DragonSworne
Banned
Yes, and another 20% making slightly more will be taxed $9000+ more than they are now.
-
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.
Vox: Bernie Sanders's tax hikes are bigger than Donald Trump's tax cuts
- Thread starter noshten
- Start date
- Status
Yes, and another 20% making slightly more will be taxed $9000+ more than they are now.
Barajas_201
Member
I thought GAF was progressive. Hilary pundits act like this isn't how its done in Europe were they get free healthcare and college.
You'd also be getting free college, if that's still applicable to you. As for skipping signing up for health care, that's no longer an option, really, given the mandate. So the real question is, do you want to pay for sub-standard health care through the existing market, or would you rather pay higher taxes and get UHC and free college?
And, if it doesn't help you personally, does it matter to you that it should increase productivity in general, because people can now deal with illnesses before they become emergent? Or that it will improve the U.S. overall to guarantee free education?
If not, you should probably vote for someone else.
PlatypusDude
Member
I mean for the lower brackets its easily explained by the fact that stuff like health care, college, and other programs you normally pay out of pocket would be covered/subsidized by the government. However, trying to get something like this to fly in November where attack ads would just throw up the tax increase of this magnitude is a fool's errand.
strikeselect
You like me, you really really like me!
Seriously cringing read some posts here. It's all about ME ME ME ME. Society as a whole would benefit from these policies.
Gaf is progressive socially, but generally shies away from fiscal leftism
cpp_is_king
Member
I would, if I felt like my tax money would be spent efficiently.
Exactly. It's just not going to happen right now. All people will see are the numbers. No one will look at the details.
Also is this assuming healthcare costs stay the same? What's stopping them from jacking the premiums up?
it depends on who the person is. It may be a teacher or government employee that already has nearly free healthcare through an employer. This is one of the problems with how the ACA was sold, that it would be better for everyone.
The truth is it would be better for a lot and worse for some, but is in the best interest of the country. But you can't sell a plan saying it would be bad for some people unfortunately.
shadowfall
Member
Well this sucks for people living in California, New York and other expensive places. As it is things are expensive here. But our healthcare costs are no where as much as tax increase we will be seeing.
I really doubt this will be passed by Congress.
I really doubt this will be passed by Congress.
NoblesseOblige
Banned
I do want to pay more. But the fact of the matter is that I CANNOT afford the number it's asking for. Not until I'm able to find cheaper housing or eliminate my student debt anyway.
Edit:
I'm already graduated. Which is why I can't afford that tax increase. Too much student loan debt. Like I said above. I do want to contribute more. But this number is just too high for me. I can realistically pay up to $1000 extra a year. Anything else and I'm cutting into necessities.
DragonSworne
Banned
People have debt and mortgages to pay, and families to feed. $4000-9000 is significant. It means not being able to make a house payment.
I can see tens of millions of people having to default on current mortgages just from tax hikes alone.
This is also coupled with a minimum wage increase gradually to $15 by 2020.
So people who would be impacted the most would be those who are unemployed or are making minimum wage. Since healthcare will be a right to all - even those too poor to pay taxes for the service.
Also a lot of infrastructure needs to be repaired so situations like Flint are addressed ahead of effecting thousands and possibly hurting a community for decades. So if taxes are raised to actually address these needs which many communities might face in the next few years if there is no substantial investment into the country.
People with less than $1,000 in savings are actually not at most risk in the current system. You realize there are many people with debts that would drive them under in a month if they lose their employment - people at huge risk who can't afford health care as soon as they lose their job. These people need to be rescued and fuck you got mine is mentality just shows the true nature of people. Wouldn't you want in a worst case scenario to be at the very least be able to go to a doctor, people out there on the streets who can't get a physician, mothers who are pregnant and can't afford to have checkups....
So people who would be impacted the most would be those who are unemployed or are making minimum wage. Since healthcare will be a right to all - even those too poor to pay taxes for the service.
Also a lot of infrastructure needs to be repaired so situations like Flint are addressed ahead of effecting thousands and possibly hurting a community for decades. So if taxes are raised to actually address these needs which many communities might face in the next few years if there is no substantial investment into the country.
People with less than $1,000 in savings are actually not at most risk in the current system. You realize there are many people with debts that would drive them under in a month if they lose their employment - people at huge risk who can't afford health care as soon as they lose their job. These people need to be rescued and fuck you got mine is mentality just shows the true nature of people. Wouldn't you want in a worst case scenario to be at the very least be able to go to a doctor, people out there on the streets who can't get a physician, mothers who are pregnant and can't afford to have checkups....
I would love to pay extra on taxes and not have to deal with any medical emergencies that might bankrupt me. It would be a MASSIVE burden off my shoulders. Also not having to deal medical bills, out of network doctors even though the hospital is in my network, etc. would be a big stress relief.
Not having insurance tied to employment would probably mean that employers could hire more people or even pay people more. This is probably one of the best things about this plan. Having to be tied down to a job that you hate because it offers your family health insurance is awful.
Health care, even for those with insurance, is the #1 cause for bankruptcy. It might hurt a few people paying extra in taxes, but the benefits will far exceed any downsides of his plan.
Not having insurance tied to employment would probably mean that employers could hire more people or even pay people more. This is probably one of the best things about this plan. Having to be tied down to a job that you hate because it offers your family health insurance is awful.
Health care, even for those with insurance, is the #1 cause for bankruptcy. It might hurt a few people paying extra in taxes, but the benefits will far exceed any downsides of his plan.
Ziltoidia 9
Member
Tax cuts for the rich aren't going to lead to people getting higher wages or solve income inequality. The problem is just going to get worse and worse as the scale in the top 2 or 3% of the economy take more and more, leaving the huge number of masses to squabble. Mix that with the idea of "money = speech" and in 10 years you would have a system that provides next to no override from the majority of the population.
