Senators weigh tax hikes to pay for health care

  1. WASHINGTON - Senators are considering limiting-but not eliminating-the tax-free status of employer-provided health benefits to help pay for President Barack Obama's overhaul plan and provide coverage to 50 million uninsured Americans.

    Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., said Tuesday that there are no easy options. Senators began grappling with how to finance guaranteed coverage for all Americans, even as independent experts put the costs at about $1.5 trillion over 10 years.

    The final package is likely to include a mix of tax increases and spending cuts in federal health programs. Among the possibilities: tax hikes on alcoholic beverages, tobacco products and sugary soft drinks, and restrictions on other health care-related tax breaks, such as flexible spending accounts.


    ful article: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090512/...ealth_overhaul

    Gee, less than 24 hours after learning that Obama had received concession from the health care industry on rate hikes that would save 2 trillion dollars and fund coverage for the un-insured, we learn that tax hikes are necessary.

    Big surprise.

    And contrary to the promise that people earning under $250K would not be subject to tax hikes.

    Another big surprise.
    •  
  2. Visit Jolie profile page

    About Jolie

    Joined: Oct '01; Posts: 9,616; Likes: 14,041

    7 Comments

  3. by   herring_RN
    It is wrong to tax health insurance.
    We need a proper debate not the sham this administration is trying to put over on us.
  4. by   funnypharm
    They just said on the news today that a few big Insurance companies along with a sister company of Acorn is writing this bill. Sceptics say this will give the big insurance companies an angle forcing out smaller companies and well... Acorns sister company??? you guess (free ride)

    All this money will not come from soda pop and booze, this is a huge understatement. It is going to force down costs for the big insurance companies. You will see socialized medicine soon. Hospitals will be like the VA and doctors offices will be just like the free clinics. This change that is coming is going to be so ugly I'm scared to death.
  5. by   Pierrette
    How may I tax thee? - Let me count the ways.
  6. by   Agrippa
    Quote from Jolie
    W

    Gee, less than 24 hours after learning that Obama had received concession from the health care industry on rate hikes that would save 2 trillion dollars and fund coverage for the un-insured, we learn that tax hikes are necessary.

    Big surprise.
    Hmm...I wonder why you didn't quote this part of the article.

    On the controversial question of taxing health benefits, Baucus is staking out a position that could put him at odds with Obama.
    The president adamantly opposed such taxes during the campaign, arguing they would undermine job-based coverage. Obama's aides now say he's open to suggestions from Congress, even if he criticized Republican presidential rival John McCain for proposing a sweeping version of the same basic idea.
    Could it be that...GASP Obama and every democratic senator may have different points of view??!!!


    Please, if you're going to post a link and infer that it's Obama's fault that other people are talking about new ideas, make sure it isn't contradicted in the article you're citing. Typical conservative BS, right out of the Fox News, Rush Limbaugh playbook.
  7. by   ZASHAGALKA
    Quote from Agrippa
    The president adamantly opposed such taxes during the campaign, arguing they would undermine job-based coverage.
    I think that it is YOU that is being disingenuous to suggest that because President Obama was "adamantly opposed to tax increases" on the campaign trail that that means that he is now.

    1. The Senators would not be proposing tax increases if they didn't think it was a bill that would get signed. Their Party controls both the Senate and the WH. They DO coordinate.

    2. President Obama was anything but consistent on the campaign trail and he's been an outright liar since taking office. He's already drastically raised taxes on poor smokers. He actively advocates increasing your electricity rates by $4000/yr with cap and trade. Not some "rich" guy: YOU. He's backtracked on GITMO and Military Tribunals. When has this guy ever told the truth? He proposed decreasing our debt as he signed up for 1.8 Trillion in debt - THIS YEAR. At the same event! This guy talks out of both sides of his mouth, and always has. Just because you only listen to half of what he says doesn't mean that only that half will hold true.

    3. Government Restricted Healthcare advocates have always suggested that the new TAXES for this boondoggle would be cheaper than insurance now. First, that's absolutely laughable. That's a transfer to government and government is ALWAYS the worst choice for free choice, quality, and timeliness, but nevertheless: that IS a tax increase.

