Healthcare..again

[jtyangel]

I was just discussing with a friend solutions to this idiocy currently in Congress and it occurs to me everyone wants some 'healthcare ideal' but they don't want to pay for it. My solution wold be to offer Medicaid as a supplemental(much like I get for my autsie son--it only covers portions not paid for on our private plan related to his disability). In that situation where one has private healthcare, no further taxes or penalites apply. Now, on to the uninsured. My question is, 'How bad do you want it?'

My idea is to start by nixing all the little tax benefits given to those who pay no taxes to begin with ie the likely recipient of a gov. healthcare plan. First would be that for those on the public insurance plan, they lose EITC and child tax and other deduction credits that will instead go to subsidize their healthcare. I keep wondering to myself why people who are not burdening the system and on private plans are being the ones targeted for being penalized? And why penalize anyone at all when all sorts of tax incentives can be pulled to the people most likely to need gov. care to begin with and rerouted to subsidize their healthcare. Like I said, it's about choices. Do people without care value the EITC they recieve to buy new cell phones more or do they value having a healthcare option? Don't answer. We all know lots of people want their cake and eat it too, but it seems to me the most practical solution is to reroute tax incentives on anyone who needs to utilize the public health option as an only plan. That would protect your average middle and upper middle class family from further tax burdens as they are most likely to have a current plan or take control of their healthcare in other ways. Again, the tax incentives would only be pulled on a yearly basis if one actually signs up for or uses the public healthcare option so one could essentially lose tax incentives one year, but if they get into a private plan with work the next they will keep their tax incentives. Might work to motivate some peeps to look for better employment and work situations too instead of counting on things like their yearly EITC 'bonus'.

Ok, off to workout.

I know this would never pass muster as we know the dems will never put any burden on their own voting block, but it seems like the most reasonable solution until tort refrom and other things can be put into place and allowed to work their magic on the free market system, but I know they are penalizing average families like mine and many here because they know we aren't their voters. SCUMBAGS!

[NHSparky]

They're being penalized, by dear woman, because they can pay it.  You don't rob the poor.

But what the Dims don't realize is that when you keep robbing people, eventually EVERYBODY becomes poor, at least on paper.

[DixieBelle]

Jty I would H5 you if I could. I love everything you said.

I wish it were set up that way. You really hit on something important....they want the ideal but they want someone else to pay for it. The thugs they voted into office are willing to reach into our pockets to make it happen. Meanwhile, we're called unsypathetic and worse for questioning it.

[jtyangel]

They're being penalized, by dear woman, because they can pay it.  You don't rob the poor.

But what the Dims don't realize is that when you keep robbing people, eventually EVERYBODY becomes poor, at least on paper.

Yeah, I know why they are doing it, but robbing the poor is a load of horseshit they try to put out there. I've seen things like the EITC being used, for example. I'd say maybe a grand gets people caught up on their utilities if they had a hard time paying those(how much is heat on a crappy little apartment anyway?). The rest loads the Walmarts and Best Buys with disposable income. Things like EITC are not 'income' to those individuals, they are tax incentives just like a homeowner getting a tax credit for their interest on their mortgage. This solution basically gives the individual a choice: continue receiving tax incentives and don't utilize the public plan or divert current tax incentives to pay for a government health options. I know....far too simple anyway for a Dim to wrap their teensie head around it--especially for people like our latest troll.

I'd love him to come in and tell us why this option is unacceptable considering EITC is basically a 'give me' to the poor for being, well, poor. I would ask why EITC wouldn't be put to better use if someone needs healthcare to use it to subsidize that instead.

[NHSparky]

Because, in the grand scheme of things, EITC is a relatively small portion of the federal budget.  A very low price to pay indeed, to keep people voting 'Rat.

[deportliberals]

Because, in the grand scheme of things, EITC is a relatively small portion of the federal budget.  A very low price to pay indeed, to keep people voting 'Rat.

