Should the Rich Pay for the Uninsured? - Room for Debate Blog - NYTimes.com »
Posted By deathray 4 months, 1 week ago in Political OpinionFocusing on health care inefficiencies may not be enough. Does Obama need to consider a surtax on the wealthy?
Read Full Story at roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com »
1294 Views Share Story 332 Comments Report
Submitted By:
deathray
Hm...summarizing a life...Investment banker, sailor, unintentional gourmet cook. Ex US Naval officer, also Foreign Service. Split my time between NYC and Miami Beach ...
Who Also Submitted:
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentShowing 319 of 332 Comments (view all)
-
88%
deathray4 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
here are a number of opinions from policy experts in the field of health care reform, addressing the issue of a surtax on the wealthy in order to pay for health care for every american.
Reply
my two cents:
the rich benefit the most from society, so they should bear a greater responsibility...and yes, this is about social conscience, and not about greed.-
87%
deathray4 months, 1 week ago
-
Al_FrankenberryComment removed: Hard Banned19 Replies
-
44%
DropkickaLib4 months, 1 week ago
-
50%
mark-stevens4 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
About those 100 million dollar sports contracts... in some states 65 million comes off the top as state and federal taxes.
Reply
Currently I'm on the wrong end of government money right now... I'm getting gov checks, a few years ago those would have been a bar bill to me. I paid a lot of taxes in my time...
I read a comment on a Seattle craigslist, where a guy wrote a that he is really sick of watching over weight Mexicans with shopping carts full of junk food using a state welfare card to pay for it.
Since you can't buy beer with a welfare card the (?) father of the kids would have a wallet full of $100 bills to pay for it -
-
83%
Goppy4 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Well ... how about just reigning back some of the massive tax rate reductions that have been awarded to the wealthiest Americans over the past 40 years.
Reply
After all ... the whole point of the tax rate rejiggering was that the rich will save our economy through 'Trickle Down' spending.
What has been the result of the massive reductions in tax rate tables for the wealthy? Since 1974, we've had AT LEAST 3 recessions ... not including the latest economic meltdown.
When you listen to Right Wing Ideologues ... you'd think that the Super Rich were being bled dry.
.
But let's look at some numbers ... some FACTS.
TAX RATES between 1971 and 1974.
........................................... First $25,000 .... .... 22%
.......................................... Over $25,000 .... .... 48%
TAX RATES between 1993 and 2002.
........................................... First $50,000 ... ... ... ... ... ... ... . 15%
........................................... $50,000-$75,000 ... ... ... ... ... . 25%
........................................... $75,000-$100,000 ... ... ... ... ... 34%
........................................... $100,000-$335,000 ... ... ... ... .. 39%
........................................... $335,000-$10,000,000 ... ... ... . 34%
........................................... $10,000,000-$15,000,000 ... ... . 35%
........................................... $15,000,000-$18,333,333 ... ... . 38%
........................................... Over $18,333,333 ... ... ... ... ... ... 35%
Look, the Right Wing in this country has modified the tax rates for their base of support - but even wealthy Americans with a conscience are appalled at these rate structures.
Warren Buffett is famously embarrased to have discovered that he pays a LOWER tax rate than his secretary.
It's a perverse tax structure.
. -
89%
Goppy4 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I would also like to address a myth that is often promoted that the super-rich are somehow deserving of their money due to their hard ... HARD work.
Reply
The fact is ... over 75% of all millionaires ... are millionaires because of inheritance.
It's just common sense mathematics ... take Sam Walton ... when he died ... all his children became millionaires ... as well as his wife.
Now ... multiply that scenario by 100,000 times.
. -
Neutral
ashleyrowell4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It is hard to believe that this question even has to be asked. We are in America people. This is not the land of take from the rich to get money. It is the land of here is the opportunity....now work hard and earn your own way. I am lower middle class, and I do not think that Trump, Gates, etc... need to pay "extra " for what I lack. They should pay their fair share of taxes and so should I. We already pay to cover those that truly can not afford insurance (Medicaid.) I do not mind paying my fair share into that system, and it worked for a long time. That is until the system became overloaded with those that are not really in need. Oh, and lets not forget the waste in these gov offices. Such as the SSA spending 800k on a resort retreat for social security workers to learn how to cut waste while they are off getting massages, pool time, etc.. So, the answer isn't even throwing more money at the system anyway. It is simply stopping the waste and corruption already in the working system.
Reply
-
-
90%
tehranchik4 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I think it's more about the disparity of wages and benefits than whether the rich should pay. BUT - If the rich have all the money and all the benefits - I guess they will HAVE to pay - they have all the money.
