Show Dad
Well-known member
JbarL said:
60 - 70% tax burden.
Interesting reading on the elections
- Thread starter stumpy
- Start date
Help Support Steer Planet:
60 - 70% tax burden.
ELBEE
Well-known member
Here's a thought. What if debt, liability, and hypochondria became illegal? Bankers, Lawyers, and Doctors would become second class citizens. And don't tell me second class citizens aren't good at they're job. I'd trust a Doctor more that made min. wage and lived in a 900 sq. ft. house. At least I'd know he wasn't greedy! Insurance companies would become unnecessary when juries decide the fate of law breakers. (How much did you get paid the last time you sat on a jury?) Those that manufacture, transport, and produce would become the elite. Any elected official (lawmaker) must work non-gradis, all the way to the top. That should put their heart in it! Ever serve on a fair board, school board, small town city council? Oops! What about China? I guess they'll have to find some other country to suck the blood out of. Maybe they could try Iran!
I think I just went back in time 230 years!
<cowboy>! Logic
I think I just went back in time 230 years!
<cowboy>! Logic
JbarL
Well-known member
SD said:
hows about a 30% tax burden businsess owners now pay on the dollar for "workers compensation" tax for each employee.....how would any small, med, or large business would ilke to elimanate that tax burden, that is attached at the hip with "every" employee (legal) we hire .....seems with a national health care system.....workers comp " insurance liability " would become a welcome delection/reduction from our monthly " fixed costs" whether we have 4 employees or 400....if you fear higher taxes.....tell em to quit spending so much....if you think that this economic burden we've created is going to just " go away".......your sadly mistaken.....national health care isnt the answer to all this countires economic ( present and future tax payers) debt problems......just some relief for those who have to pay for it.....jbarl
Show Dad
Well-known member
As a small business owner I pay my workers comp even though I pay for insurance for my employees. National healthcare won't make it won't go away. Name me one government program that has.
I don't think national healthcare will be much relief for anyone. Cost will go up and services rendered and the quality of that service will go down. Just like every other social engineering program the government comes up with.
I do agree with the not spending so much though. And I tell them every chance I get. But National healthcare will only get them to spend more.
I don't think national healthcare will be much relief for anyone. Cost will go up and services rendered and the quality of that service will go down. Just like every other social engineering program the government comes up with.
I do agree with the not spending so much though. And I tell them every chance I get. But National healthcare will only get them to spend more.
JbarL
Well-known member
SD said:
some see the glass as half empty...some see it half full......i know alot of folks that medical coverage would be a relief right now....from young college students/self employed farmers/ to 20 yr employees who were laid off/ shut down/ or there benifits just rendered usless.......i find it ironic that a man can purchase "life" insurance, " for his families future security "......pay into it for 25 / 35 yrs......and when he dies, his family then have to use it to pay outstanding medical bills from his demise.......for these reasons alone i will continue to see the glass as half full......jbarl
Show Dad
Well-known member
JbarL I agree with you that the glass is half full. The problem is the government is drinking to much. I know that there are those that could use health insurance right now. I also applaud those who find it in there heart to help them out.
The government is an inefficient way to do it. Think of your retirement in Social Security a diminishing return for every generation to finally go broke. Just what would happen to Habitat for Humanity if the government took it over?
It's just amazing that more families have both parents working and can't afford health insurance but the government takes nearly half their income in payroll taxes.
The government is an inefficient way to do it. Think of your retirement in Social Security a diminishing return for every generation to finally go broke. Just what would happen to Habitat for Humanity if the government took it over?
It's just amazing that more families have both parents working and can't afford health insurance but the government takes nearly half their income in payroll taxes.
