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 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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-12-2019, 10:32 AM
 
Location: The 719
14,720 posts, read 22,620,467 times
Reputation: 13975

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGoodTheBadTheUgly View Post
IN 2016, the top 1% earned 19.7% of income and paid 37.3% of income taxes. So, if Bernie's plan is to squeeze another $1.5 trillion from the rich, he will have to confiscate their assets. There's not enough income to tax. even at 100% rate. The math just doesn't add up.

Hey Bernie: 1 + 1 does not =3




https://finance.yahoo.com/news/berni...184145968.html
So Bernie, how much chedda for your healthcare plan?

Bernie, "Oh, 30 to 40 trillion."

Nice.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-12-2019, 10:56 AM
 
Location: 15 months till retirement and I can leave the hell hole of New Yakistan
25,586 posts, read 14,245,243 times
Reputation: 6614
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northman83 View Post
But works in all other 1st world countries...
nope, not all, and not to the level that liberals are asking for


Vermont looked into a singlepayer for itself as a state....it discovered it would bankrupt the state, Vermont a pretty liberal state and they chose... NO




California looked into a singlepayer for itself as a state....it discovered it would bankrupt the state, California is a very liberal state, and they chose ....NO
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-12-2019, 11:00 AM
 
30,425 posts, read 16,749,244 times
Reputation: 14105
Quote:
Originally Posted by serger View Post
The only developed country that has working private insurance based model is Switzerland. Basic premiums are FIXED. Insurance companies either learn to leave within their means or else. Mandate of course, otherwise can't work. Hospitals are heavily regulated, etc. No person pays more than 8% of the income towards to basic health insurance premium.


It is somewhat more expensive than the mostly single payer models in other countries, but still reasonable in relation to GDP. In contrast to the situation here.
Not much of an alternative to the state run scheme. In fact its state meddling that makes our health care and insurance such a mess.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-12-2019, 11:09 AM
 
1,890 posts, read 1,029,561 times
Reputation: 907
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank DeForrest View Post
Not much of an alternative to the state run scheme. In fact its state meddling that makes our health care and insurance such a mess.



No. It is the out of control situation here that makes the HC such a mess.



P.S. Google npr bill of the month.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-12-2019, 11:12 AM
 
30,425 posts, read 16,749,244 times
Reputation: 14105
Quote:
Originally Posted by serger View Post
No. It is the out of control situation here that makes the HC such a mess.



P.S. Google npr bill of the month.
If by "out of control" you're referring to the regulatory state that restricts supplies while goosing up demands, I agree with you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-12-2019, 11:29 AM
 
1,890 posts, read 1,029,561 times
Reputation: 907
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank DeForrest View Post
If by "out of control" you're referring to the regulatory state that restricts supplies while goosing up demands, I agree with you.

"out of control" is charging 59 times what medicare pays for a procedure.



And about "the regulatory state":



https://www.healthsystemtracker.org/...-similar-since
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-12-2019, 12:13 PM
 
7,216 posts, read 2,619,703 times
Reputation: 3944
Quote:
Originally Posted by Avondalist View Post
Even if you confiscated all of the wealth of every American billionaire, it would only fund the federal government for 2-3 years.
By my last calculation, just the billionaires alone funds ONLY the federal government for 8 months.

If you add in anyone with a net worth of more than $1 million, and seize their total combined wealth, then you get to ~27 months.

And you have not paid a single cent for state, county and local government to that point. If you add all levels of government, total wealth seizure of all people in the millionaire+ class nets you about 14 months total. And after that, all those people are skinned, dead and have exactly zero. Now what, Bernie?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-12-2019, 12:32 PM
 
Location: Upstate NY 🇺🇸
36,666 posts, read 10,857,268 times
Reputation: 34800
In fact, Bernie Sanders is very good at math:

Why Is It That Socialists Are Horrible At Math; Bernie Sanders We値l Pay For Everything By Taxing The Rich-37ueyy.jpg
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-13-2019, 04:15 PM
 
2,210 posts, read 813,646 times
Reputation: 2414
Quote:
Originally Posted by PCALMike View Post
Nope, he glorifies a time when federal government spending was basically non-existent.

The 1960s was the opposite of the libertarian dream with very strong labor unions, low inequality, high minimum wage, higher taxes on the rich, strong trust in government institutions, lots of regulation and strong anti-trust legislation to protect small business and rural America...And...the highest economic growth in the history of the country...
We had FARRR less regulation in the 60s, less than a quarter of today痴 regulatory code. The rich did not pay more federally, the top marginal rate has fluctuated between 35 and 42% for the last 70 years. The nominal rates were higher but the marginal rates the rich paid was the same mostly because there were so many loopholes and deductions. Most transactions were still handled in cash, we still had the property depreciation deduction, taxes for people who itemized were essentially voluntary. On the other hand state and local taxes at the time were far less the rich in high tax areas are universally paying more today than they were in the 60s. Government spending represented about 18% of GDP during JFKs time. 10% less than today. I would gladly go back to 60s style government if that痴 what you want.
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

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 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
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

ゥ 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

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, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top