Support NeoGAF

[ugaboga232]

I agree with all of this, but this isn't Sander's argument - the argument is "everyone aside from the evil 1% will be better off even with the higher taxes because you won't pay health insurance premiums anymore!"

If Sanders was making your argument, even though I'd still disagree with the idea he could win, I could approve of his arguments far more.

I think he has made both arguments and was talking mostly about middle class families worried about getting squeezed.

 

[Iorv3th]

Glad Sanders doesn't have a chance. Tax rate already sucks enough. I fall into middle america and would have a lot harder time under bernies plan.

Instead of saying the rich need to pay their fair share he should have just said everyone needs to pay more, but I guess that's not a good selling point.

 

[Ekdrm2d1]

Sanders lost my vote.

wow

 

[noshten]

I agree with all of this, but this isn't Sander's argument - the argument is "everyone aside from the evil 1% will be better off even with the higher taxes because you won't pay health insurance premiums anymore!"

If Sanders was making your argument, even though I'd still disagree with the idea he could win, I could approve of his arguments far more.

Within a few pages you've gone from Sander's supporters framing the issue is the problem to Sanders framing the issue is the problem - you do realize that?

This is my problem w/ Bernie.

In theory, I don't have a problem with these tax levels. I'm a social democrat after all. But, Bernie and his supporters are making the "these changes will be awesome and everybody will be better off" argument instead of the "yes, some people will be less off but we need to make these changes for the benefit of society" argument, which is the argument that needs to be made and was made in European countries.

And by the way what I've said is something Sander's has said many times in debates and speeches - you just choose not to listen.

 

[JustenP88]

These tax rates are child's play compared to Roosevelt through Reagan rates. Thank God for Ronald Reagan for saving us from the evil liberals! How the hell did this country survive?!

 

[ugaboga232]

Glad Sanders doesn't have a chance. Tax rate already sucks enough. I fall into middle america and would have a lot harder time under bernies plan.

Instead of saying the rich need to pay their fair share he should have just said everyone needs to pay more, but I guess that's not a good selling point.

I assume you didn't read what these taxes were going for.

 

[Your Entertainer]

I agree with all of this, but this isn't Sander's argument - the argument is "everyone aside from the evil 1% will be better off even with the higher taxes because you won't pay health insurance premiums anymore!"

If Sanders was making your argument, even though I'd still disagree with the idea he could win, I could approve of his arguments far more.

The richest are paying less taxes now than for a long, long time, while their wealth continues to accumulate - that's his point. Not simply that they're evil. Of course it should stand to reason that while a large number of people will have things better, not everyone will be paying less overall in all circumstances. I think it's a worthy trade-off. And for many people, they will be paying less, but there are trade-offs that require explanation, i.e. It's not 100% straightforward.

 

[Baron Aloha]

I'd be paying 10k+ more per year....and I would be fine with it. My health insurance costs like 7k per year now anyway not counting copays for prescriptions and whatnot. And if I ever wanted to go back to school, I could (assuming his tax on speculation also happened). Not to mention we would probably have a healthier and better educated society. Totally worth it.

 

[border]

What? where did I say that. They will probably pass on some of the savings which negates part of the tax burden in the article. Where is this massive tax increase on businesses? I am not fully aware of all of sanders plans on the business side so you will have to educate me there. Minimum wage would also be hiked.

The Light Grey/Light Blue part of each bar graph represents the payroll tax burden that employers cover. Those taxes increase 40% for most every employee making under 75K. The taxes are tripled for employees between 100K and 250K.

 

[blodtann]

Sanders is the smartest guy in the room. These taxes will help the country ten fold in the years to come. People may not like it... but I honestly think everyone needs to look at the big picture, at how infrastructure will help help them and their kids' future.

The problem is that I cannot afford the tax hike, it's nothing about my personal preference.

If it takes over 30% of my income to run me (as a business), then they have to look at ways to optimize. They have to do what other businesses do, if you cannot afford something you don't just put it on a CC, and then go after your country to ask for $ to support your failed budget.

You have to CUT costs by a huge margin for these budgets to even make sense, like any other normal person does. We as a country have to eat ramen noodles for several years, and not keep eat steaks for dinner every day.

 

[Angelus Errare]

Why? Why can we not, in the height of the information age, make this shit fly?

Because if this election has proved anything readily information doesn't matter. Americans (people in general) would rather be fed information from someone on TV than take the time to research for themselves.

