Keep Tipping Your Servers

[alloytoo]

Everything.
You say a government healthcare system will result in a "better quality of life".

No, I'm saying that countries with UHC feature significantly higher on Quality of life rankings than countries without, with a significant chunk ranked higher than the US.
I'm also saying that UHC systems get better results for their spend.

I'm sure many will differ when their paycheques start decreasing in amount and many even start losing their jobs.

Of course they may feel better if a prolonged hospital stay doesn't cost them their house.

Economic collapse of the USA, no one said anything of the sort.

You're certainly implying it.

Monopoly on healthcare.
Government enforced (restricted) healthcare.
Monopoly on pricing.

Sounds peachy.

But I guess time will tell.

Even countries with UHC have room for competition and private enterprize. Of course in order to survive their proposition has to offer significant valueadd over the UHC system.

 

[porchrat]

Force? Voters have had 2 chances to reject Obama. Nobody has forced anything on anyone. It's democracy. It's the system they want. Deal with it.

Considering how few Americans actually bother to vote and that of those that do vote there exists a fair percentage that are voting against the guy they don't want to win, which is hardly an ideal circumstance, I would say that point is debatable.

 

[w1z4rd]

Considering how few Americans actually bother to vote and that of those that do vote there exists a fair percentage that are voting against the guy they don't want to win, which is hardly an ideal circumstance, I would say that point is debatable.

Most people who didnt vote would have voted Obama. There were plenty of stats and polls on this.

 

[porchrat]

Most people who didnt vote would have voted Obama. There were plenty of stats and polls on this.

Don't think that has anything to do with my point. Sure if forced to vote they would have voted for Obama but that isn't the same thing as actually wanting the system in the first place. One is still left wondering if this is indeed a system they want why aren't people participating more readily?

I'm not sure it is a system the majority of Americans actually want. That the average American wants democracy... yes I could swallow that. However that they want the particular version of democracy they have?.... I'm not certain of that.

 

[w1z4rd]

While Papa John Pouts About Obamacare, Another Pizza Company Sees Opportunity

The CEO and Founder of Papa Johns, John Schnatter, took douchebaggery to a whole new level when he stated that the Affordable Healthcare Act would force him to raise prices on his hot wheels of orange cardboard with sauce . Of course this is the same person who recently gave away 2 million free pies as part of a NFL marketing stunt and managed to find the money to purchase a massive ski mansion in Utah. But mean old Obama wants Schnatter to actually support the health of all his lowly employees who ensure his millions everyday. Why somebody in the food industry would want their employees coming to work sick and thus hacking into the pizza dough (might be an improvement in taste) is beyond reason, but one local pizza shop owner in Wisconsin is happy to watch his big business rival squirm.


Nick Martin, who’s part owner of a pizza shop with four locations in Wisconsin, doesn’t have the army of employees (and corporate attorneys on permanent retainer) or daily output that Schnatter does but yet has managed to offer full heath care coverage to his 50 full-time employees for years. But as you know, in order to be successful in business nowadays you have to double as a soul-sucking leach (and it helps to look like one), who’s all about skimping on quality and bettering the business bottom line at the expense of workers. Therefore, Martin’s very noble and decent decision of offering healthcare to his employees has made it incredibly difficult to compete with national chains like Papa John’s, where workers make slave wages and have no health benefits either all so guys like Schnatter can purchase more diamond-encrusted Hummer yachts. For Martin’s part, Obamacare really levels the playing field.

“This may level the playing field for us,” Martin said of the Papa John’s price hike. “If they have to pay for benefits, and that pushes their prices up closer to ours, it will justify what we’ve been paying for and what we’ve been fighting to do the past few years.” (Huffington Post)

In fact, one professor of economics at MIT agrees that Obamacare will force franchise giants to be on par with 60 percent of small businesses that pay employees health benefits.

“Evidence suggests that when health insurance costs go up, worker wages fall, rather than prices going up,” Jonathan Gruber said. “If firms are forced to give their workers health insurance, they generally react by paying workers less in wages; they don’t raise the price of goods.”

