Bush asaults working families

[Lucky... 0]

http://news.yahoo.com/...eVEJuhIU9x2D8gUGw_IE


Another clear case in point that Bush is not for working families. Would the majority of Congressional Republicans fall in behind Bush? Most likely, they just got thru killing the federal minimum wage increase, so there is no evidence the other way.

Why is it that Mr. Cut Taxes is deciding to raise taxes for the middle class working families? I don’t see corporate taxes getting raised. Medical insurance payments from employers can equal as much ac 25%, possibly more of that employees pay, so it’s a huge tax increase. Is this the answer for Bush doubling the largest debt rate increase of Reagan/GHW Bush? Is he going to try to gather tax revenue from working people to pay for the corporate giveaways? Nice. Yea, Bush and the Repubs are for working families.

Bush spotlights rising health care costs

President Bush is not giving up on his call to overhaul the tax code for those who buy health insurance. The president focused his attention again on the topic after a recent government report projected that health care spending would double by the year 2016. Analysts say current tax policy is contributing to the increase in spending through incentives that favor more comprehensive and expensive health benefits.

The president noted that the current policy also discriminates against those who buy their insurance in the individual market. They don't get the same tax advantages as those who get insurance through their employers.

"When it comes to health care, everyone should get the same tax breaks," Bush said Saturday in his weekly radio address.

The president has proposed treating health insurance contributions as income, which would cause workers' taxable wages to shoot up dramatically. But the president then calls for a standard tax deduction for those who buy health insurance — $15,000 for family coverage and $7,500 for individual coverage.

So, the key to getting a tax cut will be to keep the cost of the policy below the size of the new deduction. The prospect of a tax cut would serve as a huge incentive for people to spend less on health insurance.

Democratic leaders were quick to criticize the plan. But more recently, a group of 10 senators — five Republicans and five Democrats — wrote the president and told him they agreed that current tax rules for health insurance disproportionately favor the rich while promoting inefficiency.

Bush went to Chattanooga, Tenn., earlier this month to try to generate momentum for his tax proposal. He shared a stage with people who hold full-time jobs but cannot afford to insure their families. For Danny Jennings, a father of two who manages a nursery, the plan would save about $4,500 a year on his tax bill, Bush said.

"These tax savings would put basic coverage within the reach of his family," Bush said.

The president said he also wants to support governors who come up with innovative ways to help their citizens get insurance coverage.

Under his proposal, states that put in place a basic health plan for all of their citizens would get access to what he calls "affordable choice grants." The grant money would come from programs that now reimburse providers when they care for the indigent.

"By taking existing federal funds and turning them into Affordable Choices grants, we will give America's governors more money and more flexibility, so they can help provide private health insurance for those who need it most," Bush said.

[kallend 2,150]

The GOP has done an excellent job of scaring the middle classes that the undeserving poor and minorities are after their money, all the while screwing the middle classes for the benefit of the very wealthy.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Lucky... 0]

Yep, kinda like standing out front disallowing the minority kids from using your garden hose to get a drink while the rich guys run out the back with the TV.

I doubt we will see a response from the other side on this one, they have a habit of selctive response.

[Gawain 0]

Quote

Yep, kinda like standing out front disallowing the minority kids from using your garden hose to get a drink while the rich guys run out the back with the TV.

I doubt we will see a response from the other side on this one, they have a habit of selctive response.

In the face of metaphors like the ones you use, you point at conservatives and talk about selective response?

That's what stunts intelligent discourse on issues like this. I don't know what to make of the President's idea yet. What I do know is that it is definitely outside the box, and merits some debate.

What I like about it is that on the face of it, it would allow states to make their own framework with funding, and grants. I like that it offers the potential for what may be a greater tax break, in fact, for many.

However, I don't think there should be a ceiling. If you're going to open a door for medical care tax deductions, open it. Don't limit it.

It's better than another government-run program.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[kallend 2,150]

Quote

Quote

Yep, kinda like standing out front disallowing the minority kids from using your garden hose to get a drink while the rich guys run out the back with the TV.

I doubt we will see a response from the other side on this one, they have a habit of selctive response.

In the face of metaphors like the ones you use, you point at conservatives and talk about selective response?