    4. Even if they borrow for this and don't "tax", it's still a tax. If you increase the monetary base by 25% the result - not immediately, but as it phases through the economy - will be drastic on inflation. So, in order to do that, the government just borrows and that devalues the dollar by 25%. THAT is a tax because - due to the policy decisions of the government, you have less spending capital and you have less capital because the government instituted policies - debt - that diverted that capital to it instead of you.

    5. Medicare is going bankrupt this year. There IS NO TRUST FUND. The trust fund is an IOU based on future tax receipts - YOUR FUTURE SALARIES. To borrow that money, the government must transfer that debt from you to somebody else and that means more debt - ON TOP OF WHAT WE ARE BORROWING NOW. We have already TAXED that system to the max, and well past it.

    6. We aren't borrowing enough now. We can't. There aren't enough takers. To pull a fast one, the government is issuing new dollars from the Fed to buy treasury notes. This is called "monetizing the debt" - creating money to pay for debt. If YOU did that, it would be called "check kiting" and you would go to jail. When a government does that, it signals a serious debasing of the money supply. Think JIMMY CARTER MALAISE.

    7. This Administration is moving at light speed because they know that the clock is ticking. There is going to be a blowback to their socialism and they want to get as much done before the 60 or so so-called 'blue dog' dems start to worry about their seats in the House. They should be worried. FOR THIS REASON, Hillarycare went down in flames in 1993 - and so did DEMS in Congress the following year. It's the same reason this will stall now.

    8. Americans are a generous people. They want everybody to have their basic needs. However. WHEN YOU PUT DETAILS ON THE TABLE that will socialize the average Americans' health care, they will balk. This has been consistently true. Your basic problem is that people inherently distrust government, as they should. "Free clinic" quality care might be OK for those that cannot afford it, but it's a no-sale for the majority that can.

    ~faith,
    Timothy.
    Last edit by ZASHAGALKA on May 16, '09
  8. by   Agrippa
    Wait...so someone says that Obama is for taxing health benefits. They post the link to the article. The article plainly and clearly says that Obama is against any such taxes, I point this out, and this makes me disingenuous? Are you for real?

    You need to get a real taste of reality instead of this delusional objectivistic world that I'm sure you would love. John Galt was fictional, Ayn Rand was wrong, and this is something you should have learned in high school. Although I'm sure you keep Atlas Shrugged next to your Bible, make sure you don't confuse one for the other.

    Be well.
  9. by   ZASHAGALKA
    Quote from Agrippa
    Wait...so someone says that Obama is for taxing health benefits. They post the link to the article. The article plainly and clearly says that Obama is against any such taxes, I point this out, and this makes me disingenuous? Are you for real?
    Yes. I point out that you are purposely misquoting outdated campaign materials in light of 2 basic facts: 1:Congress - controlled by Democrats and coordinated with the WH - are advocating tax increases, and 2: you cannot get to gov't restricted healthcare without raising taxes. You are talking about almost a trillion dollars a year. That doesn't grow on trees and can't be printed from thin air for long.

    You complain that others pick and choose while you do the same. Plus, YOU specifically said that others pointing out that taxes would be inevitable were being misleading and highly partisan. They were not.

    In order to nationalize health care, tax increases are inevitable. Refute that as you may. I'd really like to hear YOUR plan for taking over 1/7th of the economy while only taxing "the rich". Details, please, and don't suggest that taxing colas would be enough, although, that's a TAX.

    I just pointed out that Obama's campaign rhetoric isn't fact: it's that same highly partisan rhetoric that you were allegedly attacking while using.

    And. I'm not an objectivist, although "Atlas Shrugged" describes this Administration to a T. Barney Frank IS Wesley Mouch.

    Margaret Thatcher said that the problem with socialism is that eventually, you run out of other people's money. This Administration is determine to run out of money sooner than most. Elections have consequences. So does what you do while in office. Carter brought us Reagan and Obama will elect Palin. Want and see.

    Every time this government convinces itself that we must rely solely on Keynesian economics, they topple our economy. FDR required a war to save him. Carter required Reagan. Obama?

    Palin.

    ~faith,
    Timothy.
    Last edit by ZASHAGALKA on May 17, '09

close