However, when added to all the other leftist entitlements we're talking 60% of this nation's buduget.  Today, leftist entitlement programs, SSA, Medicaid, Medicare, Welfare, SCHIPS, etc consumes 60% of this nation's budget.

A fact the lying leftist mainstream media refuses to give to americans.  You can go to the OMB/CBO web sites and see the pretty pie charts showing this.

[Chris_]

Yeah, I know why they are doing it, but robbing the poor is a load of horseshit they try to put out there. I've seen things like the EITC being used, for example. I'd say maybe a grand gets people caught up on their utilities if they had a hard time paying those(how much is heat on a crappy little apartment anyway?). The rest loads the Walmarts and Best Buys with disposable income. Things like EITC are not 'income' to those individuals, they are tax incentives just like a homeowner getting a tax credit for their interest on their mortgage. This solution basically gives the individual a choice: continue receiving tax incentives and don't utilize the public plan or divert current tax incentives to pay for a government health options. I know....far too simple anyway for a Dim to wrap their teensie head around it--especially for people like our latest troll.

I'd love him to come in and tell us why this option is unacceptable considering EITC is basically a 'give me' to the poor for being, well, poor. I would ask why EITC wouldn't be put to better use if someone needs healthcare to use it to subsidize that instead.

There is a much simpler solution......we had it decades ago, and it worked (sorta), and provided healthcare for all........it was called "public hospitals"........one could go there and have free healthcare provided to them, regardless of means, however the problem was it was not EQUAL healthcare........the results were/are the same as healthcare found in Canada, the UK, and elsewhere under socialist medical plans.......waiting lists, overcrowding, rationing, and poor staff quality......but it was FREE.

Unfortunately that is not what liberals want.......they want us to ALL have access to third-rate health care.....we must be EQUAL, doncha know.......it is not fair that a group of middle class working Americans can buy healthcare that is superior to what your average welfare leech has to put up with.......Of course the exceptions are politicians, government employees, union members, etc., they are special......

I will become interested in "healthcare reform" when all of the members of congress, including the president and his family, as well as all government and union employees are required to belong to the same plan that they propose for the rest of us........

doc

[jtyangel]

However, when added to all the other leftist entitlements we're talking 60% of this nation's buduget.  Today, leftist entitlement programs, SSA, Medicaid, Medicare, Welfare, SCHIPS, etc consumes 60% of this nation's budget.

A fact the lying leftist mainstream media refuses to give to americans.  You can go to the OMB/CBO web sites and see the pretty pie charts showing this.

That's what I was getting at. Most 'working poor' families I have come across seem to get an EITC of 4-6k(this class of people seem to be braggarts so it's right out there). 4-6K seems in the range of what these ding dongs want to charge for this folly. Plus, I would assume many of these same families access CHIPS or Medicaid now too so you can add what's paid into that for them as well to that total. I don't know about you all, but I think 8-10k a year should buy a pretty sweet private policy...forget about public. 

[Carl]

That's what I was getting at. Most 'working poor' families I have come across seem to get an EITC of 4-6k(this class of people seem to be braggarts so it's right out there). 4-6K seems in the range of what these ding dongs want to charge for this folly. Plus, I would assume many of these same families access CHIPS or Medicaid now too so you can add what's paid into that for them as well to that total. I don't know about you all, but I think 8-10k a year should buy a pretty sweet private policy...forget about public. 

Fwiw the EITC sticks in my craw a bit because it seems to be a direct subsidy for the poor to have children and punish a person that has none.
So be it that is what is.

The problem with all this is that you are trying to come up with a "solution" and the dems are always trying to come up with a new problem.
Whether it is by economic class or race they need to convince voters that they either don`t have enough or that someone else has more and it isn`t fair but they will fix it for them.

[MrsSmith]

I'd just like to make a few points about Earned Income Tax Credit.  First, you've got to have a job to get it.  In my own personal case, this meant that I made enough money to get NO other government assistance.  No food stamps, no heating assistance, nothing. 