That's what stunts intelligent discourse on issues like this. I don't know what to make of the President's idea yet. What I do know is that it is definitely outside the box, and merits some debate.

What I like about it is that on the face of it, it would allow states to make their own framework with funding, and grants. I like that it offers the potential for what may be a greater tax break, in fact, for many.

However, I don't think there should be a ceiling. If you're going to open a door for medical care tax deductions, open it. Don't limit it.

It's better than another government-run program.

Max, please don't hold your breath waiting:

"Reforming Social Security will be a priority of my administration", G.W. Bush, November 4, 2004

"We must join together to strengthen and save Social Security", G.W.B. State of the Union Address, 2005

"Fixing Social Security is our No. 1 priority", G.W.B., Republican National Convention, 2000.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Gawain 0]

Quote

Max, please don't hold your breath waiting:

"Reforming Social Security will be a priority of my administration", G.W. Bush, November 4, 2004

"We must join together to strengthen and save Social Security", G.W.B. State of the Union Address, 2005

"Fixing Social Security is our No. 1 priority", G.W.B., Republican National Convention, 2000.

I don't have to hold my breath. Congress killed any life to the initiative after the 04 election. Yes, I think the President could've pressed on the issue more, but there wasn't even debate on that.

Having said that, Social Security isn't the topic here. Congress isn't even trying to wag it's own tail. They need to get through their procedures and start getting to work. Debate the matter.

Sh*t, pick a state and run an experiment...say, South Carolina. Huge working class, mega-demographic-mix.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[billvon 3,120]

>I like that it offers the potential for what may be a greater tax break, in fact, for many.

How do you figure? If nothing changes, taxes on middle class americans go up in the short term, because more of their income (in the form of health care) is now taxable. This will likely spur companies to drop their healthcare programs. They can then get a smaller health care package by shopping for themselves (smaller because it must be under the new cap.)

Traditionally, large group policies are fairly cheap because a lot of healthy employees share the risk with the older at-risk population i.e. a company that employs 22 to 65 year olds are paying premiums as if the average age is somewhere in between. If people have to buy their own policies, though, the younger, healthier people will forego coverage, or get catastrophic insurance only. Older at-risk people will get slammed by very large premiums, because now the comprehensive policies are covering a smaller, sicker population.

So to me you end up increasing health care costs on the people who need it most, and keeping them similar on the people who won't use them anyway. And since in most cases they were getting the coverage for free (effectively) through their company anyway, I can't see this doing anything other than increasing healthcare costs for the people who need it the most.

[kallend 2,150]

Quote

Having said that, Social Security isn't the topic here. Congress isn't even trying to wag it's own tail. They need to get through their procedures and start getting to work. Debate the matter.

Just an illustration that talk is much cheaper than action in DC.

Bush claimed SS reform was his #1 priority more than 6 years ago, and did sweet F.A. even when he had a friendly Congress. Now he's got the hots for health care reform. BFD.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

In the face of metaphors like the ones you use, you point at conservatives and talk about selective response?

How am I failing to respond? I gave my editorial, so where's your point?

Quote

That's what stunts intelligent discourse on issues like this.

What intelligent discourse? All I see is avoidance.

Quote

I don't know what to make of the President's idea yet.

Like this, this is the avoidance.

Quote

What I like about it is that on the face of it, it would allow states to make their own framework with funding, and grants.

OH, like this: Under his proposal, states that put in place a basic health plan for all of their citizens would get access to what he calls "affordable choice grants." The grant money would come from programs that now reimburse providers when they care for the indigent.

SO would:

- This money taken from indigent care cover all costs?
- There be no money for indigent care?
- All states have similar plans?
- Insurance coverage for middle classers fall in quality?

And you like that? Where is the funding for indigent people going to come from if it is robbed from these other sources?

Quote

However, I don't think there should be a ceiling. If you're going to open a door for medical care tax deductions, open it. Don't limit it.

What Bush is inferring is that these people decline coverage from employers to save the emp money, after all, that is the important issue with Bush, and then get cheap coverage on their own, very poor coverage, and then use it as a tax break. So the worker should get cheap coverage and call it a tax break, sweeeeet.

