Yet another reason to tax the rich more

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

i'm curious, what do you consider rich? where is the line over which you believe one should be taxed heavily for being rich?

It's graduated, but the entire tax tables need to be hammered up. You never have addressed how everything goes better when taxes are raised. You have never shown me teh brilliance when tax cuits are imposed. I've shown the opposite, guess you don't want to back up your point.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

sorry to burst your bubble, but the dems are at the peak of their power right now. 2010 will see the pendulum shift back the other way. dems will still maintain control of the house and the senate, but they will start to lose seats. that trend will continue until 2012 as well. right now i put obama's chances for re-election at 50/50 at best.

OK, fine, your guess. Look at all the minorities that have come out of the woodwork, look at the Hsipanics that were dumped on by Bush and the R's: bro, you're making a guess based upon nothing substantive.

I would wait for a real shift in something other than a few Tea Party nuts carrying guns before I made that claim.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

I'm not "rich", but I did work my way thru college with full-time class loads and full-time work

Me too.

Quote

If I'm willing to work harder in order to earn more, why should I have to give that "more" to people who aren't so willing?

Explain how you "give" anything away if HC is passed. Explain how the taxing and spending process is linear. In the past 28 years or more, the absolute trend is that spending and taxing are inverse processes.

[kallend 2,150]

YOU ARE ALL MISSING THE POINT.

Taxes have absolutely nothing to do with fairness or who deserves what. Taxes are about raising revenue with the least amount of pain for the politicians.

Since there are fewer rich people and they generally have more money (doh), that's where it's easier.

...

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

[TrophyHusband 0]

Quote

You never have addressed how everything goes better when taxes are raised. You have never shown me teh brilliance when tax cuits are imposed. I've shown the opposite, guess you don't want to back up your point.

what are you talking about? what point did i make that i'm not backing up? quote please.

"Your scrotum is quite nice" - Skymama
www.kjandmegan.com

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

>OK, my bad then, having, let's say, marginal kidney failure that you
> have to wait until you're passed out to get help, dialysis . . .

No, you don't.

Thx for the comprehensive response.

Quote

> If you play the ER game you are in debtor's prison until you can BK . .

We don't have debtor's prisons. You won't wind up in jail for ER bills.

Metaphorically, you cannot own a home, get a car loan, etc. You are indebted to these hospitals if you play the ER game, I'm sure will agree.

Quote

> Compare Africa, parts of Asia, India and other toilets to make the US
>system of health look good.

?? It's not good - it needs a lot of work. But a system where everyone gets free care if they need it is far, far from obscene. I am sure you can find stuff wrong with it (so can I) but to call it obscene because you don't like how fast you are seen is the height of hyperbole.

Are we going to go into the hyperbole route again? We both shut down Mike with your definition of it. It must be a figure of speech that is exaggerated. How is, "obscene" a figure of speech or an exaggeration? I mean it litterally and I posted a defintion of it that oddly, no one responded to.

Everyone doesn't get free HC, the hospital bills them. They pursue them, garnish them, etc.

Do I have to post the definitioon of, "free?"

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

You cannot have everyone win when you control. You have win, lose or tie. You want to take another 10% of earnings, maybe? And then call them winners?

If education and HC were gov provided, we would be winners. Since HC is based upon your wealth status, we have stark winners and stark losers.

Quote

To say that everyone wins is disingenuous and twisted.

You don't have to be a millionaire to be a winner, just have basic human svs and be as healthy as you genetically can be.

[TrophyHusband 0]

Quote

Quote

sorry to burst your bubble, but the dems are at the peak of their power right now. 2010 will see the pendulum shift back the other way. dems will still maintain control of the house and the senate, but they will start to lose seats. that trend will continue until 2012 as well. right now i put obama's chances for re-election at 50/50 at best.

OK, fine, your guess. Look at all the minorities that have come out of the woodwork, look at the Hsipanics that were dumped on by Bush and the R's: bro, you're making a guess based upon nothing substantive.

I would wait for a real shift in something other than a few Tea Party nuts carrying guns before I made that claim.

more people are pissed than "a few tea party nuts carrying guns". i also think the dems know they are at their peak and that's why they want to ram healthcare through now. they won't have the numbers to do it later. hell, it looks like they don't have the numbers to do it now.

"Your scrotum is quite nice" - Skymama
www.kjandmegan.com

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Quit and fall into state gov aid or keep woring and be above the threshold to get aid, barely. The system advantages people to be lazy in that regard.

On this, we agree. However the solution should involve creating less lazy people, not more.

That's right and when you give incentive to quit your job as social svs will be more available, then people do just that. Let's provide basic svs and then teh incentive to work will be to have money, it won't be a business decision where moeny is on one end and HC the other.

