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.
Actually it is fairly simple. Most health care insurance is paid for by employers with employees paying a premium for the health insurance and the federal govt. giving the companies a tax deduction for providing it.
Step 1. End the tax deduction for companies providing it. - Use the addition tax revenue for universal health coverage. Net win for corporations not to have to pay for the additional medical cost, makes corporations more competive globally.
Step 2. The money that had been used to pay premiums to the insurance company now goes to the govt. to pay for national healthcare. This would be an increase in taxes, however, most americans would not see any difference in their paycheck since they had been paying this all along in the form of insurance premiums.
Step 3. There should be an equal tax on everyone for the amount required irrespective of how much you earn. Obviously if you have no job you do not pay anything, but just like a defaulted student loan, you can't get a tax return until your amount is paid.
Very egalitarian. Everyone has to pay the same amount, and for most people it probably would not be anymore than they are paying for health insurance now. Maybe even less.
You are effectively eliminating 16% of the private sector and the tax revenues on the profits that go with it. So how do we fund public health care while maintaining your beloved military industrial complex, corporate welfare, bailouts, and pro-war agenda?
Just take it from the top 1%, they're good for it..........
our military spending is right in line with most other countries as a percent of gdp
The size of a nation's military should be determined based on a comparison with the military of whoever they would possibly have to go to war with, not in proportion to how much their businesses produce.
If your businesses suddenly become more profitable, that doesn't mean the military has suddenly become inadequate.
Public health care is paid with taxes and fees. That's how it is already done.
I believe that the argument is being made that not enough is being taken in to pay for it, and since we are in an economic downturn, with more money going out then is coming in, what new taxes or fees would you institute to pay for it.
I'm making the point that we overspend on our military, and cutting back on that, the money that is already being taken in could be repurposed to healthcare.
Spend public money healing peole, or killing people, let the public decide.
Location: In a Galaxy far, far away called Germany
4,300 posts, read 4,407,894 times
Reputation: 2394
I'm not a liberal, but (it seems to me) that if we spent the money, that currently is spent on our empire, we could easily afford public care. If we kept our military to North American (and our territories/commonwealths), we could still keep ourselves strong and within a significantly smaller budget. Between that and the desperately needed reformation of our tax codes and current entitlement programs - we would be fine.
I believe that the argument is being made that not enough is being taken in to pay for it, and since we are in an economic downturn, with more money going out then is coming in, what new taxes or fees would you institute to pay for it.
I'm making the point that we overspend on our military, and cutting back on that, the money that is already being taken in could be repurposed to healthcare.
Spend public money healing peole, or killing people, let the public decide.
The options are the same as always. Tax more, cut more, or do a combination of the two. It's really that simple.
The options are the same as always. Tax more, cut more, or do a combination of the two. It's really that simple.
Sounds simple, but where to cut? Republicans say we need a military that is bloated and costs more then we need to secure our borders, or Sharia law and Muslims will take over. Democrats say that we can't increase taxes on the middle class because they are hurting already. The public, as a whole, wants to raise taxes on the richest Americans, but they still vote for the party who refuses to do that. Republicans don't want to deny anyone care, but they don't want to pay for it.
Much more complicated then "tax more, cut more, or a combination of the two"
How do I get to California? Start walking? Yeah, thats one way, but what is the smart way, and how do I pay for it?
Sounds simple, but where to cut? Republicans say we need a military that is bloated and costs more then we need to secure our borders, or Sharia law and Muslims will take over. Democrats say that we can't increase taxes on the middle class because they are hurting already. The public, as a whole, wants to raise taxes on the richest Americans, but they still vote for the party who refuses to do that. Republicans don't want to deny anyone care, but they don't want to pay for it.
Much more complicated then "tax more, cut more, or a combination of the two"
How do I get to California? Start walking? Yeah, thats one way, but what is the smart way, and how do I pay for it?
The solutions are simple. The will do it is hard. How do we pay for the government we want? Just like I said, we either raise taxes, cut programs and spending, or a combination of the both. It's that simple.
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.
