|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On September 29 2015 07:41 KwarK wrote:
Wolfstan I reread your brackets and I think that they would result in a lower overall tax revenue but an increased share of the burden on the rich. You're dramatically reducing the tax paid on income below 200k, which is the vast majority of all income for 99% of Americans, while keeping taxes the same on income over 200k, an area dominated by the 1%. You've actually succeeded in making it more lopsided with a heavier share of the collective burden on the 1% than it is already, despite having the opposite intention. The issue is that they just have so much money that they'll always be paying most of the tax. Even with a flat tax system they'll still be massively over represented because they have all the money.
Yeah that's what you get with napkin math(although I'm fairly certain that broader taxation would overall increase revenues). I think that a plan like that could realistically pass though. I simply made my brackets based on what I consider to be income breaking points.
10k just a round number
50k median household
75k "happiness amount" and where consumption turns into investment.and luxury items
200k accredited investor threshold
The most important part of this would be to balance a budget over 4 years without having to go to unrealistically rosy GDP expectations. It would need to come with entitlement reform and spending cut obviously.
|
On September 29 2015 11:16 Buckyman wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2015 07:46 Slaughter wrote:
What is the deal anyway. All I hear from those who oppose Obamacare is extremely hyperbolic rhetoric about why A) No one likes it and B) Its the worst system ever.
I never hear any actual specific reasons why its bad nor any type of poll numbers to suggest most people don't like it. I think if they really want to convince people they aren't just throwing a hissy fit they should actually show the people why its not working and make a system and show why it would be better. If they did these things they might even be able to convince democratic voters (since using their assertion that its a bad system they should be dissatisfied as well) to put pressure on their reps to actually get some steam going towards moving in a different direction. I posted about this upthread. The short version is, I was stuck with insurance that did not benefit me at all, and that sucked up enough of my income to make routine doctor visits unaffordable. And was unable to change policies.
Taxation w/o representation bro
|
On September 29 2015 11:16 Buckyman wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2015 07:46 Slaughter wrote:
What is the deal anyway. All I hear from those who oppose Obamacare is extremely hyperbolic rhetoric about why A) No one likes it and B) Its the worst system ever.
I never hear any actual specific reasons why its bad nor any type of poll numbers to suggest most people don't like it. I think if they really want to convince people they aren't just throwing a hissy fit they should actually show the people why its not working and make a system and show why it would be better. If they did these things they might even be able to convince democratic voters (since using their assertion that its a bad system they should be dissatisfied as well) to put pressure on their reps to actually get some steam going towards moving in a different direction. I posted about this upthread. The short version is, I was stuck with insurance that did not benefit me at all, and that sucked up enough of my income to make routine doctor visits unaffordable. And was unable to change policies.
IIRC KwarK (or someone else) explained that your income level lets you qualify for an exception so you don't have to purchase insurance...
|
United States43269 Posts
On September 29 2015 11:16 Buckyman wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2015 07:46 Slaughter wrote:
What is the deal anyway. All I hear from those who oppose Obamacare is extremely hyperbolic rhetoric about why A) No one likes it and B) Its the worst system ever.
I never hear any actual specific reasons why its bad nor any type of poll numbers to suggest most people don't like it. I think if they really want to convince people they aren't just throwing a hissy fit they should actually show the people why its not working and make a system and show why it would be better. If they did these things they might even be able to convince democratic voters (since using their assertion that its a bad system they should be dissatisfied as well) to put pressure on their reps to actually get some steam going towards moving in a different direction. I posted about this upthread. The short version is, I was stuck with insurance that did not benefit me at all, and that sucked up enough of my income to make routine doctor visits unaffordable. And was unable to change policies.
No you weren't. You might as well say "I was stuck having to set fire to all my money, thanks Obama". You didn't read how it worked and you then fucked it up. At some point you will have to stop blaming Obama for your decision to purchase this insurance because he's not making you do it. Like at all. Like you're exempt from Obamacare in several different ways.
Obamacare was designed to give you Federal subsidies for your health insurance. Reps couldn't stop it passing on the Federal level but they were able to refuse to implement the subsidies on a State level, ie rejecting Federal healthcare on behalf of their most vulnerable citizens, like yourself. They refused to let the Federal government pay for your healthcare because they wanted to fuck with your life to try and make you angry in the hope that you'd be too dumb to work out who had fucked you. You were confused and somehow unable to google basic phrases like "what is the Obamacare penalty?" or "am I exempt from Obamacare?" and bought health insurance without the subsidy. You're now mad at Obama.