[livendive 8]

Quote

Quote

I'm not "rich", but I did work my way thru college with full-time class loads and full-time work

Me too.

Quote

If I'm willing to work harder in order to earn more, why should I have to give that "more" to people who aren't so willing?

Explain how you "give" anything away if HC is passed. Explain how the taxing and spending process is linear. In the past 28 years or more, the absolute trend is that spending and taxing are inverse processes.

You're the one who's ecstatic about increasing taxation and incoming healthcare. If you don't think the two are related, why do you want me to pay more taxes...just so I can't enjoy the fruits of my labor?

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Will I have free healthcare, Bill? Or will I be paying for healthcare? All of the talk I've seen indicates that, yes, I will be paying for my healthcare and for that of others. For me it will not be "free."

Neither, you can afford premium insurance and that won't change. Your taxes won't be attributed to HC, so you won't pay for others.

Quote

For others it will be free. It it was free for all you would have a point. But it isn't free for all. Nothing that runs 2-3 trillion per year will be "free."

It already costs 2-3 T per year and it's inefficient. That's a gross exaggeration that it will cost an additional 2-3T per year if that's what you meant. There are enough clean-ups in HC that we can derive some of the costs from that.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Taxes have absolutely nothing to do with fairness or who deserves what. Taxes are about raising revenue with the least amount of pain for the politicians.

Since there are fewer rich people and they generally have more money (doh), that's where it's easier.

Written by a guy who will be affected more than most people in here. Even Warren Buffet agrees, raise taxes and all does well. It seems the people who will be affected the least tend to whine the most.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

You never have addressed how everything goes better when taxes are raised. You have never shown me teh brilliance when tax cuits are imposed. I've shown the opposite, guess you don't want to back up your point.

what are you talking about? what point did i make that i'm not backing up? quote please.

I've posted several times, even started a thread over it. Let's start anew:

Tell me when a major federal tax cut has led to a great situation. IOW's, lowered unemp, raised the market, raised the GDP, turned a deficit into a surplus, curbed the debt increase, etc.

Or

Show me the opposite. A tax major fed tax incr that has led to disaster.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

sorry to burst your bubble, but the dems are at the peak of their power right now. 2010 will see the pendulum shift back the other way. dems will still maintain control of the house and the senate, but they will start to lose seats. that trend will continue until 2012 as well. right now i put obama's chances for re-election at 50/50 at best.

OK, fine, your guess. Look at all the minorities that have come out of the woodwork, look at the Hsipanics that were dumped on by Bush and the R's: bro, you're making a guess based upon nothing substantive.

I would wait for a real shift in something other than a few Tea Party nuts carrying guns before I made that claim.

more people are pissed than "a few tea party nuts carrying guns". i also think the dems know they are at their peak and that's why they want to ram healthcare through now. they won't have the numbers to do it later. hell, it looks like they don't have the numbers to do it now.

That's a really nice guess. I have a guess too. I'm going to let the facts play out and as of yet, I don't see an end to the Dem run.

[billvon 3,120]

>Thx for the comprehensive response.

OK. To be more comprehensive they "don't wait until you pass out" before you get care in an ER. I am sure that has happened, but it's also happened to people with million dollar health care plans.

>Metaphorically

OK, metaphorically you will "be in debtor's prison."

> It must be a figure of speech that is exaggerated. How is, "obscene" a figure
> of speech or an exaggeration?

If you really think "people have to wait HOURS to get free health care!" is obscene, then we just have different definitions of obscene. It's like claiming that someone dying of lung cancer is a holocaust. If it makes you feel good to claim that, then go ahead. You're not going to get many takers though.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

You're the one who's ecstatic about increasing taxation and incoming healthcare.

Yes, just as Clinton wanted both and got one. When Clinton's HC failed, he still raised taxes; the 2 are not correlated.

Quote

If you don't think the two are related, why do you want me to pay more taxes...just so I can't enjoy the fruits of my labor?

I don't think you earn >250k as Obama states, you will not be affected other than your dislike of the thought that people might be getting HC who didn't previously have it.

Once again:

Explain how you "give" anything away if HC is passed. Explain how the taxing and spending process is linear. In the past 28 years or more, the absolute trend is that spending and taxing are inverse processes.

Explain how the processes are somehow tied togetehr.

[Ron 10]

Quote

I was simply advocating that different classes should have similar laws and not be exclusive.

That's not what you are saying at all. You want people with more money to have to pay more. That is not "similar", that is "different".

Quote

If you want to get us to think everyone has an equal chance then you aren't being honest.