So, the key to getting a tax cut will be to keep the cost of the policy below the size of the new deduction. The prospect of a tax cut would serve as a huge incentive for people to spend less on health insurance.

And that’s good to you, right?

Quote

It's better than another government-run program.

From a businessman’s perspective, sure. If you’re duck broke government programs work the best. If you have money, you don’t want to see poor people get assistance.

[Lucky... 0]

Let's look at the real-world application of this if ever made law.

Employers would notify employees that after a certain future date that their contributions to the employee in the form of health insurance will be taxable. The employee has 2 choices:

- Refuse the coverage (which is what the intent of this law is)

- Continue to accept it and enjoy a great state and federal withholding

Some will refuse the coverage and intend on buying their own coverage, but never have the money for it. Others will continue to accept the coverage and realize they are not having enough money, so they might change their withholding exemptions and take it in the ass at the end of the year.

I'm just looking to see how this could ever help anyone but employers hoping this would leverage employees to reject the coverage. Perhaps you can help, Gawain.

[GravityJunky 0]

Yes but unfortunately, he's been doing that all along since he first was SELECTED to orifice!

*My Inner Child is A Fucking Prick Too!
*Everyones entitled to be stupid but you are abusing the priviledge
*Well I'd love to stay & chat, But youre a total Bitch! {Stewie}

[Royd 0]

Quote

The GOP has done an excellent job of scaring the middle classes that the undeserving poor and minorities are after their money, all the while screwing the middle classes for the benefit of the very wealthy.

Funny, I must be a big asshole, 'cause I just ain't feelin' the pain.

[Lucky... 0]

Yea, but ya can't just tell the (neo) cons that, you have to spell it out for them. They still resist the obvious.

[GravityJunky 0]

Yea, I know It's called denial unfortunately!

*My Inner Child is A Fucking Prick Too!
*Everyones entitled to be stupid but you are abusing the priviledge
*Well I'd love to stay & chat, But youre a total Bitch! {Stewie}

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Let's look at the real-world application of this if ever made law.

Employers would notify employees that after a certain future date that their contributions to the employee in the form of health insurance will be taxable. The employee has 2 choices:

- Refuse the coverage (which is what the intent of this law is)

- Continue to accept it and enjoy a great state and federal withholding

Some will refuse the coverage and intend on buying their own coverage, but never have the money for it. Others will continue to accept the coverage and realize they are not having enough money, so they might change their withholding exemptions and take it in the ass at the end of the year.

I'm just looking to see how this could ever help anyone but employers hoping this would leverage employees to reject the coverage. Perhaps you can help, Gawain.

If you can't see anyone gaining from this change, you need to open your eyes.

Last year I worked for a contracting agency that offered medical. They paid 75% of the $300/mo premium. I paid $75/mo pretax, which ended up costing me about $40 in post tax income. Then I switched jobs and agencies to one that does not provide medical access. Since I'm still recovering from a major current condition, that means COBRA time. $300/mo in post tax dollars. If I were working 1099, it would be deductable. But any W2 (or unemployed for that matter) - you're paying 100%.

You tell me how that is equitable. If Bush wants to make it taxable induction with a deduction of 7500/yr, I have absolutely no objection. Individual policy holders and COBRA participants should have the same tax advantages as anyone else.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Let's look at the real-world application of this if ever made law.

Employers would notify employees that after a certain future date that their contributions to the employee in the form of health insurance will be taxable. The employee has 2 choices:

- Refuse the coverage (which is what the intent of this law is)

- Continue to accept it and enjoy a great state and federal withholding

Some will refuse the coverage and intend on buying their own coverage, but never have the money for it. Others will continue to accept the coverage and realize they are not having enough money, so they might change their withholding exemptions and take it in the ass at the end of the year.

I'm just looking to see how this could ever help anyone but employers hoping this would leverage employees to reject the coverage. Perhaps you can help, Gawain.

If you can't see anyone gaining from this change, you need to open your eyes.

