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.
Total tax burdens are still progressive. People making the most are also paying the most. It is "regressive" compared to the USA's system, but that is only an illustration of the fact that the USA has one of the most progressive tax systems in the world.
IC can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe one of her points is that having that particular regressive feature would, IF we decided to make that choice would, given the proper rate, allow the U.S. to afford single payer healthcare.
IC can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe one of her points is that having that particular regressive feature would, IF we decided to make that choice would, given the proper rate, allow the U.S. to afford single payer healthcare.
No country funds a national health care system simply through a VAT. Its almost always funded the way our own single payer Medicare is funded. In fact, we already pay more in taxes for our healthcare (Medicaid, VA, Medicare, healthcare for local and federal government workers etc) than other developed countries pay in taxes for their entire single payer health care. Thats how badly the private health care corporations fleece the taxpayer of America.
Keep in mind, a privatized health care system with user fees are far more regressive than a tax-funded system no matter how that money is raised, because in a tax funded system, the rich will always pay far more money into the system than the middle class and poor.
Well then it's up to the party in power to extend it just as they did with the Bush tax cuts even though Democrats claimed and b*tched for years that the Bush tax cuts was only for the rich.
But why accept an end date for individuals and not for corporations?
If corporations don't expand, don't raise wages why should they continue to receive incentives to do so.
I get it -- Trump fans want some kind of a win -- but at what price.
The deficit was a sore spot for 8 years and now it means nothing.
It's like people are willing to settle for garbage as long as it is their party selling it.
No country funds a national health care system simply through a VAT. Its almost always funded the way our own single payer Medicare is funded. In fact, we already pay more in taxes for our healthcare (Medicaid, VA, Medicare, healthcare for local and federal government workers etc) than other developed countries pay in taxes for their entire single payer health care. Thats how badly the private health care corporations fleece the taxpayer of America.
Keep in mind, a privatized health care system with user fees are far more regressive than a tax-funded system no matter how that money is raised, because in a tax funded system, the rich will always pay far more money into the system than the middle class and poor.
I can see why you gave the answer you did based on how I worded my post. What I meant (my understanding of one of IC's past points) is not that the VAT alone would fund a national healthcare system, but that a VAT at the proper rate added to what we have (except re our current sales tax....might be instead of) would allows for that funding.
Another point that has been brought up in past threads is that the U.S. (except for a salary exemption which I think is now about 102k per year) taxes citizens on worldwide income even if you live outside the U.S., and is one of very few countries (2 total, IIRC) that does so, and the other (Eritrea) assesses 2% to citizens living abroad. Wealthy Swedish citizens who don't need earned income can choose to live in a lower tax or no tax locale and, if they follow the rules, avoid the high Swedish income tax.
The announcer broke in on another topic to show a video, apparently live, where he said the Senate had just passed the Tax Reform Bill pushed by President Trump and most Republicans. He said the vote was 51 for, 48 against. Naturally all Democrats voted against it. John McCain (R-AZ) was absent, having gone back to Arizona to recover from his recent cancer surgery.
I see you are on the West Coast. I just couldn't stay up that late. I'm interested to see how the stock market will finish today (Wednesday).
But why accept an end date for individuals and not for corporations?
If corporations don't expand, don't raise wages why should they continue to receive incentives to do so.
I get it -- Trump fans want some kind of a win -- but at what price.
The deficit was a sore spot for 8 years and now it means nothing.
It's like people are willing to settle for garbage as long as it is their party selling it.
Dylan Ratigan made a point during a discussion on CNN on Tuesday that is sort of related to the bolded. He pointed out that it is fine to give such incentives to corporations, but only if they commit to use that capital they would then have access to (re not going toward taxes) in an agreed upon manner that would promote expansion, wage growth, and other such desired effects.
Great news for the American people. Bad news for Democrats!
Austan Goolsbee on Hannity tonight, former Barack Obama Admin. wonk and Democrat Party loudmouth, was just laughable. Claims Republican's will regret this! LOL Don't think so, but the Democrats may regret not supporting it in 2018 and 2020! Too bad, too sad.
Here is a link to median incomes for different countries. They work far less hours, have far better tax funded services, a much stronger safety net and still about the same income as in America (which does not have to be spent on massive health care bills, child care or living on the streets because of disability). They dont have lower standard of living:
However you want to frame it, the middle class in Western European countries (including Scandinavia) have less disposable income and a lower standard of living than the US middle class, because they've accepted paying much higher taxes and therefore having a lower standard of living in exchange for access to more government services.
If you think the US middle class would accept a lower standard of living in exchange for access to more government services, work on that behalf.
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.