Reply
I don't want to stick it to the rich - everyone should be responsible for themselves. However we don't have a level playing field.
Oh ya - and the IRS shouldn't be able to get anywhere near employer medical benefits.-
93%
deathray4 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
speaking for the rich, thank you...but, and i have to say this, the rich have used the currency of washington, namely, lobbying and fundraising, to skew the burden onto those whose marginal utility of the next dollar is much greater than their own, only to be denied coverage when the time comes.
Reply
now, i don't have a problem eforming the tax exemption for healthcare coverage, but none of that should preclude having a social safety net for those who aren't as fortunate as i am.
is a poor person's life worth less than my own because they have less money? if society believes this to be true, we are in serious trouble. -
90%
tehranchik4 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You know it's all a matter of dollars and cents. If you have the money, you get the care. With a few exceptions. That's today's market.
Reply
Without the benefit of employer healthcare - I get none. Thousands get none. They talk about affordable healthcare...........affordable for who? Even sliding scale is above what most can afford. And pre-existing...........let's talk about that. Any pre-existing conditions and you can kiss any coverage goodbye. Employer healthcare coverage is needed for the masses, then you could leave the rich alone. Anyone not covered through employment then covers themselves affordably ...let me say that again AFFORDABLY.....single payer. -
38%
DropkickaLib4 months, 1 week ago
-
-
83%
moxxxxxxxxxx4 months, 1 week ago
-
41%
DropkickaLib4 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The Congressional Budget Office has already demonstrated that this healthcare boondoggle will be unaffordable. This scheme is crashing in the polls and in the Congress. His own party is backing off. He has already plunged the economy into a criminal level of debt. Enough is enough! This plan is poorly thought out and Obama refuses to do anything but ram it through. Fortunately, he's being halted. There are alternatives such as healthcare savings accounts that he refuses to even consider but deserve discussion before we copy Canada's disfunctional system.
Reply -
-
chuck-the-canuckComment removed: Spam
-
-
90%
not2needy4 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
If they have true wealth, chances are they will never miss the money. That said, many have probably spent as much (or more) on lobbyists to stop universal health care, as they will be taxed to cover their tax!
Reply
I will never need Universal Health Care, i have 2 forms of insurance that i will have for the rest of my life, thanks to the job i retired from.
If having Universal Health Care meant that i would be taxed to provide coverage for the less fortunant, i wouldn't mind at all. I pay school tax, and have no children or grandchildren in school, i don't see a difference!-
95%
deathray4 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
if anything, medicare and medicaid are managed poorly because providers game the system through overutilization.
Reply
you know as well as i do that administrative overhead is much lower for these programs than it is for private insurers, who spend a lot of that administrative cot looking for ways not to provide coverage. -
-
91%
Candida4 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
not2needy: "If having Universal Health Care meant that i would be taxed to provide coverage for the less fortunant, i wouldn't mind at all. I pay school tax, and have no children or grandchildren in school, i don't see a difference!"
Reply
Are you sure you're not a Canadian?
-
-
82%
canadianrancher574 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Maybe it's time that there was a change to the tax system, those with money usually say that they are paying more than their share and yet there are people who look at the wealthy and question why the rich seem to have so many tax breaks. Now maybe farming isn't the same kind of business as most but we do get tax breaks that ordinary people don't get.
Reply
Libs I was wondering if you would be in favor of doing away with tax breaks and making everyone pay the same percentage of their income in taxes, of course I think people should be allowed a basic exemption per person and also a family exemption. Right now there is alot of money that is not taxed and it sure doesn't belong to the poor. -
76%
Dionys4 months, 1 week ago
-
-
81%
deathray4 months, 1 week ago
-
beavis617bComment removed: Retracted by user1 Reply
-
-
69%
Endoscopy4 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Get the rich to pay for it is very silly. They have accountants and lawyers to protect their money from burdensome taxes. As the tax rates go up the money is less at risk to earn money and placed where the money is protected so they have more money after taxes. The higher the rate the less exposure to taxes. This is the Laffer curve in action. Just keep raising the taxes and watch the revenue dry up. FDR tried it and the Great Depression lasted 10 years.
Reply -
77%
jordan114 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The rich are already paying for the uninsured, just like the middle class is. Higher premiums caused by higher health care costs to cover the health industries losses. The cost of medicaid is astronomical, and is paid for by all taxpayers.