JbarL
Well-known member
sd...were getting closer here......were now down to heath isurance/health care ....for everone........either one has to be paid for....i think the old job/benifits (rretirement)/ insurance options that were avaliable in say the 70's/80's worked because it was cheap ....... dont no what happend when....but when the insurance companies and the employers got together next....the prieces were high...coverage was controlled/ deductable increase /pre existing conditon defaults...employers no longer "could" take any respoknsiblity for insurance after "retirement"....." if it wasnt one thing ( employer or insurance comany) it was another ( insurance company or employer).......i think the insurance companies have had there chance,...and i think employers would be happy just managing there business and omitting all the employee paperwork/ and costs/ and time it takes to manage it......and sd...i no your a half full thinking guy....your a great, diplomatic debater, and straight thinker...i appreciate both ......respectfully.... jbarl
Show Dad
Well-known member
The only reason I kept on was because you're passionate and honest about your points. I don't profess to know all the answers (I'll leave that to my wife) but certain things don't seam to work. But we keep trying them over and over.
What happened to the insurance of the past is Bill and Hillary. Not to point it at them but when their try at universal health care failed the politico's had messed with the system and cost spun up. There by creating a problem by trying to fix a made up problem. One that now they say that only the government can fix by taking over 1/7th of the economy.
Confusing I know but that's how they separate and divide the people.
What happened to the insurance of the past is Bill and Hillary. Not to point it at them but when their try at universal health care failed the politico's had messed with the system and cost spun up. There by creating a problem by trying to fix a made up problem. One that now they say that only the government can fix by taking over 1/7th of the economy.
Confusing I know but that's how they separate and divide the people.
JbarL
Well-known member
the best to you and yours sd ....ole' nobel galactic warrior <alien> 
.... i think we both wish it was as easy as either wish it could be.....again ..the best to you all....jbarl
.... i think we both wish it was as easy as either wish it could be.....again ..the best to you all....jbarl
knabe
Well-known member
is it in the general welfare interest of the public to privatize profits and socialize losses, or the government.
JbarL
Well-known member
privatizing profits on these " general welfare" issues "then" may be the catalylst for our socila losses now? .....seems that one class of amercians my think that the "general welfare" = lower taxes on 6/7 figure homes/solid corporate tax deductions/ and protection from taxes........one class of amercians may think " general welfare " = affordable gasoline/ food pricesknabe said:
one class of amercians may think "general wefare" = jobs that pay more than minimum wage/ and work that can be done at home"......makes more sense to me to continue to privatize " funeral homes".....and let them compete and market there services to keep costs low to " all consumers" for the "final" " medical expense we all have to payl.......and whats one thing that all 3 classes of folks listed prior have in common...richest to the poorest....we are "ALL" going to get sick and die.....if that doesnt constitute an arguable "defination" of "general" as it applies to health care......... timeless as the language may be....then i dont no what does....jbarl ( nice to see ya back in knabe
)
knabe
Well-known member
i am for privatizing losses. what better method to create low income housing and wealth redistribution than from those who lied about their income, and those who loaned it to them, yes, in some cases the "government" in the form of ginnie mae, freddie mac etc, which accounted for an imbalance in housing prices.
this has affected our cost basis to compete in the international market on so many levels. it was not in the general welfare interest to subsidize and mandate that everyone should own their own home without declaring income, saving a downpayment, creating interest only loans.
all this did was create an artificial shortage which was "remedied" by government mandated growth, which, in effect, supplied their budget projections. now that that is in the tank, this is the real reason "we" bailed out bad loans. we are going to slow the price adjustment, (remember obama said it was ok gas prices went up, but they went up too fast?), this is simply the opposite where we are slowing the repegging of real estate values out of fear that all our government educated public will not be able to understand what is going on.
the key here is that the government is scared that states will be short property tax revenue from too rapid a price adjustment and won't be able to cope because they finance their growth on a smaller and smaller segment of the population, ie the rich, and when they don't invest, do tax shelters, etc., revenues are too variable. it's amazing to me that the most predictable tax base is the widest. it also tends to be a little more fair.
why shouldn't job creation outside the government be dedisincentivized? ugh, is that a word.
