• 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 2017 |OT4| The leaks are coming from inside the white house

Status
Not open for further replies.
K

kirblar

Member
Snowman Prophet of Doom said:
As part of a Medicare for All package, employers should be required to publish to their employees how much they have been paying them in the form of health insurance, required to pay them at least X% of that sum in the form of future wages, and fined if they don't comply with either of these measures.

Single-payer is about getting people to buy into a narrative as much as a policy.
Click to expand...
You need to do that before pushing that far.

It's a very good idea to raise awareness though.
 
P

Poodlestrike

Banned
NYCmetsfan said:
medicare for all is simpler to sell. it'd see medicare covered services expand
Click to expand...

See, I thought we were talking ideas, not branding.

Snowman Prophet of Doom said:
As part of a Medicare for All package, employers should be required to publish to their employees how much they have been paying them in the form of health insurance, required to pay them at least X% of that sum in the form of future wages, and fined if they don't comply with either of these measures.

Single-payer is about getting people to buy into a narrative as much as a policy.
Click to expand...

This would definitely be a good step, yeah.
 
F

Fenderputty

Banned
NYCmetsfan said:
a medicare for all system would reduce prices due to increased negotiating power or rate setting. private insurers can't do that they don't hold a monopoly. this would decrease the cost charged that private insurers now have to charge through premiums.
Click to expand...

I understand how a monopsony would lower prices via negotiation. What I'm missing is, how does the initial implementation not lift my monthly burdon if my employer doesn't give me their portion of their contribution back to me as income?
 
S

Snowman Prophet of Doom

Member
kirblar said:
You need to do that before pushing that far.

It's a very good idea to raise awareness though.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I edited my post to reflect my realization that financial disclosure about how much is spent on health insurance needs to predate the push for universal healthcare. Have it be a separate form, or something in big bold letters on your W2.
 
W

whyamihere

Banned
hahaha I had no idea Trump was going to Poland first and the Law & Justice Party is busing people in to Warsaw.

OF COURSE HE DID. LAW & JUSTICE PARTY IS THE WORST.
 
G

Gallbaro

Banned
Fenderputty said:
I understand how a monopsony would lower prices via negotiation. What I'm missing is, how does the initial implementation not lift my monthly burdon if my employer doesn't give me their portion of their contribution back to me as income?
Click to expand...
Because the likely additional tax revenue for such an expansion would be payroll tax. Basically more income you do not see.
 
S

SatelliteOfLove

Member
Grexeno said:
"Holy shit everything is awful LOOK OVER THERE IT'S HILLARY CLINTON DON'T YOU HATE HER"
Click to expand...

By this time next year, a poll of GOP voters will have 29% believing the federal government is Dem controlled and HRC is president.

ArkhamFantasy said:
Fox and Friends told me that democrats should stop talking about Russia because it hurts them.

My takeaway: Democrats should definitely keep talking about Russia.
Click to expand...

I wanna hope someone is looking into who is booking or ordering these shills talking this mess, the "collusion is alright with me", and "cray cray ain't so cray cray", cuz they're acting as if rumors are facts before they are revealed as facts, hint hint.
 
W

whyamihere

Banned
waaaaaaaaaaah

http://chapelboro.com/news/state-news/poll-shows-tillis-health-care-repeal-unpopular-nc

Over half of voters in North Carolina disapprove of the Senate Republicans health care repeal bill, according to a recent poll by Public Policy Polling.

Nearly half of voters claim that Senator Thom Tillis’ support of the repeal would make them less likely to vote to re-elect him in 2020, as opposed to 28 percent of voters who said it would make them more likely to vote to re-elect Tillis.

The poll shows that as of now, Thom Tillis would narrowly lose re-election by four points to “his Democratic opponent.”

Healthcare is certainly a large factor in this, as 80 percent of voters claim that it is either the most important or a very important issue.

North Carolina was polled on the issue along with Colorado and Iowa because the three states are now all represented by Republican Senators but had Democratic Senators prior to 2014, according to a release from Save My Care – an organization that commissioned the poll.

The release also shows that 53 percent of voters would rather fix the Affordable Care Act instead of repeal it.

Although Donald Trump won North Carolina by four points in November’s presidential election, the poll shows his disapproval rate has reached 50 percent in the state.
Click to expand...
 
S

Suikoguy

I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
Fenderputty said:
What are the arguments for or against using a payroll tax for healthcare?
Click to expand...

Payroll taxes are literally moving away from a Universal Basic Income.
We will need to tax those who benefit from the means of automation, not those who work.

Then again, I hate the idea of payroll taxes in general, it's far more effective to put those costs on those who benefit via income tax and capital gains taxes.

Payroll taxes make US businesses less competitive, unnecessarily.