Wolfstan, it's kinda funny how good at PR the 1%ers are. You look at the amount they're paying in tax and go "you know what, taxes on the rich are too high, here is my proposal for a system that I think would be fair". Only your proposed moderate system coming from you as a conservative seeking to lower the burden of the rich is actually a higher rate than they're paying right now. They're paying less than you instinctively think they should in a fair system but you still feel like they're paying too much.
|
Everyone knows politicians lie and mislead a lot. But somehow its always politicians we dont like. Not the ones we like based on preconceived belifs which we constatnly reinforce with selective information.
|
All right, all signs are pointing towards the government not shutting down. PP is still funded and the house now has to take up the measure. Lets hope they don't decide to light themselves on fire.
|
Self-Immolation can be cool though. Maybe they'll play some RAtM in the House as they do it.
|
Planner Parenthood President is testifying to Congress today. I hope she pulls an Elizabeth Warren and completely destroys the Republicans wasting everyone's time over fake videos.
|
On September 29 2015 23:21 ticklishmusic wrote:
Planner Parenthood President is testifying to Congress today. I hope she pulls an Elizabeth Warren and completely destroys the Republicans wasting everyone's time over fake videos.
I really hope she digs into them about the being idiots about the whole "selling fetal tissue" bullshit. The fact that they tried to "bid" on the tissue in the video like that is a thing that happens is so stupid. The charges they reference are for any transport of tissue or other material. The same charges are used for transporting cadavers and organs from donors. No one accuses morgues across the US of selling dead bodies.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
since there seems to be some who are familiar with sanders here, who is going to be sander's economics guy when he's elected? probably some MMT people?
clinton will probably pick alan blinder whom i really like.
|
On September 29 2015 14:25 KwarK wrote:You were confused and somehow unable to google basic phrases like "what is the Obamacare penalty?" or "am I exempt from Obamacare?" and bought health insurance without the subsidy. You're now mad at Obama.
I did what I thought was the sensible thing and talked to one of the official marketplace representatives about it. They answered those questions differently from what you said - that I was indeed not exempt and had to buy insurance without the subsidy.
Obviously, I trusted the system rather than random web sites.
However, moving from anecdotal to systematic criticisms:
* The ACA invalidated many existing insurance policies.
* The ACA has caused health insurance to become more expensive, while using subsidies to hide this fact from some consumers.
* There is an income range where the ACA and its support systems fail at their stated goal.
* The federal marketplace did not have the resources to handle its transaction volume during the second open enrollment period.
|
Well that's the free market isn't it bro. You had the ability to learn more, and you chose not to. That's why you're poor.
But hey
You can feel safe in the knowledge that your money is going to someone who deserves your money more than you do because you're fiscally irresponsible.
|
On September 30 2015 01:17 Jormundr wrote:
Well that's the free market isn't it bro. You had the ability to learn more, and you chose not to. That's why you're poor.
But hey
You can feel safe in the knowledge that your money is going to someone who deserves your money more than you do because you're fiscally irresponsible.
This post's ass hole level is off the chart. And if we are talking about the ACA, my fiancee and I are not 20K in debt because of the ACA. Because before it, she couldn't afford healthcare and it wasn't an option to put her on mine. So its pretty good in my book.
All the other problems are minor or just a system working itself out. Lots of things have rough launches and improve over time. Like all of the internet, with the exception of Skype.
|
On September 30 2015 01:09 Buckyman wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2015 14:25 KwarK wrote:You were confused and somehow unable to google basic phrases like "what is the Obamacare penalty?" or "am I exempt from Obamacare?" and bought health insurance without the subsidy. You're now mad at Obama. I did what I thought was the sensible thing and talked to one of the official marketplace representatives about it. They answered those questions differently from what you said - that I was indeed not exempt and had to buy insurance without the subsidy. Obviously, I trusted the system rather than random web sites. However, moving from anecdotal to systematic criticisms: * The ACA invalidated many existing insurance policies. * The ACA has caused health insurance to become more expensive, while using subsidies to hide this fact from some consumers. * There is an income range where the ACA and its support systems fail at their stated goal. * The federal marketplace did not have the resources to handle its transaction volume during the second open enrollment period.
*Yes it invalidated many existing policies. A lot of those policies were also effectively garbage and provided no actual support.
*Research needed. Are prices increasing because Insurers are greedy and now that they actually have to pay out in the event of illness they want to line their pockets more and the ACA provides a nice smokescreen or is it the actual ACA?
i would say lessons from the entirety of the rest of the world, where healthcare is many times cheaper and often better, should the former to be more likely then the latter.
(yes yes if you have tons of money US healthcare is superior but not for your average middle-class citizen. And god forbid your poor and ill in the US)
|
United States43269 Posts
On September 30 2015 01:09 Buckyman wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2015 14:25 KwarK wrote:You were confused and somehow unable to google basic phrases like "what is the Obamacare penalty?" or "am I exempt from Obamacare?" and bought health insurance without the subsidy. You're now mad at Obama. I did what I thought was the sensible thing and talked to one of the official marketplace representatives about it. They answered those questions differently from what you said - that I was indeed not exempt and had to buy insurance without the subsidy.
Never ask a barber if you need a haircut. Google is your friend, if you know how to use it you can find out a lot there.
|
That the person at the marketplace, which is supposed to assist and help people, couldn't help him is, if in fact true, absolutely horrible.
And no. "You could have Googled it" isn't really an argument against the above. Because many people that would google, would still put more trust in to the trained professional on the other end of the line than on more or less random google finds.
|
On September 30 2015 01:47 Velr wrote:
That the person at the marketplace, which is supposed to assist and help people, couldn't help him is, if in fact true, absolutely horrible.
