U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-04-2013, 07:46 AM
 
Location: Cherokee Nation
28,992 posts, read 11,422,361 times
Reputation: 6427

Advertisements

If it is progressive taxing and not a flat tax, it is all about wealth redistribution and nothing else.


Paul will always vote to rob Peter.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-04-2013, 11:19 AM
 
9,015 posts, read 3,398,727 times
Reputation: 2870
Quote:
Originally Posted by wrench409 View Post
I guess that means that someone, somewhere in the system has his cake and get's to eat it too.

At a time when the rich are getting richer and everyone else is either seeing their wages stagnate or actually decline, I doubt many people share your view.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2013, 11:24 AM
 
11,145 posts, read 2,909,400 times
Reputation: 2900
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iamme73 View Post
Obamacare is both. As it should be. The only way to pay for this was to tax wealthy individuals higher.

And once all the states expand medicaid and they will, it will really be redistributionist.
they are also overcharging younger people who would normally pay very little for their health care premiums per month. Healthy, young people now have to pay the same rates as the older, traditionally higher risk people. Do you think this fits your view that ObamaCare is only forcing the wealthy to pay more?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2013, 11:27 AM
 
11,145 posts, read 2,909,400 times
Reputation: 2900
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter_Sucks View Post
At a time when the rich are getting richer and everyone else is either seeing their wages stagnate or actually decline, I doubt many people share your view.
The rich are getting richer because Obama has Bernanke pumping $85 billion a month into the rich fat cat stock markets, meanwhile we have month after month with 300,000 new people signing up for Food Stamps. We even have the big union bosses telling Obama that his policies are destroying the middle class. Blind, partisan democrats are destroying the middles class, and applauding it the entire way.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2013, 11:34 AM
 
9,015 posts, read 3,398,727 times
Reputation: 2870
Quote:
Originally Posted by OICU812 View Post
The rich are getting richer because Obama has Bernanke pumping $85 billion a month into the rich fat cat stock markets, meanwhile we have month after month with 300,000 new people signing up for Food Stamps. We even have the big union bosses telling Obama that his policies are destroying the middle class. Blind, partisan democrats are destroying the middles class, and applauding it the entire way.
Bless your heart.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2013, 12:34 PM
 
18,073 posts, read 5,924,065 times
Reputation: 3402
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little-Acorn View Post
Now that people are finally able to go to these "exchanges" the liberals keep proudly pointing to, and get actual numbers for what their own family's charges will be and what govt subsidies they can get, some disquieting facts are coming up.

A family of four, looking at the "bronze" plan (the least expensive up front), found that the charge for it would be $750/month. That was scary to them, a major hit... but then they found out that they might be eligible to get govt subsides to cover part of that cost.

The same family, if they made a lot more money, would have had the same charge... but no govt subsides. They'd have to pay all of it.

The "insurance" part, as the liberals piously protest, isn't coming from government at all. You are getting insurance from the same companies you've always gotten insurance from (well, some of them), not from the government. The govt merely sets the standards, it doesn't provide the actual insurance, the liberals now tell us.

The conclusion is clear.

Obamacare is, at its fundamental nature, just another wealth-redistribution program. It's a program that uses health care as its excuse for redistributing, but its original purpose was, and still is, to redistribute wealth.

It's doing it, as people are finding out, by imposing high costs on everybody... and then "giving" lavish govt subsidies to those who earn less.
Basically it's taking lots of money from those who earn more, and handing it to those who earn less.

All this stuff about exchanges, patient loads, keeping your old plan etc., is merely window dressing. Obamacare is and always has been, a wealth redistribution program.

Is this what the American people wanted?

As the politicians said, we had to pass it just to find out what's in it. Unfortunately, once we found out what's in it, we would NOT be allowed to un-pass it if we didn't like it.

Not without a fight, against the people who tricked us into it.

I noticed as much last week when I followed a link in a C-D thread to Kaiser's online calculator and played with it. Turns out that an individual's subsidy varies by zip code (and, where a zip code crosses into multiple counties, by county as well). I live in a poor zip code and my subsidy is $1500+ more than if I lived in an affluent zip code across town.

I'd love to see how they calculate that variance.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2013, 12:37 PM
 
Location: San Diego, CA
10,587 posts, read 4,072,575 times
Reputation: 4074
Quote:
Originally Posted by freemkt View Post
I noticed as much last week when I followed a link in a C-D thread to Kaiser's online calculator and played with it. Turns out that an individual's subsidy varies by zip code (and, where a zip code crosses into multiple counties, by county as well). I live in a poor zip code and my subsidy is $1500+ more than if I lived in an affluent zip code across town.

I'd love to see how they calculate that variance.
Amount of money spent vs. number of votes gained, of course.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2013, 12:43 PM
 
Location: 125 Years Too Late...
6,759 posts, read 5,703,787 times
Reputation: 6452
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little-Acorn View Post
Obamacare is, at its fundamental nature, just another wealth-redistribution program. It's a program that uses health care as its excuse for redistributing, but its original purpose was, and still is, to redistribute wealth.
Of course it is. There was never any question for anyone not strung out on government-pushed "heroin." The flock doesn't see it that way because, beyond the heroin, their vision is often blurred by the daily multiple orgasms resulting from the S&M role games they play as the government's victim.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $89,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:52 PM.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top