in other words. what is stopping you from hiring someone today??????
sorry, disjointed response.
this has affected our cost basis to compete in the international market on so many levels. it was not in the general welfare interest to subsidize and mandate that everyone should own their own home without declaring income, saving a downpayment, creating interest only loans.
all this did was create an artificial shortage which was "remedied" by government mandated growth, which, in effect, supplied their budget projections. now that that is in the tank, this is the real reason "we" bailed out bad loans. we are going to slow the price adjustment, (remember obama said it was ok gas prices went up, but they went up too fast?), this is simply the opposite where we are slowing the repegging of real estate values out of fear that all our government educated public will not be able to understand what is going on.
the key here is that the government is scared that states will be short property tax revenue from too rapid a price adjustment and won't be able to cope because they finance their growth on a smaller and smaller segment of the population, ie the rich, and when they don't invest, do tax shelters, etc., revenues are too variable. it's amazing to me that the most predictable tax base is the widest. it also tends to be a little more fair.
why shouldn't job creation outside the government be dedisincentivized? ugh, is that a word.
in other words. what is stopping you from hiring someone today??????
sorry, disjointed response.
JbarL
Well-known member
disjointed seems to be the quandry between "employment" /"taxes/ and "health care"........as we circle back thru fannie mae/ and governement mandated growth/ and repegging property values....and any particular " widith" of any tax base..yada yada yada .......is that just another way of saying...."we cant afford national health care as a nation"? i could hire 200 people tomorrow and it would'nt do anything to ensure that anyone of of them/or me or you could be diagonised with brain cancer/ treated / and cared for at the same cost responsibility as ted kennedy and his family is now.... ......i doubt if the incovience of having to sell a sailboat or two to pay for it never even crossed there minds......" what a feeling "...... how can a politican and there families or active military members or an unemployed black 22 yr old girl with 3 kids,...be able to afford a donws syndrom/autisic child or terminal cancer or any diease and recieve a lifetime of care ( on our dime).......but a nurse/teacher/tradesman/ insurance salesman in the private sector makeing 43 K/ yr ....has to "pay" for there own as well as "puttin' in the pot" for the less fortunate.....and the real fortunate ? eventually they will realize that they have to keep the working class healthy...... not for the sake of a " tax base" .....but for the sake of equality ( monatary and social )....jbarl
BIGTEX
Well-known member
Quote from JbarL "unemployed black 22 yr old girl with 3 kids..."
1. Are we not responsible for our own actions and choices?
2. Where is the DAD? Is he not working?
3. Adoption?
My son was in ICU for 21 days and in the hospital for 7 more. My wife and I were both independent sales reps. We had individual insurance. More like catastrophe insurance.When we got out of the hospital one of us had to find a job with insurance and we did. We had to take a pay cut, but we did what we had to do. We all have choices in life, some make the right ones some make the wrong ones.
How about a employed black 22 yr old girl, did good in high school, was responsible about sex, took out student loans and graduated from college. Should she not be rewarded for choosing correctly?
1. Are we not responsible for our own actions and choices?
2. Where is the DAD? Is he not working?
3. Adoption?
My son was in ICU for 21 days and in the hospital for 7 more. My wife and I were both independent sales reps. We had individual insurance. More like catastrophe insurance.When we got out of the hospital one of us had to find a job with insurance and we did. We had to take a pay cut, but we did what we had to do. We all have choices in life, some make the right ones some make the wrong ones.
How about a employed black 22 yr old girl, did good in high school, was responsible about sex, took out student loans and graduated from college. Should she not be rewarded for choosing correctly?
BIGTEX
Well-known member
.....but for the sake of equality ( monatary and social )....jbarl
So a crack head and a productive member of society should be equal? Give them a car, house, job????? So people who work hard everyday should get equal pay as someone who do drugs everyday or doesn't work???? Should a garbage man make the same as a doctor? What would make him want to go to medical school. Just because he's a good person. Good Luck with that.
