Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
This is where the concept of marginal income kicks in. A person making $50k/yr has a much harder time eating a 15% income tax than someone making $5,000,000/yr. Yes, that person, who is in the top 0.01% of the economy, will definitely notice the loss of $750,000, but honestly, if they can't live quite comfortably on $4,250,000... they have serious money management issues.
At some point, the majority have to stand up for ourselves and say enough is enough. I make a decent living, and my income tax rate after deductions and credits ends up being 15%. I think that's fair, but I wouldn't scream bloody murder if it went to 20% and we got universal healthcare/single payer. Heck, considering I spend about 12% of my paycheck for insurance premiums & FSA contributions, I'd gladly take that trade off.
You're trying to use reason in dealing with an ideologue that has a bot like tendency to regurgitate the same talking points on cue.
Just use the term "pensions and the stock market" and out comes the bot.
You're living in an alternate reality if you believe that we are all born on a level playing field in terms of both conditions and innate abilities, let alone which abilities society places a greater value on.
Exactly, which is why with a flat tax rate some would pay significantly MORE than others for the exact same thing: government services/benefits. Because it's not a level playing field.
Which is MORE?
15% of $50,000?
Or 15% of $5,000,000?
Same tax rate, but one person is paying significantly more than the other for the exact same thing.
Not sure if you read the article you posted, but one of the paragraphs kinda shoots your argument in the foot.
In Europe, drug prices are set by governments, not by pharmaceutical companies the way they are in the U.S. On average, the difference between the price of one drug in the U.S. and the same drug in France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the U.K. was 50 percent, an analysis by the consulting firm McKinsey has found.
Uh huh... and WHY do you think the US allows pharmaceutical companies to set their own prices?
Dr.'s making less and eventually becoming gov. employees.
This could all be offset when we start burying the living and raising the dead. Small change in thinking.
i've only had employer sponsored health insurance in the States and have always had restrictions on doctors, medicine, treatments, etc. I didn't notice any change with Obamacare. Is it different when individuals are buying their own insurance.
Less freedoms and choice -- that happened when I moved from Ontario, Canada to the USA.
Not sure if you read the article you posted, but one of the paragraphs kinda shoots your argument in the foot.
In Europe, drug prices are set by governments, not by pharmaceutical companies the way they are in the U.S. On average, the difference between the price of one drug in the U.S. and the same drug in France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the U.K. was 50 percent, an analysis by the consulting firm McKinsey has found.
Uh huh... and WHY do you think the US allows pharmaceutical companies to set their own prices?
Hint: there are at least two reasons for that.
Figured you wouldn't even venture a guess, so I'll name two reasons:
1) To encourage the reinvestment of revenues into R&D, which improves lives and provides jobs.
2) Literally millions of Americans depend on their profitability. All explained here:
The two real reasons are: Lobbyists & campaign contributions.
Get the money out of our political process and institute term limits to make sure the politicians aren't too comfy in their seats of power & influence... you'll find the rules change on a lot of things, including who sets drug prices.
The two real reasons are: Lobbyists & campaign contributions.
Now that's naïve.
Do you deny the fact that millions of Americans benefit from corporate profits?
Do you realize that QE was used to prop up the stock market exactly so that those millions of American workers' and retirees' pension plans and retirement accounts wouldn't crash? And even given that, many state pension plans are in serious trouble. California and Illinois, just to name two.
Dont worry. Trump is busy handing over the health care to Wall Street and big insurance so you once again have lots of freedoms to die because you cant afford health care and medicine.
Sorry, Obama handed it to them years ago.
Have you not heard of the ACA? I can post a link if that helps.
Do you deny the fact that millions of Americans benefit from corporate profits?
Do you realize that QE was used to prop up the stock market exactly so that those millions of American workers' and retirees' pension plans and retirement accounts wouldn't crash? And even given that, many state pension plans are in serious trouble. California and Illinois, just to name two.
Right on cue the bot responds. This person can't be serious...
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.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
What Would TEXAS Look Like With Single Payer?
