Health care

I read this last month. I think it's an interesting analogy;

An economics professor gives his students a stark lesson in socialism:

An economics professor at Texas Tech said he had never failed a single student, but had once failed an entire class.
The students insisted that socialism worked since no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer. The professor then said, “OK, we will have an experiment in this class on socialism.”
“All grades will be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade.”
After the first test the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who had studied hard were upset while the students who had studied very little were happy.
But, as the second test rolled around, the students who had studied little studied even less and the ones who had studied hard decided that since they couldn’t make an A, they also studied less. The second Test average was a D.
No one was happy. When the 3rd test rolled around the average grade was an F.
The scores never increased as bickering, blame, name calling, all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for anyone else.
To their great surprise all failed. The professor told them that socialism would ultimately fail because the harder people try to succeed the greater their reward (capitalism) but when a government takes all the reward away (socialism) no one will try or succeed.

Eric, when you say "tax the rich", how much?

Another story, sorry so long.

Our Tax System Explained:

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten
comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it
would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that’s what they decided to do.

The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the
arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. ‘Since you are
all such good customers,’ he said, ‘I’m going to reduce the cost of your
daily beer by $20.’ Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the
first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But
what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they
divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his ‘fair share?’
They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted
that from everybody’s share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would
each end up being paid to drink his beer.

So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man’s
bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the
amounts each should pay.

And so:
The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).
The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued
to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to
compare their savings.

‘I only got a dollar out of the $20,’declared the sixth man. He pointed
to the tenth man,’ but he got $10!’
‘Yeah, that’s right,’ exclaimed the fifth man. ‘I only saved a dollar,
too. It’s unfair that he got ten times more than I got’ ‘That’s true!!’
shouted the seventh man. ‘Why should he get $10 back when I got only
two? The wealthy get all the breaks!’
‘Wait a minute,’ yelled the first four men in unison. ‘We didn’t get
anything at all. The system exploits the poor!’
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks so the nine sat
down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill,
they discovered something important. They didn’t have enough money
between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, ladies and gentlemen, journalists and college professors, is
how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the
most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for
being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they
might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics
University of Georgia

For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.

I was born and raised in the South, but, I had the opportunities to spend much time in the Northeast. From my experiences, it is a self annointed, entitled, mentality. A few examples....all for gun control, excempt for my personal bodyguard; all for wind power excempt not in our backyard; they can tell you all about race relations except they dont have one minority in their county, including Jews or Italians! Put them in your Country Club NOT ours! And....My #1 Northeast liberal pet peeve: They have regulated, unionized, taxed, and totally screwed up their area of the country, then decide to move South and tell us how it is done on Long Island! They really crack me up. I have to laugh and tell them, we didn't ask for your advice, blessing, or company.

Phosper, what I do with my money is my business, not the gvts. If I want to give it away, great. If I want to hord it, great. Yes, our founding fathers did expect a certain amount of tax to defend us, provide infrastructure, etc. It said nothing about education, retirement, healthcare, mandating purchasing a product from a private business, etc.

Why should I do all the work and the government make half the money? When I add up taxes, I am close to fifty percent. Yes, that includes taxes on telephone service, cell service, property tax, gas, sales tax, utility bill tax...this could go on and on. I just prefer to be left alone, and what ever income I get I would rather spend it locally, then send it to liberal do-gooders, who dont have a clue about hardwork, sacrifice, and perservereance. They are only concerned with building and ensuring their own personal wealth.

What we need in this country is jobs. We need to make stuff. We need to exploit our natural resources, we need to focus more on jobs and less on spotted owls and Delta smelt!

phospher wrote: You may say, "yeah, but my premiums will go up" hate to break it to you but they were all ready going up and have been going up damn near forever.

why is that exactly?? anyone??

MI-nick wrote: phospher wrote: You may say, "yeah, but my premiums will go up" hate to break it to you but they were all ready going up and have been going up damn near forever. why is that exactly?? anyone??

It is b/c we already have universal healthcare for the unisured. Check out your local ER any day of the week. Hospitals shift the costs from the nonpayers to the payers. The thought behind mandating insurance for everyone, will be all folks will have skin in the game, and everyone will be paying something. That sounds good until you realize that the gvt is hiring 17K IRS agents to make sure everyone has a qualified plan, and the amount you pay for a premium will be based on how much you earn! The rest will be subsidized by the taxpayers....after the gvt pencil pushers get their cut, and of course exempt themselves from the mandate. Oh, and if you have a good plan, and aren't in a Union then you get a tax for having too good of insurance!

Phil,

You misquoted one thing...

"Money is the root of all evil"...

is actually...

Love of money is the root of all evil.

Coveting money as your "god" will drive you to many evil things, greed being one of them. Standing up for the right to keep the money you earned from being stolen from the government doesn't really fall into that category.

The Bible talks about giving to others and helping others. This should be done as goodwill, not forced. The Bible also talks about giving Caesar what is Caesar's which basically means to pay your taxes and contribute to society.

Government is a very inefficient way to help people. You will also notice that the more social programs go into effect, administered by the government, the less true help people get. At some point we have to take a stand against what we feel is wrong and detrimental to true humanitarianism.

For someone that thinks like you, more liberal, you might find that someday the country has gone too far down the wrong path and you may want to stand up to fight it. At that point you may find yourself looking around to find nobody left to stand with you. I remember reading a short story to that effect.

