• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2016 |OT3| You know what they say about big Michigans - big Florida

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Mael

Member
pigeon said:
I think this is false for a couple of reasons, most notably because my yearly benefit allocation tells me exactly what the cash value of my healthcare plan is. I can assure you that most of the people I have worked with are very sensitive to variations in healthcare plans precisely because it is compensation.
Click to expand...

Actually I just checked, I have access to that information.
Company pays nearly 4 times what I pay for insurance.
I highly doubt that this would be something they would pay me if insurance was provided directly...then again another system where a benefit is paid partially by the company and the employee in France is usually given directly to the employee if the benefit isn't provided to the employee.
I don't trust corporations enough to do that though.
e: tldr : You're right, I was wrong on this and you may be right in your general point although I don't trust them that far.
 
U

User 463088

Banned
Isn't the idea under the Bernie plan that the 6.7% that the company would be taxed would take the vast majority of what they currently pay as their portion of the health care premium?
 
M

Mael

Member
Going back on the Bernie calculator, if I didn't pay the healthcare and IRS increased my taxes with the Bernie amount.
It would be a net loss for me of an amount that is roughly twice I would pay in France as a net tax.
If the company amount is paid to me, it's a significant net gain.
I don't like gambling though.
 
T

Tubie

Member
Enter the Dragon Punch said:
PgZtz0j.gif
Click to expand...

That's pretty good lol.
 
P

pigeon

Banned
shinra-bansho said:
I think reiterating the two problems with translating cost savings into wage growth are that:

The real cost savings aren't transparent to the employee. They may not know the actual value of their health plan, despite ascribing some "value" to in the market for employment.

And the competitive advantage offered may be due to penalty on other non-providing employers. State provision of healthcare would level this playing field. Intuitively this would mean employers find new ways to differentiate, but I don't know if that actually necessitates wage growth, particularly at equal value to what is lost to employees so that they receive a net benefit from the change.

They could actually just continue to offer private health benefits actually, now that I think about it.
Click to expand...

Sure, that's true (although the value of private benefits would be significantly lessened).

In general I am probably arguing a little too much in the mechanistic, assume all corporations are a perfect sphere kind of way. My argument can probably be summarized as "the labor market is very efficient."

On the other hand, I feel like the counterarguments have mainly been some combination of "employees are dumb" and "corporations are evil," which I would summarize as "the labor market is not very efficient."

So we have successfully reduced the issue to an unsolvable question! I am happy to stipulate a very high level of inefficiency in the labor market from class to class -- but it's harder for me to accept much inefficiency inside specific jobs.

To put that another way, it's clear that there's no particular fairness in the wage difference between a computer programmer and a Wal-Mart greeter. That's why I want a basic income! But I think it is harder to argue that a computer programmer who is being underpaid in terms of wages and other compensation is not going to eventually know they're being underpaid and try to find another job, and that's mainly why I would argue that that computer programmer is going to notice if we suddenly get single-payer healthcare, their taxes go up, but their company doesn't give them a raise instead of the private insurance they no longer need.
 
S

shinra-bansho

Member
pigeon said:
Sure, that's true (although the value of private benefits would be significantly lessened).

In general I am probably arguing a little too much in the mechanistic, assume all corporations are a perfect sphere kind of way. My argument can probably be summarized as "the labor market is very efficient."

On the other hand, I feel like the counterarguments have mainly been some combination of "employees are dumb" and "corporations are evil," which I would summarize as "the labor market is not very efficient."

So we have successfully reduced the issue to an unsolvable question! I am happy to stipulate a very high level of inefficiency in the labor market from class to class -- but it's harder for me to accept much inefficiency inside specific jobs.

To put that another way, it's clear that there's no particular fairness in the wage difference between a computer programmer and a Wal-Mart greeter. That's why I want a basic income! But I think it is harder to argue that a computer programmer who is being underpaid in terms of wages and other compensation is not going to eventually know they're being underpaid and try to find another job, and that's mainly why I would argue that that computer programmer is going to notice if we suddenly get single-payer healthcare, their taxes go up, but their company doesn't give them a raise instead of the private insurance they no longer need.
Click to expand...
But, and correct me if I'm wrong, I think you're assuming efficiency means that the distribution goes to the employees, when there are other parties to whom any gains can be distributed, or increased earnings can be retained and reinvested.

On the latter part, I don't think the argument is necessarily that there's no wage growth as a result of reduced costs to employers; but rather that (1) the distribution of reduced costs is not going to wholly go to employees in the short or long run and (2) the wage growth that does occur may be insufficient to offset increased personal taxation that pays for their new coverage via a public system.

(Also, I don't know if I'd use the word fairness, but the difference in wage between those two groups is simple in terms of the degree to which supply can be met. It's like when we talk about CEO pay. Although that's a whole different discussion.)
 
N

NYCmetsfan

Banned
Frank the Great said:
Bernie's tax plan is political suicide and terrible policy. Can't believe people hype him up so much. He is more DOA in a general election than Trump is.
Click to expand...
How is it terrible policy? To pay for improvements to government services taxes need to be raised. I thought we were in agreement during the Bush tax cut extension debate? He went about it in a horrible way though.

