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    I don't think everyone deserves the same, but a progressive tax doesn't do that, and I'm not advocating a salary cap. But we have 37,000,000 people who live below the poverty line. If not out of compassion, then out of concern for the economic costs -- crime, police, prisons, reduce home values, homeless people in our neighborhoods, lack of disposable income -- we need to address the basic needs of our people and our economy. There is no choice but to turn to the middle class and the wealthy. It seems to me that the middle class are a major asset to the wealthy, and have the right for part of their compensation to be in the form of increased taxes on the wealthy.
  21. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    24,998
    Likes Received:
    32
    Ratings:
    +39 / 0 / -5

    My Jersey:

    I agree we need to act to reduce the number of our citizens living below the poverty line. With 37 million of them, we need to understand what needs to be done to help them "help themselves". Let's not just take money from some and give it to others.

    Let's assume that 10 of the 37 million are incapable of improving their financial position. I don't think the gov't should "give" them enough support to get them above the poverty line because it would incent others to do the same. Give-aways need to be either eliminated or become time limitted in many cases.

    I know a woman who has a cousin who has played the system all her life. Her goal is to get on social security disability for life. She invents physical ailments in an attempt to achieve this. Funny thing is, this woman has also attended college courses for years.

    I truly don't believe this woman's actions are uncommon. I also have a cousin who has emotional issues (that she refuses to deal with) that hasn't worked in over 10 years. In my opinion, people who refuse to work because they don't want to should never get a penny from the gov't. Children or no children.
  22. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,247
    Likes Received:
    17
    Ratings:
    +19 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    As you may know, I'm changing careers and studying psychology. Last year, I interned in a community mental health clinic.

    I worked a little with this big Irish guy, a young man who was brain damagde as a result of beatings by his dad. He could not read or write, and had been institutionalized for violence. Given his limitations, our taxes pay for him to live in a group home, attend programs at mental health clinics, and when he had to go out on his own he is accompanied by an aide. I also worked with a woman who was in similar straits. It's obviously expensive to care for these people, and there are many of them.

    Many of the people I worked with suffered the kind of tragedies you read about in the newspaper -- coming home to find their husband hung, accidentally killing their girlfriend in a car accident, being sexually molested again and again at home, and so on. It's is heart breaking to work with a teenage girl who is very intelligent but really messed up on drugs and alcohol because of the sexual abuse she suffered.

    While we need to do all we can to crack down on fraud, let's understand that some people led normal lives until an event caused them to crack up. There are many people like this that social services largely keep out of our middle or upper class lives by providing services.

    Are there people who commit fraud? Of course. But, some of those people really are very ill. We have no choice but to take care of them.

    But there are many other problems, too. Very few people leave the economic class they were born into. That's because they don't have the skills or resources. I think of someone I know -- a hardworking apprentice electrician. He bought a used truck for $5,000, and the seller asked him to wire the money. My acquaintance did so, not really understanding the dangers and process of buying a vehicle. Needless to say, the money was stolen. To you and me, my acquaintance may seem like an idiot -- but he's not. He's just a guy who was born poor and wrongly assumed that wired money was protected.

    We need to do much much more with education, including adult education. We need to provide people with health care and daycare. We need to make poor communities safer and provide incentives for companies to create jobs in those communities. We need to build a private-government partnership to create jobs for the mentally ill, even if they can only work a few hours a week.

    But, we also need to understand that just because someone seems like they should be able to work, doesn't mean there aren't other things going on. The brain is an organ, too, and can be defective or damaged in many different ways.

    I'm all for cracking down on fraud, but it's my belief that those who can't work generally do not have the basic skills because of lack of education, physical limitations, or mental limitations.
  23. Real World

    Real World Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,279
    Likes Received:
    18
    Ratings:
    +18 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    What incentive would anyone have, to earn more than $10 million, if they knew that 90% of it, would go to the gubmit? The answer is, they wouldn't. That's as anti-growth, punish success, as it gets.
  24. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,247
    Likes Received:
    17
    Ratings:
    +19 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    The top marginal rate under Eisenhower was 90%. I don't know where it kicked it, but it was probably for anything over a few million dollars.

    When our income taxes were more progressive, we had expanding economies and lower deficits. Carter tried to raise taxes, but there was a revolt and Congress actually cut taxes (corporate gains). Remember what happened? Clinton raised taxes in 1993. Remember what happened? These facts may not be very convenient to you, but it's the truth. In other words, the wealthy do very well when taxes are progressive. Taxes are a sound investment for them.

    I wonder if you can come up with a counterargument more intelligent than "zzzzz"?
    Last edited: Jul 17, 2009
  25. atomdomb

    atomdomb Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    767
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    How's this?


    Forbes 400: September 2007,
    Total Net Worth = $1.54 trillion
    • This would run the US government for just six
    (6) months in the coming fiscal year.
    • If we raised the tax rate for all those taxpayers
    currently in the 35% tax bracket to 100%,
    • the US would raise $450 billion and this would
    keep the government running for 56 days in the
    coming fiscal year.

    This was from 2007. Obviously these people lost mountains of wealth and they probably don't make as much as they used to. Once you steal all the money from the rich who will then pay for these programs.
  26. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    24,998
    Likes Received:
    32
    Ratings:
    +39 / 0 / -5

    My Jersey:

    Patters...you need to listen very, very closely...

    The American people do NOT want a BIGGER federal gov't. That's a fact born out by several polls. So whatever your wishes are, remember that it must be accomplished without making gov't even bigger than it already is.

    Maybe you think we should have a czar for those who can't work? :rolleyes:
    Last edited: Jul 17, 2009
  27. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,247
    Likes Received:
    17
    Ratings:
    +19 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    The American people do not want bigger government, but many still want national health care, support bailouts and economic stimuli, want our military to have the latest and greatest weapons, etc. They may not want to hand money out to the poor, but they don't have a solution. I believe that by investing in poor communities, we get reduce the number of poor. Others believe those investments will go to waste.

    But, my point really wasn't about bigger government; it was about progressive taxes. I'm for lowering the tax rate on the middle class and progressively raising on on the wealthy whether or not the federal government grows. I think it's good economics.
  28. ljuneau

    ljuneau Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2007
    Messages:
    1,286
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    Jimmy Carter raised taxes when he took office and the nation plunged into a recession that featured high unemployment, stratospheric inflation and enormous interest rates. Once Reagan was inaugurated, he pushed through massive tax cuts and the nation prospered throughout his two-terms.

    Clinton reluctantly cut taxes in 1997.
  29. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,225
    Likes Received:
    14
    Ratings:
    +15 / 0 / -2

    My Jersey:

    Back to the question, we will all pay for Nationalized Health care, the program will cost far more than projected (see Romneycare in MA). The rich don't have enough $$$ to foot the bill.

    The 'solution' will be a VAT, it is what happened in Europe. The other cost will be inferior medical care for almost all with health ins now as we are herded into the government program.
  30. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,088
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +40 / 2 / -0

    My Jersey:

    #24 Jersey
    As I, and many others, have noted a million times - the Dems keep saying we're paying anyway through excessively high ER costs for the uninsured. So they shouldn't need any money. Dems are trying to play both sides, pity for the uninsured but saying the costs are already too high. EVEN CHRIS MATHEWS POINTED THIS OUT LAST NIGHT.

    There is still no answer to this conundrum. If we're already paying for the uninsured for expensive ERs, which is what they say, why do they need new taxes.

    It's 2+2.

    :bricks:

Share This Page