 

[ugaboga232]

The Light Grey/Light Blue part of each bar graph represents the payroll tax burden that employers cover. Those taxes increase 40% for most every employee making under 75K. The taxes are tripled for employees between 100K and 250K.

Stop quoting shitty vox articles. The payroll tax burden increases a few percent up to the very tippity top (and thats for social security, not for medicare for all which is what we are talking about). These are not huge increases given the huge decrease in healthcare spending.

 

[SoRuffShoNuff]

Why? Why can we not, in the height of the information age, make this shit fly?

Because outside of the people who flat out don't want to pay these extra taxes, like me, you will have to convince people who don't vote based on gathered fact based information to start voting on gathered fact based information. That's why this isn't going to fly.


I mean look at this election cycle. Nothing that is taking place on the republican side is based on any sort of facts whatsoever.

 

[JesseEwiak]

The problem is that I cannot afford the tax hike, it's nothing about my personal preference.

If it takes over 30% of my income to run me (as a business), then they have to look at ways to optimize. They have to do what other businesses do, if you cannot afford something you don't just put it on a CC, and then go after your country to ask for $ to support your failed budget.

You have to CUT costs by a huge margin for these budgets to even make sense, like any other normal person does. We as a country have to eat ramen noodles for several years, and not keep eat steaks for dinner every day.

I actually disagree w/ this despite my problems with Bernie's tax plan.

We're the worlds reserve currency - we can't borrow money at almost zero interest and not pay it off for decades. There's no reason for us not to borrow money to pay for investments while still cutting wasteful spending _and_ reforming the tax code to be more progressive.

 

[LegendofJoe]

Another interesting angle is the effect of Sander's tax rate changes on the value of the dollar.

Would the inflationary effect in situations where someone's passed on health care savings are greater than their tax increases be offset by the deflationary effect where the opposite is true?

Theoretically (based on the healthcare spending rate of other countries) about 8% of the economy would be opened up to other areas of the economy. So the effect should be strongly inflationary. This wouldn't happen over night of course, but if we did go the UHC route we would be wise to make sure the Fed is in position to tinker with interest rates as needed to keep inflation in check.

 

[Lumination]

It has the benefit of actually being true, as well as saving you from getting banned.

Sure, I'll elaborate next time.

I am all for socialized medicine, but if the cost of that is 12K a year, they have to come up with something better. Without looking at the top 4 posts on the budget nothing will balance it. That is the problem, nobody wants to go after medicare, social security, medicaid and military contractors.

If Sanders can cut those 4 posts on the budget by 30+% then we would be in a great place.

If you're paying an extra $12k, then your income is high enough to contribute more. Socialized medicine is not a secret phrase for "let the 1% pay for everything". As someone in the same position as you, I accept that we need to contribute more to our country to help the least fortunate of us.

My only issue with the plan is the lower two brackets. I think they should be $0 and half of what he's proposing.

The problem is that I cannot afford the tax hike, it's nothing about my personal preference.

If it takes over 30% of my income to run me (as a business), then they have to look at ways to optimize. They have to do what other businesses do, if you cannot afford something you don't just put it on a CC, and then go after your country to ask for $ to support your failed budget.

You have to CUT costs by a huge margin for these budgets to even make sense, like any other normal person does. We as a country have to eat ramen noodles for several years, and not keep eat steaks for dinner every day.

What do you propose we cut and how much do we need to cut? Personally, I'd start with military.

 

[mackattk]

This thread is why Trump will win. If even a "liberal leftist" forum like GAF is so socially conservative , the rest of the american public probably consider anything coming out of europe (and most of the world tbh since the US are a bit of an exception) just as devilish contraptions of the communist satan.

Who will be there to listen when you will go broke for health reasons and cry? Who will be here to help you when your job line goes extinct and there's no social security to keep you afloat? Social progress isn't free.

Some people would just rather let people die in the streets rather than to receive health care. So yeah, I don't think there is much sympathy for the sick out there sometimes.

 

[lawnchair]

reading this thread .....

we are doomed

 

[Flo_Evans]

reading this thread .....

we are doomed

Just wait till the robots take all of our jobs and don't want to pay any taxes!

 

[Crimson_Gold]

reading this thread .....

we are doomed

We aren't. You are able to get these things done by doing them gradually. Transition over a period and people are able to adjust to the changes.