Second, welfare queens aren't likely to get it. The way assistance is set up, any money they earn decreases their assistance checks: Earn $2, lose $1.  Now, that seems like they'd still be coming out ahead, but the lose $1 comes from every single program.  Lose a dollar from food stamps, lose a dollar from rent assistance, lose a dollar from ADC, lose a dollar from heating assitance, lose a dollar from healthcare.  End result, they earn $2 and lose $5.  Therefore, they don't work at all...officially.

Third, those that are getting will lose it.  The vast majority of those that keep their jobs in order to get EITC will eventually work themselves into a living wage and lose it. 

Fourth, believe it or not, sometimes it's not wasted.  My EITC was usually just in time to replace the clothes my kids had been wearing since the beginning of the school year...and starting to outgrow.  They were usually very pleased to actually get new clothes sometimes.  The rest would go into my savings account, and would be used to reduce the number of charges I put on my credit cards.  (BTW, I have paid off all the medical bills from the years with all my kids, and only owe about $10,000 yet for the unavoidable expenses that my wages didn't cover.)

Fifth, those that "pay no taxes" still pay payroll taxes, gas taxes, utility taxes, sales taxes, property taxes, etc., etc.  The only tax they don't pay is income tax...because they don't have the income to owe it.  The EITC helps some, but it does not by any means wipe out all the taxes actually paid.

I'm sorry if I've offended some of you, but the working poor are those that are digging their way out of the hole...not those that intend to live off the government forever and still whine constantly for more.

[jtyangel]

I'd just like to make a few points about Earned Income Tax Credit.  First, you've got to have a job to get it.  In my own personal case, this meant that I made enough money to get NO other government assistance.  No food stamps, no heating assistance, nothing. 

Second, welfare queens aren't likely to get it. The way assistance is set up, any money they earn decreases their assistance checks: Earn $2, lose $1.  Now, that seems like they'd still be coming out ahead, but the lose $1 comes from every single program.  Lose a dollar from food stamps, lose a dollar from rent assistance, lose a dollar from ADC, lose a dollar from heating assitance, lose a dollar from healthcare.  End result, they earn $2 and lose $5.  Therefore, they don't work at all...officially.

Third, those that are getting will lose it.  The vast majority of those that keep their jobs in order to get EITC will eventually work themselves into a living wage and lose it. 

Fourth, believe it or not, sometimes it's not wasted.  My EITC was usually just in time to replace the clothes my kids had been wearing since the beginning of the school year...and starting to outgrow.  They were usually very pleased to actually get new clothes sometimes.  The rest would go into my savings account, and would be used to reduce the number of charges I put on my credit cards.  (BTW, I have paid off all the medical bills from the years with all my kids, and only owe about $10,000 yet for the unavoidable expenses that my wages didn't cover.)

Fifth, those that "pay no taxes" still pay payroll taxes, gas taxes, utility taxes, sales taxes, property taxes, etc., etc.  The only tax they don't pay is income tax...because they don't have the income to owe it.  The EITC helps some, but it does not by any means wipe out all the taxes actually paid.

I'm sorry if I've offended some of you, but the working poor are those that are digging their way out of the hole...not those that intend to live off the government forever and still whine constantly for more.

EITC was but one example. Tax incentives or deductions was the general focus. All I am saying is you have a buffet of services and only so much money. The taxpayer now has a choice in the matter.

I'm also well aware of the qualifications for EITC. People game that system for the EITC, sometimes letting other, working, family members claim their children and they split the 'bonus' with those people so yes, many 'welfare queens' get it too, indirectly. The point though is that people can not have everything. This was an idea to find a way for people to have this healthcare crap BUT with the stipulation they have to pick and choose their services and benefits: they can NOT have all. It's what your average person who does not qualify for any of this has to do and btw, I targeted their crap too. A middle class or upper middle class family that avails themselves of gov. healthcare should contribute any deductions they take as well to pay for it. It was meant in a broad application.

As a side note, EITC may be great to the family getting it, but another family did have to pay in income tax to pay for that. Anyway you slice it another family's income has been lowered to raise someone else's. It's still wealth redistribution anyway you cut it. I know some people use ti prudently, but it still is what it is.