Last year I worked for a contracting agency that offered medical. They paid 75% of the $300/mo premium. I paid $75/mo pretax, which ended up costing me about $40 in post tax income. Then I switched jobs and agencies to one that does not provide medical access. Since I'm still recovering from a major current condition, that means COBRA time. $300/mo in post tax dollars. If I were working 1099, it would be deductable. But any W2 (or unemployed for that matter) - you're paying 100%.

You tell me how that is equitable. If Bush wants to make it taxable induction with a deduction of 7500/yr, I have absolutely no objection. Individual policy holders and COBRA participants should have the same tax advantages as anyone else.

So you're making the argument based upon the unemployed or transitional workers who go to jobs w/o medical coverage. Could we be a little more obscure? And you must be single with those premiums, how about larger families? How about familes of 4?

Let's look at the maggot we call PIC and his intent. He obviously wants to remove employers from the burden of insuring employees and he wants to do so with baby steps.

1) Throw out a large deduction to entice workers to self-insure, and a penalty to workers who refuse to.

2) Get most people transitioned away from employer-paid insurance via infeasability, and then lower the deduction. He's aware the voters are Nazi'd out for a while and the Dems will be holding power in the near future, so he knows the Dems will be raising taxes accross the board, so he feels that this diversion from employer-paid medical is a good thing that will be cut by the Dems.

The front-end motive of this legislation is to entice/penalize workers away from employer-paid medical coverage. Anyone unable to see the slipery slope is intentionally doing so.

We have 1 of 6 American citizens w/o any coverage anyway, this will certainly widen teh spread.

Furthermore, you conveniently avoided the question about the indigent funds and how they are paid, care to addess that one?

[Zipp0 1]

Quote

What I do know is that it is definitely outside the box, and merits some debate.

Allow me to add to the debate. This is the most retarded, ignorant, piece of shit, fuckwad legislation ever proposed. I guess it should be no surprise, considering the source.

Ok, so I guess that wasn't "debate". Sorry.

--------------------------
Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down.

[kelpdiver 2]

Obscure is making this legislation much more complicated than it really is.

The tax deduction for health care should be universal. Or non existent. It's bad enough that I subsidize home owners and parents - but there are defenses for those benefits. There's none in this case.

The master plan theory is a bit stupid - the guy is only in office for 23 more months and the last year is basically an election year. So anything that happens, happens this year, with a Democratic controlled Congress. Your plan of doom is FUD.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

This is the most retarded, ignorant, piece of shit, fuckwad legislation ever proposed. I guess it should be no surprise, considering the source.

Ok, so I guess that wasn't "debate". Sorry.

No, don't apologize, it counts as debate here. Throw in a few links and call some names and you have a winner.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Obscure is making this legislation much more complicated than it really is.

Yep, it's a simple tax increase for the middle and lower classes, plain and simple.

Quote

The tax deduction for health care should be universal. Or non existent. It's bad enough that I subsidize home owners and parents - but there are defenses for those benefits. There's none in this case.

The people who get healthcare are those who work for people, the middle and lower classes. The people who buy their own are business owners and the rich and they can write off what they pay. So this yet another redundant cut for the rich and increase for teh poor. Please, no story about your neighbor, etc, etc, etc..... the masses will pay more tax or be forced to abandon their healthcare.

Quote

The master plan theory is a bit stupid

And I think most of what I read from you is also stupid, but I post data and cites to support my assertions rather than exclusively rhetoric.

[Lucky... 0]

Versus Kelpdiver calling me stupid w/o citations or a reasonable argument.

I just rarely read a citation from the RWingers.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Versus Kelpdiver calling me stupid w/o citations or a reasonable argument.

did he include a link with the insult?

if not, it doesn't count directly or as a 'versus'

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Lucky... 0]

In reviewing this thread, at least he tried to address the thread issue, you ad nothing. Go address the proposition by Bush.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

In reviewing this thread, at least he tried to address the thread issue, you ad nothing. Go address the proposition by Bush.

You take yourself too seriously, Lucky. A nap and a jump are in order.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

So you're making the argument based upon the unemployed or transitional workers who go to jobs w/o medical coverage. Could we be a little more obscure?

A little more than half of all workers in the private sector receive healthcare benefits. The rest either pay for it themselves (at a rate typically much higher that corporations are charged), go without or get what they can through the government..

http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/surveymost