Edit: I should clarify, the idea of payroll taxes where businesses pay part of it.

whyamihere said:
waaaaaaaaaaah

http://chapelboro.com/news/state-news/poll-shows-tillis-health-care-repeal-unpopular-nc
Click to expand...

I read that website as ChapelBro
 
S

Spoiled Milk

Banned
NYCmetsfan said:
a medicare for all system would reduce prices due to increased negotiating power or rate setting. private insurers can't do that they don't hold a monopoly. this would decrease the cost charged that private insurers now have to charge through premiums.
Click to expand...
All-payer rate setting

Fenderputty said:
I understand how a monopsony would lower prices via negotiation. What I'm missing is, how does the initial implementation not lift my monthly burdon if my employer doesn't give me their portion of their contribution back to me as income?
Click to expand...
companies want to keep you as an employee and so they have to offer you a higher wage to compete with the other companies that are also wealthier now

but neither employer nor employee would like this scenario. if they're getting their extra money in the form of taxable income instead of untaxable healthcare benefits then they lose. if companies get less they can deduct on their own taxes (paying for employee healthcare is deductible, right?) then they are also losing.
 
F

Fenderputty

Banned
Suikoguy said:
Payroll taxes are literally moving away from a Universal Basic Income.
We will need to tax those who benefit from the means of automation, not those who work.

Then again, I hate the idea of payroll taxes in general, it's far more effective to put those costs on those who benefit via income tax and capital gains taxes.

Payroll taxes make US businesses less competitive, unnecessarily.
Click to expand...

The bolded is kind of what I was getting at. One of the negatives of our system is that healthcare is tied to labor and it's something I thought we wanted to rectify. Are there any other payment proposals or just a payroll tax?
 
T

teiresias

Member
Snowman Prophet of Doom said:
As part of a Medicare for All package, employers should be required to publish to their employees how much they have been paying them in the form of health insurance, required to pay them at least X% of that sum in the form of future wages, and fined if they don't comply with either of these measures.

Single-payer is about getting people to buy into a narrative as much as a policy.

Edit: In fact, you could do the first thing right now, allow time for the sentiment of how much people are "losing" on employer-provided health insurance to percolate.
Click to expand...

Easiest way would be for the IRS to require the employer contribution to be in the W-2 each year I'd imagine.
 
P

Poodlestrike

Banned
Aaron Strife said:
This was posted a few days ago along with Colorado and Iowa. Gardner's re-elect numbers are complete shit (he's a bigger goner than Heller if they hold up), but unfortunately it looks like Ernst will be sticking around for a while.
Click to expand...

Ernst is baffling to me. All I know about her is that she used to castrate pigs for a living. Other than that one really mediocre ass State of the Union I feel like she's avoided stepping into the public eye.
 
P

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
NYCmetsfan said:
its the most frustrating thing when we discuss single payer. STICKER SHOCK, HUGE TAX INCREASE!



medicare for all is simpler to sell. it'd see medicare covered services expand
Click to expand...

Except that is guaranteed to be how most Americans react if the plan was ever enacted. There would have to be some law that businesses would have to convert insurance costs into wages or else it would be a colossal disaster. Given the freedom, companies would assuredly pocket the difference.
 
A

Aaron Strife

Banned
Poodlestrike said:
Ernst is baffling to me. All I know about her is that she used to castrate pigs for a living. Other than that one really mediocre ass State of the Union I feel like she's avoided stepping into the public eye.
Click to expand...
I just can't believe how fucking bonkers Iowa and Wisconsin went after Obama elected compared to the other Midwestern states. Michigan and Pennsylvania were close enough in 2016 to dismiss Trump winning them as a bit of a fluke (plus 2014 at least held us a Senate seat in MI and flipped Pennsylvania's governorship so there's clearly a limit even in bad Dem years), but WI, while close has done nothing to curb Walker's madness and turned their back on Feingold while IA has gone full stupid. Something in the water, indeed.
 
S

studyguy

Member
DEAWZnLUAAAq2Uh.jpg
Click to expand...
dank
 
D

Diablos

Member
PBY said:
First of all, its not funny.

Second, it reinforces all the negative shit that people say about the leadership and fundamentally does not inspire any confidence in me that they are capable of effective messaging.
Click to expand...

Seriously, first thing that crossed my mind

They can do better.
 
P

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
O

Ogodei

Member
Fenderputty said:
The bolded is kind of what I was getting at. One of the negatives of our system is that healthcare is tied to labor and it's something I thought we wanted to rectify. Are there any other payment proposals or just a payroll tax?
Click to expand...

The payroll tax is more politically acceptable in the short term, i'd argue. The employer tax is paid by your employer, even though that de facto eats away at your salary because a higher tax means lower salary because the employer doesn't want to pay more overall.