Don't want people to purpose these things? Then fix the economy.
Don't want people to purpose these things? Then fix the economy.
SlickShoesRUCrazy
Member
So, a tax plan similar to "When America Was Great" as the people on the right like to say.
Invest in the health and education of the future of this country + create jobs be investing in our crumbling infrastructure.
I'm cool with this.
But of course, it will never fly because of the "i got mine, fuck everybody else" mentality prevalent in this country.
Invest in the health and education of the future of this country + create jobs be investing in our crumbling infrastructure.
I'm cool with this.
But of course, it will never fly because of the "i got mine, fuck everybody else" mentality prevalent in this country.
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
All I can say is good luck.
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
oh come on. This is all assuming he somehow manages to pass free health care for all and free college for all. Which is NOT going to happen.
Secondly, free college for all does not apply to me anymore, but free health care will help me since i pay $6k per year in insurance. So $4.5k extra in taxes will actually be beneficial to me. but we all know thats not going to happen in this country.
You seem to not understand that making $50-$80k a year for families is NOT an easy living. you are still living paycheck to paycheck while paying off student loans, car loans, insurance, bills and other medical bills that pile the fuck up when you have kids. i cant send my son to daycare as it is, which means he is going to start off at a disadvantage to all the rich folks who were able to afford daycare for kids. Putting my $5k in the hole is fucking absurd.
Mass_Pincup
Banned
Some people are really against free healthcare?
Wow...
Wow...
Septimus Prime
Member
Yeah. It's distressing (but unsurprising) to see this type of reaction, but it explains a lot about Americans' priorities.
superdeluxe
Member
This, many do have good insurance through their employer, and while costs can vary, might nto be as high as those Tax increases.
The lament of a Bernie support.
The "fuck you, got mine" culture will be the death of this country.
God Dayumm
Banned
Ugh I thought Sanders was more progressive than "tax everyone lol!"
shoplifter
Member
Why not? What's stopping you from getting another degree?
Anybody who would not be happy is simply selfish and cold-hearted
shadowfall
Member
I guess I can finally do an MBA without worrying about the debt. Sounds good to me.
I'm all in for tax increase, but what's the point of taking that $1.6k from the lower bracket? That's very excessive increase to me.
Or maybe it speaks more to their personal financial situations than a lack of empathy for others.
DragonSworne
Banned
Few people? We are talking about 40% of this country.
That is 64million people if we limit it to people who pay income tax.
Rockandrollclown
lookwhatyou'vedone
If it includes free healthcare, I'd be saving money.
superdeluxe
Member
nhlducks35
Member
Neither tax plan will pass Congress so the point is moot
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
are you serious? kids, family, mortgage, food. who is going to raise my family? you?
Crimson_Fate
Member
When all of the Companies move out of the country and everyone looses their jobs we will all be in the lower tax bracket so I guess it works.
benicillin
Banned
You really can't just look at those numbers in a vacuum since the tax policy would be coupled with other progressive policies that would, theoretically, increase the prosperity and standard of living of most people in the country.
I'm still wondering how we will deal with the supply problem of colleges once prices are dropped to essentially free.
I'm perfectly and 100% ok with a $20K+ tax hike if it's for the best of the country. I don't think the best approach is to hike taxes of the bottom 40% of the distribution, however, and I don't see the clear connection between the timeline of the tax plan and the timeline of resolving the institutional and supply issues of both education and healthcare.
As an aside, it would be nice if people got off their horses for a second to understand the nuances of the discussion, rather than being indignant at the responses.
Stop "cringing" and start discussing.
But surely the timing of that policy, including the training of new qualified faculty, is significantly decoupled from the tax plan?
How do we square away the timing of these two?
I'm perfectly and 100% ok with a $20K+ tax hike if it's for the best of the country. I don't think the best approach is to hike taxes of the bottom 40% of the distribution, however, and I don't see the clear connection between the timeline of the tax plan and the timeline of resolving the institutional and supply issues of both education and healthcare.
As an aside, it would be nice if people got off their horses for a second to understand the nuances of the discussion, rather than being indignant at the responses.
Stop "cringing" and start discussing.
But surely the timing of that policy, including the training of new qualified faculty, is significantly decoupled from the tax plan?
How do we square away the timing of these two?
Would definitely be better in the long run. I know I pay more in healthcare premiums each year than that tax hike. Healthcare and school should be a basic right too, but this is exactly why he's going to lose. People are unfortunately not going to take this the right way at all.
How are you dodging the mandate for coverage now, though? Just taking the tax hit?
Ideally Sanders would speak to the issue with student loans. I don't think he has yet, preferring to focus on free college tuition. I'd be fine with a limited amnesty as the transition to free education happens. Or just go back to letting students declare bankruptcy and move on.
After a little research I see that Sanders has spoken about student loans, but mostly he's looking to cap interest rates on the loans at half what they are now. I wouldn't be surprised to see him address student loan debt forgiveness or restructuring at some point.
We start building new colleges, instead of building new prisons. You might even see an "education boom".
This would be devastating to anyone in places like San Francisco or New York City, where the general cost of living is incredibly high. After all my other essential expenses (rent, food, transit, etc), paying this new income tax might put my bank account in the red.
I like where I live; I don't want to be forced to leave. :-(
I like where I live; I don't want to be forced to leave. :-(
Netherscourge
Banned
He has no chance.
Even liberal tax-friendly voters won't accept hose hikes.
Good run, Bernie. But nobody can afford any of your ideas.
Even liberal tax-friendly voters won't accept hose hikes.
Good run, Bernie. But nobody can afford any of your ideas.
- Status