And no. "You could have Googled it" isn't really an argument against the above. Because many people that would google, would still put more trust in to the trained professional on the other end of the line than on more or less random google finds.
I don’t see it as any different from getting a shitty car salesman or loan issuer that gets you a bad deal. It sucks, but its not like he didn't' have the option to see a second opinion. We are also only getting half the story, so he may have provided them with incorrect information or is providing us with bad info.
|
United States43269 Posts
On September 30 2015 01:47 Velr wrote:
That the person at the marketplace, which is supposed to assist and help people, couldn't help him is, if in fact true, absolutely horrible.
And no. "You could have Googled it" isn't really an argument against the above. Because many people that would google, would still put more trust in to the trained professional on the other end of the line than on more or less random google finds.
Never attribute to malice what can be explained by ignorance. It's not hugely surprising that people at the call center aren't versed on the intricacies of how Obamacare works or how it'd apply to his unique tax situation. I'm a tax nerd so I can tell you that bucky doesn't owe any tax and that if he submits a w4 stating that he is exempt he won't have a refund for the Obamacare penalty to hit but I think it's unreasonable to expect that from a call center employee. What is more reasonable though is for bucky to spend a few minutes learning how the Obamacare penalty is levied and what is own tax situation is.
You won't go far wrong by assuming that the vast majority of people know far less than can be casually found out in a few minutes of independent research. Obviously there are exceptions, such as with doctors, but doing independent research before making any decision is a great habit to have.
We live in a world in which most of the information you need to make pretty much any decision is instantly available if you know how to operate a search engine. Pretty much any question you may have has been asked, answered and had multiple nerds arguing over it with the full text available for reviewing if you look.
|
Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards on Tuesday for the first time directly addressed members of Congress about undercover videos purporting to show that the women’s health organization illegally sells fetal tissue for profit, telling members of the House Oversight committee that the allegations are “offensive and categorically untrue.”
At a hearing centering on whether federal funding should continue for the group, Richards forcefully defended her organization, calling it a critical source for cancer screenings, testing and treatment for sexually transmitted diseases, contraception care and other services for millions of women, particularly those who are low-income.
“For many American women, Planned Parenthood is the only health-care provider they will see this year,” she said during her opening testimony. “It is impossible for our patients to understand why Congress is once again threatening their ability to go to the health-care provider of their choice.”
But the hearing quickly turned into a grilling, with Republican lawmakers aggressively questioning Richards on everything from her annual salary to the support of Democratic candidates provided by the group’s political action committee; often delivering rapid-fire questions that left little time for her to respond.
The hearing came as congressional leaders approached an agreement that would keep the government funded through Dec. 11, likely averting a shutdown that had loomed this week arising from a dispute over whether Planned Parenthood should continue to receive federal dollars.
The organization and its affiliates receive more than $500 million in state and federal funds, primarily through grants and Medicaid reimbursements.
Planned Parenthood leader: Video allegations are ‘offensive’ and ‘untrue’
|
On September 30 2015 02:07 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On September 30 2015 01:47 Velr wrote:
That the person at the marketplace, which is supposed to assist and help people, couldn't help him is, if in fact true, absolutely horrible.
And no. "You could have Googled it" isn't really an argument against the above. Because many people that would google, would still put more trust in to the trained professional on the other end of the line than on more or less random google finds. Never attribute to malice what can be explained by ignorance. It's not hugely surprising that people at the call center aren't versed on the intricacies of how Obamacare works or how it'd apply to his unique tax situation. I'm a tax nerd so I can tell you that bucky doesn't owe any tax and that if he submits a w4 stating that he is exempt he won't have a refund for the Obamacare penalty to hit but I think it's unreasonable to expect that from a call center employee. What is more reasonable though is for bucky to spend a few minutes learning how the Obamacare penalty is levied and what is own tax situation is. You won't go far wrong by assuming that the vast majority of people know far less than can be casually found out in a few minutes of independent research. Obviously there are exceptions, such as with doctors, but doing independent research before making any decision is a great habit to have. We live in a world in which most of the information you need to make pretty much any decision is instantly available if you know how to operate a search engine. Pretty much any question you may have has been asked, answered and had multiple nerds arguing over it with the full text available for reviewing if you look.
For doctors, doing your own research on medications and treatments is pretty important. Ask questions about tests. If your doctor is recommending a big surgery or something, get a second opinion. Heck, many doctors call in a consulting physician for complicated stuff.
Point is, with any major purchase you should be doing tons of research, because in the vast majority of cases, you're gonna save money. Each hour you spend researching about cars or houses when you're looking to buy could equate to hundreds or thousands of dollars in savings or avoided cost. If a penny saved is a penny earned, then your hourly wage while doing research is going to be insane.
There's a stupidity tax on a lot of things. It's not necessarily levied on people because they're dumb, it's because the system is much more complicated than most people can be expected to understand without doing a little legwork.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