They have a much better chance here than in most places. Obama as one example.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

OK. To be more comprehensive they "don't wait until you pass out" before you get care in an ER. I am sure that has happened, but it's also happened to people with million dollar health care plans.

OK, how's this: I currently have teeth with cavities, if we had humane HC I could have those filled and be done. Since we don't I would have to wait until it became abscessed and became infected to the point that I was in tears before they saw me. Then the extraction, surgery to remove infected tissue and antibiotics. A simple process turns ugly and expensive due to what you call our free system now, the system that would chase me around for years to collect.

Quote

If you really think "people have to wait HOURS to get free health care!" is obscene, then we just have different definitions of obscene.

I didn't write that, at least in this thread and I don't recall writing what you placed in quotes; not sure if you were trying to quote me. The closest I wrote was:

OK, my bad then, having, let's say, marginal kidney failure that you have to wait until you're passed out to get help, dialysis, etc is just great.

And we just established that HC is not currently free, as you are in a cycle of debt and run. I posted the definition of obscene, I think by the non-response, hence acquiescence that our current system is obscene. Can't understand why you're redefining what we've agreed upon.

Quote

It's like claiming that someone dying of lung cancer is a holocaust. If it makes you feel good to claim that, then go ahead. You're not going to get many takers though.

If you had to wait hours to get free HC then you would be right, but since you only qualify for ER care if you're in bad shape and it's not free as we've established, then this example is void.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

That's not what you are saying at all. You want people with more money to have to pay more. That is not "similar", that is "different".

I mean that in reagrd to baseline rules, esp HC.

Quote

They have a much better chance here than in most places. Obama as one example.

The US was the bastion for class mobility, many foreigners would come her for that, now they realize it's piss.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

>All of the talk I've seen indicates that, yes, I will be paying for my
>healthcare and for that of others.

Correct - just as you are now.

It is not just as I am now. I pay into a fund that is paid into by everyone else who is eligible. This means that there are not 40 million or so who are not paying into it. Or paying market rates for it.

So in order for a fund to remain solvent that pays benefits to those who do not pay and have not paif into it, those who DO pay have to pay a lot more.

Thus, it is free for some and more costly to others.

You know the difference, Bill. Insurance doesn't allow those who don't pay into it. Though that is the new hot fashion.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Ron 10]

Quote

I mean that in reagrd [sic] to baseline rules, esp HC.

So you want to cherry pick when things should be similar and when they are fine not to be? And only things that meet your approval should be similar?

Quote

The US was the bastion for class mobility, many foreigners would come her for that, now they realize it's piss.

You stated that people do not have the ability to rise from poverty to greatness.... That is just not true and you just restating it is does not make it so.

People still come to the US to escape other places. People still make a life here that they could not make in other places.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[billvon 3,120]

>OK, how's this: I currently have teeth with cavities, if we had humane HC I
> could have those filled and be done. Since we don't I would have to wait
>until it became abscessed . . .

Or you could brush your teeth. Your choice.

>A simple process turns ugly and expensive due to what you call our free system now . . .

Correct. The system is far from perfect.

>And we just established that HC is not currently free . . .

And never will be - and is not free, anywhere. But you can get it if you have no money. And that's far from obscene.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

So you want to cherry pick when things should be similar and when they are fine not to be? And only things that meet your approval should be similar?

Nope, I want baseline rules, meaning the lowest a person can go, to be similar. I want the rich to pay for the government that affords them major success.

Quote

You stated that people do not have the ability to rise from poverty to greatness.... That is just not true and you just restating it is does not make it so.

I stated that they don't have, as in never? Where? Or your interpetation? The ability is greatly limited thx to neo-conservative measures like union-busting, etc.

Quote

People still come to the US to escape other places. People still make a life here that they could not make in other places.

Yea, you and Bill like to list Africa, parts of Asia, etc... toilets of the world. Let's compare the US to descent places and watch how we sink.

[billvon 3,120]

>You know the difference, Bill. Insurance doesn't allow those who don't pay into it.

I'm not talking about insurance. I am talking about the tens of billions you pay to take care of the uninsured.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Or you could brush your teeth. Your choice.

There's good science folks; brush and floss and you will NEVER get cavities.

Quote

Correct. The system is far from perfect.

And far from free.

Quote

And never will be - and is not free, anywhere. But you can get it if you have no money. And that's far from obscene.

We're going circular here, you cannot get HC unless you are very ill and even then you will be hounded until you pay or BK.

- > 1/2 the BK's are related to medical bills

- They can refuse you care unless it is a true emergency

- The incentive is to quit work so you can receive state assistance


That's obscene as per the definition I posted that no one substantively responded to.