Democratic Nomination

Post Reply New Topic

From the experience of being British:

• The taxpayers.
• It’s cheaper per unit output that way.
• A lot of them still object.
• They also object if standards are lowered to balance tax cuts.

^^
Yeah, as difficult and practically politically impossible to do it;
If somehow in a 'snowball chance in hell'; Americans could come to
a consensus decision that would allow Free College Education and Health Care
For all; Now. i 'Just wonder' what the Average Upper Middle Class Family who no longer
has to pay 30,000 Dollars a year for Health Insurance or Pay at Least 100,000 Dollars and
So Much more for their Children's College Education would do with the rest of that Money; for sure, not
unlike close to the Trillion Dollar Cost of the Current Safety Net the United States Provides; Obviously, put it back in
the Economy, for a win-win overall; Not that it would be good for Nature overall; but Consuming would go way up as anyone with Common Sense who understands the Human Animal Intuits/knows from observing this Animal for a while now.

"The US Census Bureau dropped its annual load of statistics on American poverty and income, and the data shows Americans weren’t much better off in 2018 than they were a year earlier.

On the upside: 2.3 million more people snagged full-time jobs and the official poverty rate fell half a percentage point.

On the downside: Fewer people have health insurance and women earned about 82 cents for every dollar a man earned. Middle-class incomes hardly budged.

But one of the most interesting data points released each year shows the massive economic impact that federal “entitlement” programs, such as food stamps and housing subsidies, have on low-wage workers."

"During President Donald Trump’s second year in office, income from these safety net programs directly kept 47.7 million people out of poverty. That’s 2.8 million more people compared to 2017. So far, Trump and congressional Republicans have been unable to gut spending on the safety net programs, facing resistance from Democrats whose votes they needed to pass a budget deal."

It's true the Unemployment rate is Low now; but if not for the Social Net; so many of those workers would be living
in Poverty with or without a Job. The Retail Industry, where Social Safety Nets catch Single Mothers who work
in the Retail Industry, as those jobs comprise 82 Percent Female Participation, stands to Lose A Third of a
Billion Jobs Globe-Wide to Automation in this Current Decade by 2030; where 14 Percent of the total Global
Work-Force Will Have to Find somewhere else to work.

It Just goes to show; if you don't Look deeper the Entire Ship may Sink.

And again, considering that Science Shows the Average Human Being Now
is diluted with the Attention Span of Less than a Literal Gold Fish; all the Distractions
That Technology overall Brings now; all the glitz and dopamine-lit screens all that's really left is 'Twitter Breaths',
overall, to even
get to
the Surface of the Ocean.
When no one's Paying attention;
Those who are truly become more successful.

https://www.vox.com/2019/9/10/20858828/ ... safety-net

https://time.com/5779879/retail-worker-jobs/

Regarding health care, Bernie Sanders wants to make *poor people* pay for it.

He wants to take away the FREE health care they get now, and make them pay for his health care.

Make the rich pay their taxes, and that would certainly cover a good sized percentage.

It strikes me that this is just an outright lie, a deliberate deception.

I guess you could argue that some poor people get to use another family member's insurance, but Sanders doesn't want to abolish Medicare, quite the opposite.

On the other hand, your preferred candidate, Trump, does want poor people to pay for their healthcare. Or put it another way, Trump wants poor people to pay for rich people's tax cuts.

Go on, I'm sure you can substantiate this claim. You know, supposing you're not just making s**t up.

Right now, very poor people can get free Medicaid or ACA-fully subsidized health care.

Sander's plan is to raise taxes on these people with a new individual health care tax AND create a new employer health care tax on an employee's wages (which is effectively another tax on an individual).

So, these people go from FREE to SUBSTANTIALLY TAXED.

So...you're saying that people who currently get free healthcare (Medicaid) will actually have less money in their pockets under a Bernie administration than they do now and in effect, with a new Bernie tax, they'll be paying for healthcare rather than being free????

Well, we only have generalities from him.

It looks like lately he won't even say how he plans to pay for it.

However, based on his previous statements that he will make new health care taxes on working people, presumably, this would apply to all working people.

So, working Medicaid and ACA-fully subsidized poor people would be worse off.

According to Pete Buttigieg, a Sanders opponent, Sanders has said he will only raise taxes on people earning over $29,000. This is comfortably above the poverty line.

I don’t like Sanders but the thing about bad politicians is that you don’t need to make up bad things about them.

$29,000 per year is a VERY low salary in most areas of the United States.

The official poverty-line figure for a family of 4 in the United states is $25,750. A person making $15 an hour (the minimum wage in a few places) working a 40-hour week make $31,200 a year.

Even if you believe this.

He plans to raise taxes on employers for an employee's wages.

So he is raising taxes on people below $29,000 as that will affect their compensation.

If you live in New York City, $29,000 a year with two children is a joke. You can't live on that, unless you're subsidized on some way.

At $29,000 a year, people are still eligible for the "earned income credit." If they get rid of that, this will definitely cause problems. People are eligible until their yearly salary rises above $53,000 for a family of 4.

Sanders proposes a 7% employer payroll tax.

"Sanders would impose another 7 percent payroll tax which on employees which he calls an “income-based premium paid by employers.”
https://www.atr.org/list-tax-hikes-sand ... l-plan?amp

So, workers making $29,000 or less would have an indirect 7% tax.

Workers making over $29,000 would have a 4% direct tax and 7% indirect tax.

However, he throws out a lot of ideas, and this is just one of them.

Right, the $29,000 is laughable.

It's possible to make $100,000 NOW, and still get free health care, if you have enough deductions.

It's true that 29,000 Pounds per Annum is not a bad salary in the UK----but people in the UK are usually more heavily subsidized than people in the US.

It is harder, probably (in general) for people living in the UK than it is for people living in the US.