Well, well. It seems that utopian dreams of health care reform come at a price. One that others will appear to have to pay. So health care reform is not about insurance, but welfare and income redistribution, at least that seems to the consensus of Democratically controlled Congress and its leaders, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. Fortunately, not all members of the Democratic party have been “drinking the Kool Aid” and are beginning actually worry about the cost of all this. Sadly, we have offered solutions that could be effective, be implemented, and not break the bank or demand that others bear the responsibility for those who will not or do not get health insurance (such as the young and healthy, most of the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants, etc.), but these have not been implemented (1). Medicaid and now the SCHIP expansion cover the vast majority of the poor overall, and a large swath of children and young adults. Medicare is already on board for the elderly and disabled.
Who Pays Federal Income Taxes
Top 1% pay 39.89% of all Federal incomes taxes
Top 5% pay 60.14% of all Federal incomes taxes
Top 10% pay 70.79% of all Federal incomes taxes
Top 25% pay 86.27% of all Federal incomes taxes
Top 50% pay 97.01% 0f all Federal incomes taxes
Bottom 50% pay 2.99% of all Federal incomes taxes
Note: AGI is Adjusted Gross Income Source: Internal Revenue Service, tax year 2006
Dear members of Congress, socialist solutions are not the answer. Properly regulated free markets are. Our plan allows for free markets to exist, private insurance to remain the mainstay, but places significant restraints on actions insurers can take. Additionally, it places the responsibility for obtaining coverage on the individual, not employers, and demands accountability from our citizenry.
The expiration of the 2001 tax cuts will drastically raise tax rates on the MINORITY who already pay the lion’s share of taxes (see above). At present, 1/4th of tax filers/workers/earners pay over 86% of ALL federal income taxes. That means that the remaining 75% pay ONLY 14% of all taxes, and the bottom 50% contribute just under 3%. With top rates returning to 39% next year, and the DEATH TAX returning, along with the talked about 3% surcharge for health care on the top two brackets, we will likely see top federal rates in the 43-45%. With state taxes, property taxes and sales taxes added in, top earners could well see overall tax rates surpass 60-70%.
At some point, dear Mr President and members of Congress, you will kill the goose that is laying all those golden eggs. With these facts looming, do you really believe your stimulus will drive this economy forward? Not when the real drivers of the economy, small business owners, entrepreneurs and professionals decide to hold back, decrease spending, limit investment, hold on expansion and retrench to protect their positions. Your current direction is a prescription for killing meaningful, REAL HEALTH REFORM, along with the economy.
Tax and spend appears to be alive and well. Change has been promised, but the addiction of taking others money to spend on your visions is simply to tempting for you to let go. Well it is time to sober up, dry out, and get real. As in Real Health Reform . . . obi jo and jomaxx
Democrats break ranks on health care
House Democrats are demanding significant changes before they can support a sweeping health care overhaul, forcing the House to join the Senate in delaying action on President Barack Obama’s top domestic priority.
The Democrats’ list of demands came on the eve of House Democratic leaders’ planned unveiling of their final bill today. The bill release was pushed back to Monday at the earliest and Democratic leaders agreed to devote today to meetings with the fiscally responsible Democrats to work through their concerns. These include the need for more cost containment measures, protections for small businesses and a focus on rural health care. We cannot support a final product that fails to” address these issues, members of the group wrote to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Majority Leader Steny Hoyer. Opposition from the 52-member group could imperil House passage of a bill. (2)
Among the concerns is the shape of a new public insurance plan that would compete with private insurers. House leaders envision making payment rates to providers in the plan some 5 % higher than Medicare payment rates. These Dems say they can’t support any link to Medicare rates, which they say pays well below market rates and varies unfairly around the country. (3)
Instead, the House Ways and Means Committee was said to be nearing agreement on an income tax surcharge of 2 percent or more on Americans with the highest incomes — those earning more than $250,000. The surtax would rise for those earning $500,000 and rise again for those earning more than $1 million.
Much of the revenue burden could fall on a privileged few. The House Ways and Means Committee is close to completing legislation expected to include a surtax of up to 3 percent on households with incomes that exceed $250,000, pushing the top rate over 40 percent, assuming President George W. Bush’s 2001 tax cuts are allowed to expire next year as scheduled.