So a crack head and a productive member of society should be equal? Give them a car, house, job????? So people who work hard everyday should get equal pay as someone who do drugs everyday or doesn't work???? Should a garbage man make the same as a doctor? What would make him want to go to medical school. Just because he's a good person. Good Luck with that.
knabe
Well-known member
no nation can afford health care, never will.
what seems to be missing is the notion that some people who get too much care are dying at the same or slightly higher rates than people who receive less care for the same afflictions.
if we could spend infinity on everyone, it still wouldn't be enough.
without the pressure of personal responsibility, there is no action.
think about health care expansion in the next 20 years. the western world, whatever that is, (including china very shortly) will be in general obese. i remember in 1-6th grade, we had one heavy kid in school, ONE. i've gone to open house for my daughter for two years now at combined class meetings, and the skinny kids are the exception, especially immigrants. some of these kids are so heavy at such a young age it's shocking. the health care implications of this are interesting.
one, they won't live to get social security, so i guess it's not in the general welfare of society to have fast food restaurants, oops, they are already doing that.
two, they will need amputations and will be less mobile as they decay rapidly and die a painful death as diabetes as an adult is worse than adult onset diabetes.
so where should we spend our money on this. if we convert our entire economy to health care, there will still be people who refuse to take responsibility. if you live in oregon, the government already rations health care, and will send you a letter offering you euthinasia becuase some treatments are deemed too expensive.
i say that the everybody equal crowd should sell bonds.
i say the iraq war people should sell bonds.
i bet the war bonds would outsell the universal health care bonds at least 5:1
i don't understand the constant battle cry to spend someone elses money on one's pet projects. if there is no pressure to improve, there will be no improvement, both on the care side or the responsibillity side.
no universal health plan, socialism, collectivist society has never been able to withstand tyranny for very long. europe and canada are probably the best examples, but they can't and haven't defended themselves, and can't do a variety of other things let alone contribute 25% to the "united" nations women and poor nation abuse club.
what seems to be missing is the notion that some people who get too much care are dying at the same or slightly higher rates than people who receive less care for the same afflictions.
if we could spend infinity on everyone, it still wouldn't be enough.
without the pressure of personal responsibility, there is no action.
think about health care expansion in the next 20 years. the western world, whatever that is, (including china very shortly) will be in general obese. i remember in 1-6th grade, we had one heavy kid in school, ONE. i've gone to open house for my daughter for two years now at combined class meetings, and the skinny kids are the exception, especially immigrants. some of these kids are so heavy at such a young age it's shocking. the health care implications of this are interesting.
one, they won't live to get social security, so i guess it's not in the general welfare of society to have fast food restaurants, oops, they are already doing that.
two, they will need amputations and will be less mobile as they decay rapidly and die a painful death as diabetes as an adult is worse than adult onset diabetes.
so where should we spend our money on this. if we convert our entire economy to health care, there will still be people who refuse to take responsibility. if you live in oregon, the government already rations health care, and will send you a letter offering you euthinasia becuase some treatments are deemed too expensive.
i say that the everybody equal crowd should sell bonds.
i say the iraq war people should sell bonds.
i bet the war bonds would outsell the universal health care bonds at least 5:1
i don't understand the constant battle cry to spend someone elses money on one's pet projects. if there is no pressure to improve, there will be no improvement, both on the care side or the responsibillity side.
no universal health plan, socialism, collectivist society has never been able to withstand tyranny for very long. europe and canada are probably the best examples, but they can't and haven't defended themselves, and can't do a variety of other things let alone contribute 25% to the "united" nations women and poor nation abuse club.
JbarL
Well-known member
BIGTEX said:
1...yes we are
2 ...dont know.... none of my business..