Reply
We must fix health care. We're going to pay for it one way or another. Soon as someone comes up with viable alternatives, I'll listen. But for now, this is the only game in town and we MUST do something. -
33%
Icantwait4 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
My Fellow Americans: Sure, Tax the Rich, Tax the Poor, Tax the Middle Class. Now, Pelosi is calling it Universal Health Care. What a leap from National Health Care. Take every cent of what everyone earns and put it into one big Health Care Fund. Forget about Paying China back. Those Suckers Deserve it.
Reply
So, those deserving to get the same standard of Health Care will still not be able to get it but at least we know the Tax Money will be paying for it.
Hey, If you're too old and need an operation forget about it. You're soon going to Kick it anyway. If you're an Illegal Alien, then one way of reducing their population is to refuse any Health Care for the Critically Ill. Got Aids? Then you better hang it up, you're too expensive to worry about. Cancer got you down? Start making Funeral Arrangements. An Injured Combat Veteran? No, artificial limbs for you. Obama can really cut back on Health Care Expenses, isn't that Wonderful?
Don't read anything you sign, My Friendly Congressmen, just shove it up our,(?). Everyone Loves and Trusts Obama he SAID he is looking out for our own Good. We should Believe him or Else. The Real American -
83%
oldslowjim4 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Some of the class warfare statements on here bother me a lot. Just because your rich doesn't mean you got your money unethically. Sure some do, but a lot also risked a lot and worked their arses off to get there. Grouping everyone together into one pot is just one more form of bigotry, i.e. racism.
Reply
One of the problems I see with the current health care redo is that no one has any stated and specific goals and therefore can't promise anything. For example, if I am paying $500 a month for health insurance and this has a built in factor for the uninsured, why is neither Congress or Obama telling me that my health insurance costs will go down by 5, 10, 20 percent upon implementation of this bill?
No one has really explained EXACTLY how costs will be reduced. For example, if a hospital does five CT scans and four are for insured folks and one for an uninsured person how does this public plan reduce the hospital's cost for each scan? Does the government "reduce" costs by simply not covering the entire expense. If so, then it's no wonder that they can't promise anything since I'll still be picking up part of the uninsured costs to the system.
I don't really have a problem with a government taking over health care rather than having an employer driven mechanism. However, much more thought and specific goals must be given to this legislation. It's something that should be done over 18 to 24 months where unintended consequences can be identified and dealt with.-
100%
fsev414 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Disagree somewhat with your first paragraph. Some rich (many) get there money through inheritance, some unethically and some ethically, it is an extremely rare for a person to get rich entirely on their own labors. People may get rich by building on a small base they started with but the do not start accumulating wealth until they have others working for them and increasing their profits.
Reply
No health care bill can go into the specifics you seek. There are simply far too many variables. The rough bill out there now is already a thousand pages. Unintended consequences will show up in any bill that is drafted. No one can predict every set of circumstances that may arise over the years. No bill or law (in any field) is perfect and that's why we allow for changes and amendments and also why we have courts.
It is essential to our economic recovery to address the current health care situation quickly as it is a major contributor to many of our economic woes.
-
-
100%
oldslowjim4 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Perhaps we have reached a point where medical insurance needs to be considered a "utility". We currently regulate any number of utilities like telephone and electric companies based upon a "rate of return". Why not do the same with medical insurance companies? We could require covering everyone and simply regulate the financial returns the insurance companies get. The coverage you get from private insurance companies would still be competitive since you could choose the plan you wanted with the assurance you aren't being raped financially.
Reply
Then, if necessary, the government can look into the actual medical provisioning system separately, i.e. doctor, hospital, drugs, etc. to see if tinkering is needed to "reduce costs".-
Neutral
moxxxxxxxxxx4 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Or perhaps it should be considered like other government services: fire department, police, ambulance, military, crisis response. What would people do if their house started on fire and the fire department didn't respond because they wanted to get paid first.
Reply
-
-
50%
fjgalt4 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Loyal American Taxpayer Certificate
Reply
I hereby affirm and make it known to all:
I am intelligient enough to earn my money but not smart enough to spend it properly; therefore, I happily surrender ever greater amounts of my money each year to the government so that it can give it to those worthier than myself and spend it on projects that I, in my selfishness, would waste on my desires, wants, and needs.
I have accepted the principle that those who can better afford it should pay more. The government has my approval to use force against my neighbors and anyone else to take as much as it can to pay for whatever people, projects or purposes it deems proper. Our modern guiding principle should be:
From each according to his ability, to each according to his need (Karl Marx)
I believe that the government knows best how to teach children and that most parents have the wrong set of values and are incapable of properly raising children. Therefore, I agree that the government should force parents to send their children to government-run and approved schools, and force all taxpayers to pay for them, so that the children will grow up to be obedient and loyal citizens and taxpayers.