[Carl]

I don`t wish to completely derail this or offend anyone that I have a great amount of respect for but if the EITC was intended to be a refund of all non income taxes paid by working poor then why is it tied only to having children?
We all know the answer to that and would have a completely different outlook if it was based on income with no other qualifications.

[MrsSmith]

EITC was but one example. Tax incentives or deductions was the general focus. All I am saying is you have a buffet of services and only so much money. The taxpayer now has a choice in the matter.

I'm also well aware of the qualifications for EITC. People game that system for the EITC, sometimes letting other, working, family members claim their children and they split the 'bonus' with those people so yes, many 'welfare queens' get it too, indirectly. The point though is that people can not have everything. This was an idea to find a way for people to have this healthcare crap BUT with the stipulation they have to pick and choose their services and benefits: they can NOT have all. It's what your average person who does not qualify for any of this has to do and btw, I targeted their crap too. A middle class or upper middle class family that avails themselves of gov. healthcare should contribute any deductions they take as well to pay for it. It was meant in a broad application.

As a side note, EITC may be great to the family getting it, but another family did have to pay in income tax to pay for that. Anyway you slice it another family's income has been lowered to raise someone else's. It's still wealth redistribution anyway you cut it. I know some people use ti prudently, but it still is what it is.

So long as government is set up to allow anyone to game the system, some will.  However, as I pointed out, for the working poor, the EITC DOES NOT cover MORE than the other taxes they pay.  They pay LESS in taxes...but they don't pay NO TAXES.  No matter how you cut it, those with more do pay more, but those with less still pay.

As for me, when I was so fraking poor, I would have GLADLY traded that whole $1000 per year for healthcare!  My kids' bills were way higher than that every year...despite my health insurance.  With a $1000 deductible and 80/20, that EITC didn't even cover the first major accident every year.

As I said, I'm still paying debt from having all my kids...and none of the wealthy taxpayers were ever expected to help me out then or now.  On the plus side of my huge debt to the American taxpayer, I now have 3 grown children working and paying into the system...with 2 more on their way to that goal.  I can guarantee you that we've definitely paid in far more than the 8 or 9 thousand you all helped me with.  And so will the majority of EITC recipients.

The EITC is tied to kids becaus kids are expensive...and our government recognises that they grow into taxpayers.

[Carl]

The EITC is tied to kids becaus kids are expensive...and our government recognises that they grow into taxpayers.

What if they grow up to not be taxpayers then with the cycle repeated through several generations?

All I am saying is that if a person made 25,000.00 /year and it was determined by the benevolent government that it wasn`t enough to provide adequate food and shelter so after refunding all income tax paid we also will give to you an extra couple of thousand to help make life better we would all be against it.
It is tied to children to make it palpable as the scenario I just painted is no different in practice just in asserted purpose.

Perhaps my view is not colored simply by not having children so I don`t qualify but from observing folks I know who work for themselves partially under the table so as to not claim enough income to owe tax given the deductions allowed and then beyond that get a refund of a few thousand dollars.
That refund is not coming out of the sales,property,school and other taxes I pay to offset theirs.
I have those as well plus income tax.

I know this is my anecdotal evidence and as such doesn`t take into account those that are indeed trying as hard as they can to provide and work themselves beyond qualifying.

[deportliberals]

 

Fifth, those that "pay no taxes" still pay payroll taxes, gas taxes, utility taxes, sales taxes, property taxes, etc., etc.  The only tax they don't pay is income tax...because they don't have the income to owe it. 

Not quite!  They in fact do have the income to owe income taxes but that income has been excused by leftist schemes from taxation.  I don't think there should be such a thing as people not paying income taxes.  Those taxes go to the defense, education & health of this nation.  No one earning income should not be able to enjoy the benefits and protections of this nation that tax provides without paying at least a minimum share.

Further, it is a fact that with the earned income credits and other such allowances acutally produce windfall refunds...just outrageous.