3...i'm all for adoption
can only hope your sons recover is healthy and swift.....your situation with youi and your wife having to change your lively hood for medical bills and insurance is exactually why i belive that all folks should have health care........
employed black 22 yr old. good in school, responsible with sex, took out student loans and graduated. great!....rewarded how???...there are 10's of thousands of kids doin it every year......jbarl
JbarL
Well-known member
BIGTEX said:
yes for the sake of equality (monatary and social)....no matter what our vices are...crack, nicotine, sex,gambling,overeating, painkillers.alcohol.....what does it matter what a doctor or garbage man does on his two weeks in vegas ? ........should they only go to "legal" prostitues who have medical care and monitoring paid for by us tax payers....or do we want them to get the "cheaper" non monitored "ladies"/........some how.... who you are or what you do for a living, shouldnt have anything to do with the distribution of tax payers monies directed at health care.....what if we all joined the military and there wasnt anybody left to pay for everybodies health care but the doctors and gargagemen???/ do you think they can carry the burden.....when do the scales go beyond " maximum" capacity with our tax dollars and the need for health care.....lets say we make "everone" pay there own way, and pick up the next "good" insurance package that comes along....imagine a captain in the marines, having to take a "second job" to pay for his or his families medical expenses, or maybe just quit when he finds a good benfit package???....its a bit scary when the best you can do as a young man to have steady work, good pay, medical benifts and guaranteed retirement ( no college necessary) exisits only in the military.......not a whole lot of difference in paying for free health care to crack heads as it is politicians......we pay equally for both to protect them from medical monetary demise......seems the best hope for us is that bush will add our professions to " jobs that americans wont do ", and get illegals to pay for it all maybe??.........jbarl
knabe
Well-known member
JbarL said:
those in the military accept lower pay for job security, health benefits, housing in some cases, financial aid for college and a pension if they serve 20 years. no pension should be allowed for congress, which they can get after 6 years with an increasing percentage. maybe those who write the tax laws might remember that income from renting property overseas is income and they need to pay taxes on it (charlie rengel).
i make more than the military, make enough to save for retirement, don't put my life on the line. they deserve what they get. those who don't do nothing don't deserve very much, let alone that it's guaranteed. this gets into the realm of illegals going to school on my property tax dime, claiming midwife birthing in texas even though they are born in mexico, and texas for that matter, no illegal gets benefits or a job. get in line. if you don't stop this, by 2050, we will have absorbed the population of mexico and canada COMBINED. who will provide the housing, jobs, water food, entitlements?
Who?
anyone can join the military. the payoff for being in the private sector is not dying, more pay, work where you want doing what you want. there is no difference with illegals between bush and obama, except for the fact that bush had an illegal work for him for 15 years, and that obama advocated for them as a community agitator.
the worst thing we do as a society is create entitlement. look at the atm spenders after katrina. look how much money we gave them and they still want to build 20 feet below the ocean and call everyone racists. i say do it with their own money, their own pooling of money for insurance. i'm tired of paying for stupidity.
the best hope for us is that 40 million americans would get off their rear end. the best hope for us is to recognize that too much of our infrastructure is on building housing rather than products we cansell to the world. the government is MOTIVATED to build houses as this converts low revenue property to high revenue property whether it's used or vacant. they are the cause of blight, and the definers, ie judge and jury.
it's time socialism paid it's own way and time for conservatives to get a spine and wean them. what is so wrong with weaning.
i kind of just skipped mostly hear to the end and never really got involved in this thread before but the reason i will vote for john mccain in this election is because i don't believe that socialism is a good route for this or any country. people should get what they earn and nothing less. just because person a has a good job and healthcare doesn't mean they need to pay for person b who dropped out of school and doesn't have healthcare. and the same thing for illegal aliens. i'm cool with being the minority in 2040, as long as the incoming people arrive legally and take the steps to become legal citizens. i don't believe everything that was said at the republican convention because i understand that they are campaigning and trying to convince people to vote for them. but at the same time, i believe that they will do what is in the best interest of us as citizens and try to keep things as fair as possible.