 

[rokkerkory]

So I will be paying 10% more almost? I guess I better pop some kids soon so they can leverage free colleges. lol

 

[blodtann]

What are you even talking about with balancing the budget. We are talking healthcare. The cost is not 12k per person, you just happen be making more money than 80% of the population and will pay more to help others achieve healthcare which benefits society. I doubt the cost will end up even being 12k for you at the end of the day when all the benefits vs costs are added up but even so that is what socialized medicine is.

I thought this thread was about tax rates. And I'm pretty sure my taxes goes to balancing a budget.

 

[ugaboga232]

We aren't. You are able to get these things done by doing them gradually. Transition over a period and people are able to adjust to the changes.

The problem with gradual change is twofold here. First off, you are assuming the system/status quo will not resist gradual changes that threaten them and second, you assume people aren't going to die or go bankrupt because of shitty healthcare which is going to happen.

I thought this thread was about tax rates. And I'm pretty sure my taxes goes to balancing a budget.

These tax increases are for a specific set of plans, not just for drones and stuff.

 

[hawk2025]

Another interesting angle is the effect of Sander's tax rate changes on the value of the dollar.

Would the inflationary effect in situations where someone's passed on health care savings are greater than their tax increases be offset by the deflationary effect where the opposite is true?

Theoretically (based on the healthcare spending rate of other countries) about 8% of the economy would be opened up to other areas of the economy. So the effect should be strongly inflationary. This wouldn't happen over night of course, but if we did go the UHC route we would be wise to make sure the Fed is in position to tinker with interest rates as needed to keep inflation in check.

Hmm, good point. I agree.

Good thing we didn't undermine the FED's independence a few years ago.

 

[Marty Chinn]

Gonna call shenanigans unless its some crazy kaiser based new age plan which is where everyone is going to. You are well under the average cost paid by employer and employee and you seem to get a ton of healthcare so something isn't adding up. Also, since you are in the top income quintile, you probably will have to pay more taxes. Such is life.

Well it is Kaiser. I only know the cost because I use my wife's plan and I get the full cost of the plan paid out to me since I skip using our medical benefits. We're a small company, so I know they're not misleading me. In fact we've had discussions about the costs before in casual talking and it was pretty open in comparing prices and amazement at how other people's coverage, for similar coverage even at Kaiser costs more than what we're paying. So I don't know how they did it, but they did and I would certainly be hit more in this case than under the current situation. Not that I'm against the notion of paying more in order to establish UHC. I fully understand everyone needs to pitch in to get it. I'm just trying to say it's not a clear win for everyone and I can understand how people might balk over actually having to pay more for healthcare under this plan than what they already have.

 

[pdog128]

I don't know. I'm a Bernie fan and will vote for whoever the Dem is, but nobody wants to pay more taxes.

Right now my wife and I (we have 2 kids) make a combined $80k/year. We live in a low cost-of-living area, so it's a decent income. We have insurance through my job, it's around $2,200/year (employer pays ~$12k).

Spoiler

Public sector healthcare plan. It used to be even cheaper

The plan is decent: $1250/individual deductible, $2500/family. $5250/ind out-of-pocket, $10,500/fam out-of-pocket.

Spoiler

Again, used to be better. 400/ind deductible, 800/family and half the out of pocket.

I guess if I figure that I'll keep that $2,200, and won't be on the hook for thousands in deductibles if we get sick, Bernie's plan is a best a wash for my family. Which is fine, I understand that in order for it to work some will have to pay more.

 

[LegendofJoe]

Hmm, good point. I agree.

Good thing we didn't undermine the FED's independence a few years ago.

Another reason in the long list of reasons why I don't identify with the Republican party.

 

[CharminUltra]

If you drive a car, I'll tax the street
If you try to sit, I'll tax your seat
If you get too cold I'll tax the heat
If you take a walk, I'll tax your feet

Taxman!

 

[Officerrob]

You can't sell this to the general electorate.

 

[border]

Stop quoting shitty vox articles. The payroll tax burden increases a few percent up to the very tippity top (and thats for social security, not for medicare for all which is what we are talking about). These are not huge increases given the huge decrease in healthcare spending.

If the article is wrong, please tell me how. Just disregarding it as "shitty" seems dismissive. To say that the tax increases are only a few percentages seems short sighted. Relative to where taxes are now, they are actually big boosts. Going from 2.9% to 9% is tripling the employer's taxes.

 

[d00d3n]

This tax policy seems to go too far. I knew that the guy liked Scandinavia, but extremely high taxes like this kind of sucks. Our government (Swedish) pays for so much shit on the public dime. Universal healthcare and free education are used to get people to accept the program, but a lot of unnecessary stuff will be packaged in.