He stated flatly that taxes were going to go up then AFTERWARDS, in a very confusing way, said that people overall would be paying less.

That a horrible message because people only pay attention to the first part.

The way single payer should be sold (I'm actually coming around to the idea single payer isn't the best for the US and shouldn't be the goal for the US but this is for arguments sake) is:

"We're going to eliminate private insurance premiums, if you monthly get money taken out of your paycheck and it's sent to United that's over. We'll expand Medicare to every American with its high quality coverage. To pay for that we'll institute a fee that is SUBSTANTIALLY lower than current premiums. Americans will pay less and receive the same or better care at your current doctor."

I'm not a speechwriter but you don't mention taxes, because payroll taxes aren't really the same thing as income they tend to fund services and function more like fees.

It's just frustrated me his people botched that all much. It's likely why he's losing the health care question to Clinton.

Liberals need to refund things, especially debates about taxes and government programs as positives to fight back against the attacks on the welfare state
 
F

FiggyCal

Banned
They did the "self-described" thing when they were introducing Noam Chomsky as a socialist. I don't ever see them doing that same thing for other political ideologies. Like 'self-described conservative" or "self-described liberal", etc.
 
H

Hilbert

Deep into his 30th decade
FiggyCal said:
They did the "self-described" thing when they were introducing Noam Chomsky as a socialist. I don't ever see them doing that same thing for other political ideologies. Like 'self-described conservative" or "self-described liberal", etc.
Click to expand...

Call the wrong person a socialist when they don't think of themselves that way, and they might get pretty upset.
 
N

NYCmetsfan

Banned
shinra-bansho said:
But you're not going to eliminate the private insurance industry.

There's a well-regulated private insurance industry in Australia, despite a universal Medicare system.

And as to whether or not you'll receive the same or better care, well that's up for discussion, but I don't think that's an easy sell regardless.

That's the crux of the apprehension though that this sort of change has for those already covered. They know what they have now. They don't know what they're getting in exchange for it, in terms of net change in income as well as the provision of care.
Click to expand...

Like I said I'm not really for a Medicare for all type system only but more so trying to talk about how Sanders botches the raising taxes point.
 
U

User 406

Banned
Makai said:
Is anyone still a Democrat after using the calculator? :U
Click to expand...

Sure, I'll pay the Hillary subscription fee, $30-50 per year sounds like a pretty good deal for a progressive Supreme Court.


adam387 said:
Our local news talking about how Cleveland is going to roll out red carpet for the RNC.

Bitch, that carpet gonna be white, but they'll make it red with their blood.
Click to expand...

Motherfuckers gonna come here and enjoy the largesse of our local tax dollars and try to tell us the government is wasteful and that we shouldn't be paying taxes for stupid bullshit. >:|


On the tax thing, setting aside economic arguments for how the costs and benefits shake out, it's pretty contradictory to assert that wealth inequality is the main problem facing the country, and then propose a regressive tax to pay for a new program. The whole point of wealth redistribution is to, y'know, actually redistribute it.
 
M

Macho Madness

Member
I'm baffled what I'm witnessing on All In tonight. Ben Jealous shouts half truths about Bernie and then a Muslim Sanders supporter criticized Obama for only visiting a mosque this year when Bernie has visited several. Without a hint of irony or context as to why that last part might be a problem.
 
S

shinra-bansho

Member
Sea Manky said:
On the tax thing, setting aside economic arguments for how the costs and benefits shake out, it's pretty contradictory to assert that wealth inequality is the main problem facing the country, and then propose a regressive tax to pay for a new program. The whole point of wealth redistribution is to, y'know, actually redistribute it.
Click to expand...
Somewhat related pet peeve, I don't really like the conflating of wealth distribution and income stagnation even though they interact.
 
F

Frank the Great

Banned
NYCmetsfan said:
How is it terrible policy? To pay for improvements to government services taxes need to be raised. I thought we were in agreement during the Bush tax cut extension debate? He went about it in a horrible way though.

He stated flatly that taxes were going to go up then AFTERWARDS, in a very confusing way, said that people overall would be paying less.

That a horrible message because people only pay attention to the first part.

The way single payer should be sold (I'm actually coming around to the idea single payer isn't the best for the US and shouldn't be the goal for the US but this is for arguments sake) is:

"We're going to eliminate private insurance premiums, if you monthly get money taken out of your paycheck and it's sent to United that's over. We'll expand Medicare to every American with its high quality coverage. To pay for that we'll institute a fee that is SUBSTANTIALLY lower than current premiums. Americans will pay less and receive the same or better care at your current doctor."

I'm not a speechwriter but you don't mention taxes, because payroll taxes aren't really the same thing as income they tend to fund services and function more like fees.

It's just frustrated me his people botched that all much. It's likely why he's losing the health care question to Clinton.

Liberals need to refund things, especially debates about taxes and government programs as positives to fight back against the attacks on the welfare state
Click to expand...

