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.
Obamacare has some positives...however, by 2023 the CBO estimates that we will still have 30 Million non-elderly uninsured Americans - while it will cost about ~2.5 Trillion over that timeframe adding up all of the costs from the law. How anyone can defend this highly inefficient law is beyond me.
P.S. I would support a single payer system.
With today's low wages not many could afford to have 15% FICA taxes on their paychecks.
Keep an eye on Vermont who will be implementing single payer in 2017.
So far they will need a 19% bump to FICA (8% on the employee and 11% on the employer) and an additional consumption tax at the state level.
With today's low wages not many could afford to have 15% FICA taxes on their paychecks.
Keep an eye on Vermont who will be implementing single payer in 2017.
So far they will need a 19% bump to FICA (8% on the employee and 11% on the employer) and an additional consumption tax at the state level.
Those who favor single payer don't realize it takes an "all in" approach. The way the Dems have demonized those making over $200/250k. Piggy backing tax increases on Medicare surcharges around those income range. It's an easy sell to their voting base.
They will have a much tougher time telling their constituents who make $20k-30k-40k a year they will face a huge tax burden to fund single payer.
I am all in if everyone is all in for single payer. That's fine with me. Paying 7-8% taxes on my income for health care. Heck I will probably save money paying 7-8% on health taxes compared to where we are heading in the next 3-4 years for those making over 400% with the Aca.
We also have a dysfunctional system that makes it vastly more expensive for millions of others as well.
Bottom line: it's wealth redistribution except the super rich aren't feeling much of the affects from the increase premiums and deductibles. It's those making over 400% of poverty who are self employed. Mostly small business owners making less than 200k who will feel the most pain.
This is just inaccurate. The ACA is redistributive, but it does hit the wealthiest Americans directly. You should inform yourself of reality.
Businesses and wealthy owners of estates and trusts have asked the IRS for changes to a part of President Barack Obama's 2010 health-care law that has received comparatively little attention: a 3.8 percent tax on investment income intended to provide the bulk of the law's funding.
The tax kicks in this year, with U.S. taxpayers accounting for it for the first time in their tax returns for 2013. It is projected to raise more than $100 billion over a decade to help pay for health insurance for millions of Americans who lack it.
Investment income is flat out mostly the wealthy.
The new 0.9% Medicare tax applies to wages above $250,000 ($200,000 for singles).
This is just inaccurate. The ACA is redistributive, but it does hit the wealthiest Americans directly. You should inform yourself of reality.
Businesses and wealthy owners of estates and trusts have asked the IRS for changes to a part of President Barack Obama's 2010 health-care law that has received comparatively little attention: a 3.8 percent tax on investment income intended to provide the bulk of the law's funding.
The tax kicks in this year, with U.S. taxpayers accounting for it for the first time in their tax returns for 2013. It is projected to raise more than $100 billion over a decade to help pay for health insurance for millions of Americans who lack it.
Investment income is flat out mostly the wealthy.
The new 0.9% Medicare tax applies to wages above $250,000 ($200,000 for singles).
No. U are misunderstanding me. I am not even talking about the tax increases.
I am talking about roughly 4-5 million on the exchanges who are facing jacked up premiums like me because of the Aca.
Remember making over 400% is only about $40k for individual and $90k for family of 4. You don't get subsidies and most will get hit with big premium increases.
This is just inaccurate. The ACA is redistributive, but it does hit the wealthiest Americans directly. You should inform yourself of reality.
Businesses and wealthy owners of estates and trusts have asked the IRS for changes to a part of President Barack Obama's 2010 health-care law that has received comparatively little attention: a 3.8 percent tax on investment income intended to provide the bulk of the law's funding.
The tax kicks in this year, with U.S. taxpayers accounting for it for the first time in their tax returns for 2013. It is projected to raise more than $100 billion over a decade to help pay for health insurance for millions of Americans who lack it.
Investment income is flat out mostly the wealthy.
The new 0.9% Medicare tax applies to wages above $250,000 ($200,000 for singles).
LOL at that. The government gave them 3 years to move their money around.
You think they just sat and waited to be taxed ?
The strategies were all over the place on how to reduce/eliminate the tax.
It all depended on your adjusted MAGI and level of investment income to it.
No. U are misunderstanding me. I am not even talking about the tax increases.
I am talking about roughly 4-5 million on the exchanges who are facing jacked up premiums like me because of the Aca.
Remember making over 400% is only about $40k for individual and $90k for family of 4. You don't get subsidies and most will get hit with big premium increases.
We aren't even talking 200/250k wage earners.
4-5 million on the exchanges facing jacked up premiums is just another falsehood.
I am not saying that no one is paying higher premiums, but to say that of the 6.5million signed to the exchanges that 4-5million were insured previously is not known and then to claim that their premiums are higher is probably inaccurate.
LOL at that. The government gave them 3 years to move their money around.
You think they just sat and waited to be taxed ?
The strategies were all over the place on how to reduce/eliminate the tax.
It all depended on your adjusted MAGI and level of investment income to it.
Again, people will pay the taxes. Are they disappearing their investment income? LOL
They can't get away from the Medicaid taxes and if they have investment income and they make over $200,000 if single and $250,000 if married, then yes they will pay that tax.
4-5 million on the exchanges facing jacked up premiums is just another falsehood.
I am not saying that no one is paying higher premiums, but to say that of the 6.5million signed to the exchanges that 4-5million were insured previously is not known and then to claim that their premiums are higher is probably inaccurate.
Like I said. I could be consider someone who's paying the same premium in 2014 as 2013 with that calculator.
This is where the smoke and mirrors comes in. The calculator doesn't factor in deductibles faced.
Most people who are paying full price (those 4-5 million) have two choices similar to what I face. Keep premiums the same but have deductibles double from $6000 to $12000.
Or pay 40% more in premiums to keep the deductible around $6000.
In summary. That calculator doesn't examine the entire picture. Read the fine print.
Again, people will pay the taxes. Are they disappearing their investment income? LOL
They can't get away from the Medicaid taxes and if they have investment income and they make over $200,000 if single and $250,000 if married, then yes they will pay that tax.
Yes they are.
It's not $200K..it's your adjusted MAGI and the percentage of investment income you have.
It's the passive income they went after.
Sheesh....
Convert to a Roth where you can take out the contributions penalty free and after 5 years the investment income is NON TAXABLE.
Invest in rental RE and oil and gas properties...income is offset by expenses/depreciation.
Invest in growth stocks vs income stocks. Taxed when sold and only on the amount sold.
Do more Section 1031 exchanges.
But you go ahead and think that they will do nothing and wait for the taxman to come collecting.
You cry about big business loopholes and don't even realize that individuals have just as many.
It's not $200K..it's your adjusted MAGI and the percentage of investment income you have.
It's the passive income they went after.
Sheesh....
Convert to a Roth where you can take out the contributions penalty free and after 5 years the investment income is NON TAXABLE.
Invest in rental RE and oil and gas properties...income is offset by expenses.
Invest in growth stocks vs income stocks. Taxed when sold and only on the amount sold.
Do more Section 1031 exchanges.
But you go ahead and think that they will do nothing and wait for the taxman to come collecting.
I know. People here don't understand tax maneuvers people do. California had a 'surplus" for 2012. Wanna know why? Because all the rich people were cashing out on investments in 2012 in anticipation of taxes going back up to 39.6% federally. Plus they had prop 30 that retroactivity raised state income taxes for entire 2012 year even though it was passed in November 2012.
Wait for the 2013 numbers from California. Someone the state will claim "they are missing money" or not generating enough revenue. Duh. It's cause people accelerated their taxes in 2012.
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.
