Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Part of the health care bill calls for a tax on so-called Cadillac health care plans. Just like tobacco, alcohol and water, this will price some people out of the market. Instead, they will settle for a sub-prime health care plan. The government wont get its anticipated revenue stream, and some person will end up not getting the type of medical care they really wanted to and was willing to pay for.
The "anticipated revenue stream" here is folks with employer-sponsored coverage substituting taxable wages for (arguably) overinsurance. Eliminate the tax benefits of piling up ever more expensive high actuarial value plans, and a great many folks with those plans will just prefer cash and more reasonably priced plans.
A higher tax revenue, slower health expenditure growth double whammy.
Part of the health care bill calls for a tax on so-called Cadillac health care plans. Just like tobacco, alcohol and water, this will price some people out of the market. Instead, they will settle for a sub-prime health care plan. The government wont get its anticipated revenue stream, and some person will end up not getting the type of medical care they really wanted to and was willing to pay for.
The "anticipated revenue stream" here is folks with employer-sponsored coverage substituting taxable wages for (arguably) overinsurance. Eliminate the tax benefits of piling up ever more expensive high actuarial value plans, and a great many folks with those plans will just prefer cash and more reasonably priced plans.
A higher tax revenue, slower health expenditure growth double whammy.
The tax increase for sure,but it won't slow growth,so lets tell people how they can be compensated,and wring them for all the tax we can??
Why would anyone think higher taxes are good,the Feds and most state and local gov.have shown complete ineptitude at finances,we would be STUPID to give them any more then what they get right now,and most likly the only way to really solve the problem is starve the beast .
"Putting special taxes on medical related goods and services isnt going to improve medical care any more that putting special taxes on tobacco increases the sale of tobacco products."
False analogy. The idea is to reduce the costs in the long run, not increase the revenue stream.
Here are two opinions from people who disagree with you:
Senator Scott Brown (R) Ma
Candidate Elizabeth Warrens position evolves. (D) MaThe medical device tax threatens our economy and our economic recovery in Massachusetts. And with more than 400 medical device firms and employing nearly 25,000 workers and contributing more than $4 billion to our economy, the Commonwealth can simply not afford to have this industry targeted with the tax.
If enacted, this harmful tax will put American workers at a competitive disadvantage and chase jobs overseas.
The medical device tax would likely cost 43,000 jobs across the country at the loss of $3.5 billion in wages. Massachusetts alone is estimated to lose more than 2,600 jobs as a direct result of this tax, so about 10% of our entire medical device manufacturing workforce.
On April 17, 2012, Democratic Senatorial candidate Elizabeth Warren announced a reversal of her own position on this issue, saying that innovation is a vital part of who we are and that the medical device industry in Massachusetts accounts for 13% of all state exports. Warren said that the Excise Tax would slow the pace of innovation and harm Massachusetts employers.
Of course our government engages in 'social engineering,' the use of federal law and force to make civilians comply with its intent and purpose of law.
The only question is whether the engineering is a legitimate exercise of governmental power.
The question of this thread is whether the taxation power should be used for such purposes.
Of course our government engages in 'social engineering,' the use of federal law and force to make civilians comply with its intent and purpose of law.
The only question is whether the engineering is a legitimate exercise of governmental power.
<tedious Starkey ad hominem redacted />
The question of this thread is whether the taxation power should be used for such purposes.
who has taxation power in our govt?
The question of this thread is whether the taxation power should be used for such purposes.
who has taxation power in our govt?
You don't know??
who has taxation power in our govt?
You don't know??
Just as i thought, son
we call this
Game
Set
Match
You are welcome, be grateful i asked the question, which had you googling it, then when you found out the answer you realized you needed to shut up since you had no argument, I do respect someone who knows when they are defeated, so good on you for that.
The "anticipated revenue stream" here is folks with employer-sponsored coverage substituting taxable wages for (arguably) overinsurance. Eliminate the tax benefits of piling up ever more expensive high actuarial value plans, and a great many folks with those plans will just prefer cash and more reasonably priced plans.
A higher tax revenue, slower health expenditure growth double whammy.
The tax increase for sure,but it won't slow growth,so lets tell people how they can be compensated,and wring them for all the tax we can??
Why would anyone think higher taxes are good,the Feds and most state and local gov.have shown complete ineptitude at finances,we would be STUPID to give them any more then what they get right now,and most likly the only way to really solve the problem is starve the beast .
yeah, those 90% tax rates simultaneous with building the greatest infrastructure and middle class in human history, how did we manage!
The tax increase for sure,but it won't slow growth,so lets tell people how they can be compensated,and wring them for all the tax we can??
Why would anyone think higher taxes are good,the Feds and most state and local gov.have shown complete ineptitude at finances,we would be STUPID to give them any more then what they get right now,and most likly the only way to really solve the problem is starve the beast .
yeah, those 90% tax rates simultaneous with building the greatest infrastructure and middle class in human history, how did we manage!
Mostly because NOBODY paid the 90% tax rate. There were so many legitimate deductions that the people in the upper brackets barely paid a 40% EFFECTIVE tax rate.
http://www.healthcare.gov/law/timeline/index.htmlTaxing bad behavior
It is common knowledge that the government can reduce bad behavior by taxing or penalizing it.
Tobacco and alcohol use are the perfect examples. Every time the tax rates increase on tobacco products, some people quit using tobacco. It happens with alcohol also. Some people quit or reduce consumption because they cant afford it anymore. Some because they just dont want to pay the increased taxes.
A few years, the city of Chicago instituted a 5 cent tax on bottled water. They said they needed the tax money because all those empty bottles were getting into landfills. I guess they sort of forgot about their recycling programs. The sales of bottled water dropped, and Chicago didnt get the revenue stream they anticipated and wrote into their budget.
By the way, the reason I know this about Chicagos bottled water tax is because I am the IT person for a fortune 100 retailer that had to develop the reporting so that our company could collect and pay the tax to the city. Our sales of water have dropped dramatically since the tax was introduced.
Part of the health care bill calls for a tax on so-called Cadillac health care plans. Just like tobacco, alcohol and water, this will price some people out of the market. Instead, they will settle for a sub-prime health care plan. The government wont get its anticipated revenue stream, and some person will end up not getting the type of medical care they really wanted to and was willing to pay for.
Another part of the health care bill calls for taxing manufacturers of medical equipment. I am willing to bet, those costs will be passed on and some doctor or hospital will just buy less medical equipment. The anticipated taxes wont be realized, and the medical services that could have been provided with that equipment wont be available.
Anybody with a lick of common sense knows that unfairly taxing something reduces a persons propensity to engage in that behavior. Putting special taxes on medical related goods and services isnt going to improve medical care any more that putting special taxes on tobacco increases the sale of tobacco products.
I'm not sure why the government thinks medical care is bad behavior.
He specializes in declaring victory with little reason.
alright then!
dblack attempted to and failed at redefining the OP. Yes, it is a fail for him.
I "always" confront extremists of either wing who (1) try to redefine definitions and facts or (2) try to redefine the OP or (3) try to make their opinions and beliefs as evidence and proof.
You do that all the time, SP.
dblack did that and got kicked. Every time you do that, you will get kicked.
Stay on track.
No one is required to give evidence to rebut other folks' opinions.
Opinions are not fact or proof, period.
Give solid, credible evidence, SP, and you will have a discussion.
"Confrontation" is your word, and a weak mind's tactic: put words in another person's mouth. You said it, not me, weak mind. I said "confront", which means "oppose."
"Social engineering" is the use of governmental force to change cultural and social behavior.