I just think it's terrible policy to raise taxes that much on the middle class. I think it would drastically depress consumer spending and could send the economy into a depression. Lightening the load for college students would do nothing to offset that.

Not everyone is as liberal as you. I think raising taxes that much is both political suicide and a disastrous policy.

He should have just proposed military cuts or something. Or at least just raise taxes on the rich. Or both. What he's proposing is just crazy.
 
M

Makai

Member
That calculator makes Trump's chances seem a lot greater, too. Several thousand dollar tax cut for median earner under Trump. Tax increase under Clinton. Wooeee.
 
K

kirblar

Member
Frank the Great said:
I just think it's terrible policy to raise taxes that much on the middle class. I think it would drastically depress consumer spending and could send the economy into a depression. Lightening the load for college students would do nothing to offset that.

Not everyone is as liberal as you. I think raising taxes that much is both political suicide and a disastrous policy.

He should have just proposed military cuts or something. Or at least just raise taxes on the rich. Or both. What he's proposing is just crazy.
Click to expand...
I concur.

The last thing you want to be doing is implementing any sort of regressive taxation.

I don't see huge net benefits - free college? public health care? We have serious issues with both of these- but his solutions aren't good. Government-subsidized higher education is a massive source of the inflation that's occurred in college tuition - we obviously need to fix things, but pumping more government money into an inflating system isn't the way to do it.
 
N

noshten

Member
Macho Madness said:
I'm baffled what I'm witnessing on All In tonight. Ben Jealous shouts half truths about Bernie and then a Muslim Sanders supporter criticized Obama for only visiting a mosque this year when Bernie has visited several. Without a hint of irony or context as to why that last part might be a problem.
Click to expand...

Perhaps she has reasons to be displeased with Obama at the moment:

The Obama Administration Prepares for Mass Deportation of Muslims

Immigration authorities have begun transporting South Asian detainees to Florence, Arizona, as a staging ground for impending mass deportation. Many of the Muslim migrants from Bangladesh being transported were participants in the #Freedomgiving hunger strikes at the end of 2015 that roiled a dozen detention centers across the country and brought attention to the prolonged, unjustified, and discriminatory detention of Muslim and South Asian migrants.

One of the detainees, who gave a name of Manik and is scheduled to be deported as well, said that “they are gathering all of us here from across the different jails, but none of the men here want to be sent back. Most are terrified and crying about what will happen to them if they are sent back.”

As Candidates Trump and Cruz stir anti-Muslim sentiment calling for the surveillance, ban, and deportation of Muslims — the Department of Homeland Security under the Obama Administration is already racially profiling and discriminating against Muslim migrants, by holding detainees for indefinite and extended periods of time, setting unusually high bond amounts, and now preparing to deport Muslim detainees en masse to their potential deaths.

“It is alarming that the State Department is getting involved in matters of immigration, detention, and deportation, and so recklessly jeopardizing the lives of asylum-seeking migrants who are escaping repressive and dangerous conditions,” said Fahd Ahmed, Executive Director of DRUM (Desis Rising Up & Moving). DRUM has coordinated hunger strikes and advocacy efforts for the detainees over the last 6 months. He added that “their lives have been further endangered by the mishandling of their cases and confidential information by the U.S. government.”

In violation of international law, the names and personal information of the detainees were given to the Bangladeshi government by the U.S. Embassy in Bangladesh, and their names were then leaked and published by the Bangladeshi media. And in violation of their own protocols, the detainees may be expelled despite being witnesses and victims to civil rights violations that are under open investigation by the Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties within DHS.

“While many have rightfully condemned the anti-Muslim rhetoric spewed during ongoing presidential campaigns, our current policies are just as terrifying. We call on the State Department and DHS to immediately halt these deportations and for administration officials to end these policies that single out Muslim migrants,” adds Linda Sarsour, Director of MPower Change.

Activists raise grave concerns for the men’s safety and have begun using the hashtag #Deported2Death to highlight the consequence of their potential removals and are calling on the State Department and Department of Homeland Security to cancel their removals and allow them to pursue their asylum claims.
Click to expand...

http://blogs.ilw.com/entry.php?9106...tion-Prepares-for-Mass-Deportation-of-Muslims
 
S

Suikoguy

I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
Tesseract said:
Wow president Obama what the fuck is this, dewd

:/

This deserves its own thread, right?
Click to expand...

Isn't that exactly what you would want?
I honestly have no idea why they let your troll character continue.
 
S

Suikoguy

I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
Also, what the fuck kind of website is that? Clicking on their "sources" does nothing to validate the claims made in the article.
 
M

Macho Madness

Member
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher
338 339 340 341 342
17K
2M
UselessNapkin replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
395 396 397 398 399
20K
2M
RDreamer replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT4| The leaks are coming from inside the white house
396 397 398 399 400
20K
2M
ShironRedshift replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT3| 13 Treasons Why
393 394 395 396 397
20K
2M
Zaraki_Kenpachi replied
  • Locked
Poligaf 2017 |OT| It Almost Isn't Fair
9
4K
Bonen no Max'd replied
Top Bottom