For example, our government employs 50 people in the "government board of knitting" to support knitting and other domestic arts. I wish that was a joke, but it is 100% true. Don't give your government abundant resources, or they will start shit like this with your money.

 

[ugaboga232]

Well it is Kaiser. I only know the cost because I use my wife's plan and I get the full cost of the plan paid out to me since I skip using our medical benefits. We're a small company, so I know they're not misleading me. In fact we've had discussions about the costs before in casual talking and it was pretty open in comparing prices and amazement at how other people's coverage, for similar coverage even at Kaiser costs more than what we're paying. So I don't know how they did it, but they did and I would certainly be hit more in this case than under the current situation. Not that I'm against the notion of paying more in order to establish UHC. I fully understand everyone needs to pitch in to get it. I'm just trying to say it's not a clear win for everyone and I can understand how people might balk over actually having to pay more for healthcare under this plan than what they already have.

Oh nice, kaiser is using new age payment/incentive models which have a lot of power in reducing costs hence their plans being cheaper. Obviously its not going to be a clear win but the vast majority should benefit. The goal is to create a more inclusive economy that accounts for the failures of the underlying assumptions of the free market and accounts for externalities.

If the article is wrong, please tell me how. Just disregarding it as "shitty" seems dismissive. To say that the tax increases are only a few percentages seems short sighted. Relative to where taxes are now, they are actually big boosts. Going from 2.9% to 9% is tripling the employer's taxes.

You can spin it that way or say its only a 6.1% increase in tax for huge healthcare savings. The article is also purely marginal rates so employees over 250k don't cost the employer as much as you make it seem.

This tax policy seems to go too far. I knew that the guy liked Scandinavia, but extremely high taxes like this kind of sucks. Our government (Swedish) pays for so much shit on the public dime. Universal healthcare and free education are used to get people to accept the program, but a lot of unnecessary stuff will be packaged in.

For example, our government employs 50 people in the "government board of knitting" to support knitting and other domestic arts. I wish that was a joke, but it is 100% true. Don't give your government abundant resources, or they will start shit like this with your money.

What is wrong with that? That is very small drop in the bucket.

 

[Iorv3th]

I assume you didn't read what these taxes were going for.

You assume I care where they are going. Is bernie going to cut all the waste with the military as well and still need this much in taxes?

 

[SlimySnake]

People who think Employers will compensate their employees accordingly because they just had their insurance burden lessened are treading into Sam Brownback territory.

It's the liberal version of

 

[blodtann]

Sure, I'll elaborate next time.


If you're paying an extra $12k, then your income is high enough to contribute more. Socialized medicine is not a secret phrase for "let the 1% pay for everything". As someone in the same position as you, I accept that we need to contribute more to our country to help the least fortunate of us.

My only issue with the plan is the lower two brackets. I think they should be $0 and half of what he's proposing.


What do you propose we cut and how much do we need to cut? Personally, I'd start with military.

I'd cut military contractors to the bone. That alone will almost yield a positive budget.
If any other country than the US needs US military help, then they would have to pay for it.

Then I'd go after the rampant fraud in medicare.

Then I would set down a group of people to price all drugs (like calif did for workers comp) and procedures and move to a single payer (being the govt). I've worked in healthcare for years, and the amount of fraud is insane.

Then I'd move to a flat tax model with no deductions and no loop holes (no need for the IRS). I'd close all the loop holes where big companies (apple etc) have offshored all their money to prevent paying taxes. Then I'd reduce the corporate tax level to something more appropriate to attract companies to invest in the US (follow the model done here in TN).

 

[SoRuffShoNuff]

Instead of asking the middle class to bear the burden of this why not start reigning in the military and use those savings to ease the burden a bit?

 

[ugaboga232]

It's the liberal version of

Except it's really not because trickle down is very easy to prove as not incentivizing creating more jobs whereas lower healthcare spending per employee incentivizes better pay.

You assume I care where they are going. Is bernie going to cut all the waste with the military as well and still need this much in taxes?

So you have a weird obsession with tax rates and not how much it saves you or what it is going for? He wants to cut military waste as well. Perhaps you should read the article or read what these taxes are going towards including public healthcare, free tuition for public colleges, tons of infrastructure, etc.