Signature_________________________________________...
Your signature on this form testifies that you are a loyal and government-approved citizen.-
38%
automan9094 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It's typical Marxism.
Reply
Just like we have been telling you all along.
Obama does not care about America.
He wants to indoctrinate us with Marxism.
That means destroying the middle class so that everyone is the same.
Broke and dependent on the Government for everything.
Even when it comes to them telling us when to die.
Wake up America and fight the evil Marxist.
-
-
-
89%
Will13134 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Posed this yesterday and got NO RESPONSE.. let's try again..
Reply
For people using the argument.. well I work hard and I pay for my own insurance for myself and my family.. .. a very noble thing .. please ponder the following...
you're in perfect health... got your employer sponsored health care plan.. or for self employed your own. ..
you're on your way to work when you have a traffic accident.. a fairly minor traffic accident but it leaves you with an injury that you cannot work for 6-9 months.. you aren't able to make the contributions to your employer plan or afford the premiums on your private plan.. and you lose your insurance (in Florida a right to work state.. by this time you have also lost your JOB.. with no recourse).. during the recovery... it' discovered you have diabetes... GUESS WHAT YOU NOW HAVE A PRE-EXISTING CONDITION.. AND YOU ARE BASICALLY UN-INSURABLE.. potential employers will not hire you because you will raise their health care costs.. and you will pay thru the nose for private coverage.. that really don't cover sh*t..
what do you do... ?? .. I'd love to hear your RATIONAL ideas.. -
50%
icono14 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Marx, Letter to His Father (1837)
Reply
If we have chosen the position in life in which we can most of all work for mankind, no burdens can bow us down, because they are sacrifices for the benefit of all; then we shall experience no petty, limited, selfish joy, but our happiness will belong to millions, our deeds will live on quietly but perpetually at work, and over our ashes will be shed the hot tears of noble people.-
71%
Goppy4 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
WOW ... that letter is nearly IDENTICAL to the one that George W. Bush wrote to HIS dad.
Reply
The only differences are what is in brackets.
"If we have chosen the position in life in which we can most of all work for [our class], no burdens can bow us down, because they are sacrifices for the benefit [our class]; then we shall experience no petty, limited, selfish joy, but our happiness will belong to million[aires], our deeds will live on quietly but perpetually at work, and over our ashes will be shed the hot tears of [our fellow non-tax paying] people.
.
-
-
100%
NoWayMan4 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
newsflash:
Reply
we already pay for those who are uninsured.
and if the focus is on saving money, a proven way to do that is the public option.
the way we're curently doing it is all wrong, especially when we have situations like the uninsured using the emergency room as their only source of medical care, which is very expensive.
with a public option, those costs will be much much less since people won't be doing things like going to the emergency room for care.
over the last ten years...
cumulative wage growth has gone up 29%
cumulative inflation has gone up 44%
health insurance premiums have gone up 120%
a public option will save everyone money since the profit incentive will be removed and the rise in helath costs will be in line with inflation and wages rather than with those who are solely focused on the bottom line.
so, if anyone here is interested in saving money over the long run, a public option is the way. -
-
67%
quackpot4 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Should the rich pay for their employees' health care?
Reply
If not, should the rich pay their employees enough so that they can afford their own health care coverage?
If you say the rich have no employees, please explain how you think the rich became rich.
-
-
80%
FairNBalanced4 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
DR says: the rich benefit the most from society, so they should bear a greater responsibility...and yes, this is about social conscience, and not about greed.
Reply
So it's greed if you disagree with the government that its your role to pay for the poor's insurance? Thats a new definition.
Yes, we all should have a social conscience, and there are plenty of charities and faith based initiatives that can consume us already. We don't need the government taxing the rich any more. The richest 1% of Americans now pays 35% of all income taxes. The top 10% pay more taxes than the bottom 60%.
Where will the taxing find it's end? Liberals will just keep using their ill-rational formulas to tax, tax, tax.-
78%
Beau78904 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I've never heard of charities or faith-based initiatives paying for anyone's healthcare.
Reply
The government provides necessary services, and most of them are not social services for the needy. How much tax are you willing to pay in order to support what the government does for you?
-
-
100%
wesxauto4 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Wy do you think the goverment puts so much forcefull wording in this bill. They should just come out with a plan and if it truley is a good plan let we the people sign up for it on our own free will. WE all know the middle class will be paying the premiums that supports the whole system anyway and hope the rich can pay for the non citezens that they left the door open for to join.
Reply
Submit a Story
Advertisement
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.