Getting a little philisophical here, but there's a trend I've noticed over the last 30-50 years. It seems to me like we are supposed to feel guilty about being successful and that being successful is unfair. So, to help feel less guilty and to help those less fortunate, we're going to redistribute wealth.

We have several good programs where we pay for a service through taxes, like roads, but there are tons of social programs that do nothing more than redistribute the wealth.

How many of you feel guilty that you make good money, drive a nice car, live in a nice house, have plenty of food and clothing, have good health care, and even can have a little fun with spending money, while Joe Poorman is lucky to have a place to live or get a decent meal?

How many feel like you must have gotten much better opportunities than him and it's your "duty" to help him?

How many feel like having the government implement and control the program is the most effective method to help poor Joe?

My personal view is kind of a WWJD type response. Do we see examples of Jesus giving people hand outs or helping them learn to better themselves.

The old give a man a fish, teach a man to fish idea.

I'm by no means an expert, but I am an employer (partnership) in the construction industry, and has not laid an employee off since 1982. We pay our employees health care, roughly $17,000 a year per employee with a family. With what I've read, our company could end this program, and pay around $3000 (penalty) per employee per year. Does that make sense? Please correct me if I'm wrong.
BTW, we would never think to do that. But with the rules changing, who knows?

Riley wrote: Phil I very seldom listen to Rush Limbaugh or any conservative talk radio. I did used to listen to Air America ie Al Franken and Randy Moss. What you libs don't get is conservative talk radio is popular because a lot of people really think like that. I find it boring because it's nothing new to me. I'd rather listen to music. I had you pegged for a liberal in the religeous thread. Easy to spot the attitude. Answer this: Why are the politicians exempt from the plan? Are they going to be taxed on their Cadillac plans?

Q: Does the health care bill specifically exempt members of Congress and their staffs from its provisions?

A: No. This twisted claim is based on misrepresentations of the House and Senate bills, neither of which exempts lawmakers.

We’ve received many questions about claims that House and Senate members would be exempt from the health care legislation taking shape in Congress. But neither the House nor the Senate bill exempts Congress from its provisions.

Members of Congress are subject to the legislation’s mandate to have insurance, and the plans available to them must meet the same minimum benefit standards that other insurance plans will have to meet. "All plans would have to follow those requirements by 2019," Aaron Albright, press secretary for the House Committee on Education and Labor, told FactCheck.org. "People actually believe we wrote in the bill that Congress exempts itself from these requirements. That falsehood has been going around since the very beginning."   continue reading at: http://www.factcheck.org/2010/01/congress-exempt-from-health-bill/



Pegged me as a liberal in the religious forum ey? The attitude gave it away? Attitude can be misleading when you can't hear the tone of my voice. Well, I'm a registered independent, actually made the mistake of voting for Bush the first time around, am mainly against abortion, pro-guns, I support a progressive tax against millionaires and corporations. I am against outsourcing, against illegal aliens, believe that the government is controlled to much by corporate interests, am a bit of an environmentalist, am against the patriot act, am for the death penalty, I think we spend way too much money on defense, and am against free trade. That should give you more of an idea..

Guys, also wanted to let you know that there will be a very interesting debate on TV tonight. ABC Nightline Face-Off Does God Have a Future? Check it out: http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/FaceOff/nightline-face-off-god-future/story?id=10170505

23 employees.
I know there is an exemption. So if I no longer can afford to pay my employee's health care, I just don't? So then who fills in that "donut hole"?

Just for the record...

tullfooter wrote: Another story, sorry so long. Our Tax System Explained: Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this... David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D. Professor of Economics University of Georgia For those who understand, no explanation is needed. For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.

David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.

From http://davidk.myweb.uga.edu/

"Contrary to Internet folklore, Dr. Kamerschen is NOT the author of "Tax Cuts: A Simple Lesson in Economics" or “Bar Stool Economics” or anything similar to that. Additionally, he does NOT know who wrote it and he has no opinion on its merits."

emccallum, your opinions are a bit extreme. Like Michael Moore of the left and Glen Beck on the right. I'm sure you will be fine..It's more the principal for you right? You don't actually think your going to go broke right?

phospher wrote: Riley wrote: Answer this: Why are the politicians exempt from the plan? Are they going to be taxed on their Cadillac plans? Q: Does the health care bill specifically exempt members of Congress and their staffs from its provisions? A: No. This twisted claim is based on misrepresentations of the House and Senate bills, neither of which exempts lawmakers. We’ve received many questions about claims that House and Senate members would be exempt from the health care legislation taking shape in Congress. But neither the House nor the Senate bill exempts Congress from its provisions.

It is actually the Staff writers that exempted themselves from the bill.
Wonder what they know..
Link

phospher wrote: I just got a grand idea.... Tax the churches! "We are not talking chump change here. Consider that for every tax dollar a religious organization does not pay, you and I pay it on its behalf. Many are among the wealthiest organizations in the world: by 1971, the amount of real and personal property owned by U.S. churches was approx. $110 billion. In New York City alone, the amount was $3 billion in 1989. A 1986 estimate showed religious income in that year of approx. $100 billion, or about five times the income of the five largest corporations in the U.S. All tax free".

Well, I cringe as I write this. I'll probably join you Phospher on the public enemy list for this website, but nonetheless . . .

Morally, I have less issue with this idea than I do with the continuing efforts to take more and more from "the wealthiest" Americans.

BKH

You know what GM stands for after the stimulus package they accepted.. "Goverment Motors"..