*However*, since the employer also pays the lion's share of the health benefits, a single-payer system funded mostly by payroll tax and partially by a negligible tax hike could be engineered to be a net zero for median earners.

Let's take an average-ish earner of $36000, or $3000/mo (for easy math). 15% payroll tax, or $450, and a $750/mo employer share insurance premium, with a $60/mo employee premium share (2% of income). Overall that means your employer pays 40% more than what you see on your paycheck. So a payroll tax hike of another 15% would actually save the employer money in this case, and *maybe* pass through to the employee as new income. Meanwhile, a 1% income tax increase at all brackets would, for this earner, be $30/mo back in their pocket, assuming that the premium went away.

You'd make up money on the fact that it would scale at the higher end, so your C-suite executive making $30,000/mo, but whose insurance would still only cost the company $750/mo, now costs the company $9,000/mo in payroll instead of $5,250 for payroll plus insurance, and instead of a $60/month premium the high earner's paying $300/mo in new income taxes, but they can easily afford that, and because the premium goes away it's really only a $240 hit.

A low-wage earner of $24,000 a year would save the company money outright. $1,050/mo on this employee (for 15% payroll tax and $750 monthly premium), and $60/mo out of their take-home pay, suddenly becomes $600/mo in payroll taxes and $20/mo in new income taxes.

Essentially middle America would zero out, poor people would see reduced burdens, rich people would see higher burdens, but only people making above-median pay.

Obviously this is all napkin math, but you could set your payroll tax rate to that sweet spot where an average earner wouldn't notice the difference.
 
B

Blader

Member
VendettaRed07 said:
It isn't really optics for me. I think it's fair to call into question the judgement of whoever is in charge if they think they are in the position to sell off "jokes" like this.

They just suffered the most humiliating result ever and hold no position of power and a likely record low positions from dog catcher up.
Click to expand...

Well, have you seen the '72 or '84 maps? 49 RED STATES is pretty damn humiliating.
 
D

Dangansona

Member
What do you say to someone who says there is no evidence of Trump and Russia and that he doesn't trust the governmental agencies saying it happened?
 
S

shinra-bansho

Member
Haha good luck with compelling employers who were offering health incentives voluntarily as a USP to potential employees to have to provide mandatory pay increases based on that.
 
D

Dangansona

Member
PBY said:
I mean - what do you mean by evidence of "it"?
Click to expand...

Collusion I guess. I told him about the Photoshopped Time cover and how it's hypocritical of the fake news crier and then he said that's different than the media trying to undermine the presidency (along with referencing Veritas) and then when I said they aren't making it up he said there's no evidence.

So I don't know specifically.
 
H

Hyoukokun

Member
Dangansona said:
What do you say to someone who says there is no evidence of Trump and Russia and that he doesn't trust the governmental agencies saying it happened?
Click to expand...
Try to establish with them a standard of evidence that they would consider admissible. This may be hopeless if they dismiss all gov't sources out of hand, mind.
 
P

PBY

Banned
Dangansona said:
Collusion I guess. I told him about the Photoshopped Time cover and how it's hypocritical of the fake news crier and then he said that's different than the media trying to undermine the presidency (along with referencing Veritas) and then when I said they aren't making it up he said there's no evidence.

So I don't know specifically.
Click to expand...

The "it" is important, because unless I've missed a story (and someone will chime in here), there really isn't solid evidence of direct collusion. However, there is evidence that Russia tried to interfere in the election, and possible shady actions by Manafort, Page and Flynn.

Obstruction is a different matter, theres more there imo.
 
H

Holmes

Member
I like how the GOP asked if Hillary even had a health care plan, and when she tweeted it, some doosh made like a 6 tweet reply rant basically saying "UNLESS IT'S SINGLE PAYER, I DON'T CARE!!" like, that wasn't the point my good dude.
 
I

Ithil

Member
Dangansona said:
What do you say to someone who says there is no evidence of Trump and Russia and that he doesn't trust the governmental agencies saying it happened?
Click to expand...

Ask them who is it they do trust and why. Their answer will likely inform you the conversation is pointless.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Show us your gaming setup: 2024 Edition
2 3 4 5
238
45K
Hrk69 replied
  • Locked
Show us your gaming setup: 2023 Edition | 20th anniversary thread
2 3 4 5 6
268
59K
DGrayson replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher
338 339 340 341 342
17K
2M
UselessNapkin replied
How games prevent us from Crossing Map Boundaries? (2010 - 2020)
Analysis Trailer
2
1K
IbizaPocholo replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
395 396 397 398 399
20K
2M
RDreamer replied
Top Bottom