The Senate Finance Committee is weighing a “millionaires’ tax,” a surcharge on health benefits for top earners and a Medicare tax on capital-gains income. And still on the table is Obama’s proposal to limit deductions for wealthy taxpayers. (4)
(1) http://realhealthreform.wordpress.com/the-plan/details-on-the-plan/
(2) Conservative Democrats break ranks on health care- http://www.neworleanscitybusiness.com/uptotheminute.cfm?recid=25682&userID=0&referer=dailyUpdate
(3) Democrats Are at Odds on Financing Health Care – http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/10/health/policy/10health.html?_r=1&emc=tnt&tntemail0=y
(4) Congress Targets Wealthiest Earners for Health Reform Funds – http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/09/AR2009070902907.html
Obama agenda stalls on Capitol Hill – Deadlines not likely to be met – http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jul/10/health-climate-reforms-hit-roadblocks/?feat=home_cube_position1
House Reform Bill Talks Slow; Senators Look To Regroup – http://www.nationaljournal.com/congressdaily/cda_20090710_3514.php
Band of House centrists offers support for ‘robust’ public health insurance plan – http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/band-of-house-centrists-offers-support-for-robust-public-health-insurance-plan-2009-07-09.html
Conservative Democrats break ranks on health care – http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090710/ap_on_go_co/us_health_care_overhaul;_ylt=AnGJoHfVzrb1ZxZWgze0latp24cA;_ylu=X3oDMTJ0Yjg1cTg4BGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMDkwNzEwL3VzX2hlYWx0aF9jYXJlX292ZXJoYXVsBHBvcwM3BHNlYwN5bl9wYWdpbmF0ZV9zdW1tYXJ5X2xpc3QEc2xrA2hlYWx0aGNhcmVvdg–
You know what they say about statistics. Lies, damn lies, etc.
Well I came across a statistic lately that affirms my lifelong standing as a yellow dog Democrat. Depending on which source you check, one percent of the population controls from one fifth to over a third of the national wealth and/or income. Moreover, about a fifth of the country is living on about one percent of the combined national income.
I accept the fact that payroll taxes are levied from the first dollar for all who work. That is regressive, not progressive taxation, and those taxes are not subject to deductions for those of us who itemize. But it galls me to hear people say that poor people pay no taxes simply because after the “standard deduction” they are not subject to tax on earned income.
I don’t need to hear any more complaining about rich people paying too much in taxes.
Here’s a link for you.
http://www.newshoggers.com/blog/2009/07/wendell-potter-on-bill-moyers.html
Don’t miss the Tennessee health fair report. I think it’s in the second video.
Well, I hear you. But do remember that those who talk about 92% tax rates during the Eisenhower years forget about the myriad loopholes, deductions and the like that existed. It was the Reagan years that saw taxes cut, along with most of the tax shelters and other major loopholes that allowed many of the “rich” to avoid paying any taxes for years. That is not now the case. When marginal rates are raised, there are few if any tax shelters to shield income from the government. So while tax rates may be lower, any increase is likely to have a much greater effect in terms of both monies raised and impact.
The real issue relates to the fact that all citizens should participate in a national plan of this type. Selective taxation for specific programs that effect all is bad policy and sets a bad precedent. It sends the wrong message to the country as a whole. The fact is that many millions of working citizens do pay nothing in federal or state income taxes (they may pay property taxes and certainly pay sales taxes, to be sure). It is also a fact that many of those are on the lower end of the wage scale and have been removed from the tax rolls by both Democrats and Republicans. In my view, not a good way to promote citizen involvement and investment in their nation.
The real issue relates to the fact that all citizens should participate in a national plan of this type. Selective taxation for specific programs that effect all is bad policy and sets a bad precedent….The fact is that many millions of working citizens do pay nothing in federal or state income taxes (they may pay property taxes and certainly pay sales taxes, to be sure). It is also a fact that many of those are on the lower end of the wage scale and have been removed from the tax rolls by both Democrats and Republicans. In my view, not a good way to promote citizen involvement and investment in their nation.
Agree.
But there are two little realities left out of all that.
First, you cannot get any more money where there is none. It is not realistic to imagine that those now not receiving anything more than emergency care are in a position to afford more. The money is not there. Like Willie Sutton, we have to look where the money is to get it.
Second, you mentioned that they pay sales and property taxes, but you left out the most ubiquitous tax of all: payroll. Moreover, except for the Medicare portion (which presumably eventually helps everyone, there is a cap on the biggest portion. That is a regressive tax that only affects wage earners at the bottom, which in today’s dollars amounts to about five times the federal poverty rate. (I don’t know what the numbers are with precision, but you get the idea. I paid the max into SS over twenty years while working in a job managing the working poor, so I am keenly aware of the disparity.)
If itg doesn’t get knocked out, the latest proposal does, in fact, call for universal participation with a payroll tax funding it. Those who opt out (if that remains a choice, face something like a fine in the form of a tax provision. It may not be a pound of flesh, but for skinny people even a few ounces of flesh is a lot.