My company pays for my healthcare, as in it isn't taken out of my salary, so giving me free healthcare does absolutely fucking nothing for me (Company isn't going to magically give me the money it was spending on healthcare). But hey I would lose $4k+ and gain nothing.... so yay!.....?!?!?

(Thanks for saving the company 2k Bernie!)

Your company spends way more than 2000 dollars on healthcare and some other company will use the savings to try and poach you.

My taxes would go up by 8.5 % and I have to pay more payroll tax for my small business. I know Bernie wants to give everyone free everything, but nothing is free. He's totally against small businesses, so for that fact alone, as likable and nice as he is, he'll never get my vote.

Small businesses don't get to not pay living wages/pay what is necessary just because they are small businesses.

 

[Croatoan]

My company pays for my healthcare, as in it isn't taken out of my salary, so giving me free healthcare does absolutely fucking nothing for me (Company isn't going to magically give me the money it was spending on healthcare). But hey I would lose $4k+ and gain nothing.... so yay!.....?!?!?

(Thanks for saving the company 2k Bernie!)

 

[Mouse Cop]

My taxes would go up by 8.5 % and I have to pay more payroll tax for my small business. I know Bernie wants to give everyone free everything, but nothing is free. He's totally against small businesses, so for that fact alone, as likable and nice as he is, he'll never get my vote.

 

[Tesseract]

We aren't. You are able to get these things done by doing them gradually. Transition over a period and people are able to adjust to the changes.

People can't afford more gradations, they need answers. The working class is about to die.

 

[SlimySnake]

Except it's really not because trickle down is very easy to prove as not incentivizing creating more jobs whereas lower healthcare spending per employee incentivizes better pay.

you are extremely naive if you think these companies wouldnt just pocket the extra profits like they do now.

 

[Foffy]

Just wait till the robots take all of our jobs and don't want to pay any taxes!

You won't have any money, no home, no opt-in insurance, and no prospects. We..win?

 

[Sydle]

Puts a little bit of a hurt on me considering I'm in the 60-80%, single in an expensive city and still trying to save for a house and retirement, as well as pay down student loans. However, after thinking on it for a bit, it's hard to argue how much good it would do.

I can give up a few things to get behind this. In (I think).

 

[blodtann]

The problem with gradual change is twofold here. First off, you are assuming the system/status quo will not resist gradual changes that threaten them and second, you assume people aren't going to die or go bankrupt because of shitty healthcare which is going to happen.



These tax increases are for a specific set of plans, not just for drones and stuff.

That has typically worked out great in the past.

 

[damisa]

The worst part of all this is the actual cost will be significantly higher. These kind of government costs are always underestimated.

 

[ugaboga232]

you are extremely naive if you think these companies wouldnt just pocket the extra profits like they do now.

You are extremely naive if you think there wouldn't be competition. You think every company will magically decide to not use a single penny of savings instead of trying to hire better employees?

That has typically worked out great in the past.

That is pretty big logical fallacy and of course everything can always be misallocated but these tax increases are specifically for specific things so believe what you want.

 

[d00d3n]

What is wrong with that? That is very small drop in the bucket.

The drops add up. The example shows a carelessness with government funds that is quite disgusting imo, and sadly very common in social democratic countries. There is zero public support for or demand for a "government board of knitting" of course. Just a government bathing in tax money overspending on useless stuff because they can get away with it.

 

[Enduin]

Instead of asking the middle class to bear the burden of this why not start reigning in the military and use those savings to ease the burden a bit?

Problem is we don't know what can or cannot be cut so you can't just appropriate cuts without know where they're coming from. The DoD has never been audited, it's actually exempt, so while it's clear to anyone with half a brain that there's rampant waste in military and contracts they put out, I don't think there's any kind of clear breakout of exactly where that waste is and how much. So you can't really put out a proposal based on nothing.

Though Bernie I believe has said a couple times that he would like to or that we should audit them, which to my knowledge no other presidential candidate has even come close to endorsing.

 

[mackattk]

you are extremely naive if you think these companies wouldnt just pocket the extra profits like they do now.

I am sure they will. It will take a little while but more jobs will open up because more people will have money to spend. Taking out the huge financial stress of healthcare in college education frees up so much money for people to actually live off of. It might take a year or two, but things will turn around. Best thing about this is if you don't like your job, then you aren't tied down to it because of health care coverage.

There is no way this plan will pass, but things wouldn't magically get better overnight.. they would, eventually, though.

 

[gkryhewy]

NOPE. Sorry Bernie.