And since a major portion of Papa Johns employees are already making slave wages, Gruber pointed out. “So you can’t reduce wages for those employees, and the firm may have to increase prices a little bit,”he said. (Huffington Post)

So a company that’s merely two years old has managed to provide its employees with health coverage, but yet a mufti-million giant that’s been in existence for decades cannot do them same? Any way of making greed a pre-existing condition? Well, if Obamacare forces purveyors of crap like Papa Johns and Denny’s to suffer, America may not even need health insurance anymore since we will automatically be 100 percent healthier.

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/11/19/less-healthcare-bigger-mansions-papa-johns/

 

[Nerfherder]

Why? It's highly unlikely I'll be paying them. Will you be paying them?



I already enjoy Universal health care, paid for by my taxes, and I'm relatively happy about the allocation of the spend.

South African state health care is however an abject disaster.

+1

Its a disaster but if you got sick and lost your job you at lest have access to helthcare. In America, you are on your ass.

 

[BBSA]

Everything.
You say a government healthcare system will result in a "better quality of life".
I'm sure many will differ when their paycheques start decreasing in amount and many even start losing their jobs.



Economic collapse of the USA, no one said anything of the sort.

Monopoly on healthcare.
Government enforced (restricted) healthcare.
Monopoly on pricing.

Sounds peachy.

But I guess time will tell.

Amarica is on the brink of economic collapse and it cannot afford Obamacare. Obamacare is likely to be the final straw that causes the collapse of the USA like Argentina in 2001 , and for essentially the same reasons. (or more recently, Greece, Italy, Spain, Ireland, Iceland);

 

[ponder]

Whenever I read this thread title I picture someone pushing a bunch of servers over.

 

[Nicodeamus]

Whenever I read this thread title I picture someone pushing a bunch of servers over.

I actually read "keep tipping your strippers"

 

[empirex]

Amarica is on the brink of economic collapse and it cannot afford Obamacare. Obamacare is likely to be the final straw that causes the collapse of the USA like Argentina in 2001 , and for essentially the same reasons. (or more recently, Greece, Italy, Spain, Ireland, Iceland);

That's the point isn't it. Yet more taxes, in such turbulent financial times..

The middle class is already suffering, specifically business owners; students have never been in more debt than ever before (over a trillion dollars); more people than ever are on food stamps -- Obamacare wouldn't be the sole reason to pull the carpet out from under the US economy, but as you say it is yet another straw.

 

[alloytoo]

+1

Its a disaster but if you got sick and lost your job you at lest have access to helthcare. In America, you are on your ass.

I know of people who have gotten married, simply to extend health benifits to someone in need.

 

[empirex]

OBAMACARE SET TO HIKE DIVIDEND TAX TO 43.4%, CHINA CUTS DIVIDEND TAX TO 5%!

While the US is set to hike the estate tax to 55%, and hike the dividend tax rate from 15% to 43.4% courtesy Obamacare, China announced today it will slash its dividend tax rate in half from 10% to 5%!!

Ironically, the new government of the People’s Republic of China has decided the REDUCE their tax on dividends. Years ago it was 20%, then dropped to 10% in 2005. Effective January 1st, though, the dividend tax rate in China will drop to a mere 5%.

Tax rates across the board in the United States are set to increase dramatically in 2013. For example, if you happen to kick the bucket on or before December 31st, the government will charge a 35% tax on the value of your estate that exceeds $5 million.

If you happen to kick the bucket on January 1st, however, the tax goes up to 55%, and the exemption goes down to $1 million.

Moreover, this exemption is not indexed to inflation. Which means that the more Ben Bernanke prints, and the more asset prices become inflated, the more people will fall into this category.

Again, the message they’re sending is quite clear– citizens, even in death, are dairy cows for the government to milk.

Perhaps most shocking is increase in dividend tax rates, set to rise from 15% to as high as 43.4%. Individuals who start productive businesses are being heavily penalized. Individuals who save their money and put it to work investing in other people’s businesses are being heavily penalized. This says a lot about government values.

Ironically, the new government of the People’s Republic of China has decided the REDUCE their tax on dividends. Years ago it was 20%, then dropped to 10% in 2005. Effective January 1st, though, the dividend tax rate in China will drop to a mere 5%.

.

 

[alloytoo]

FUD

Four Major Lies About Obamacare Taxes

I don't what's more frightening, the FUD, or the 2 minutes it took to google the truth.

Don’t Believe the ObamaCare Myths

There is an popular opinion piece on FoxNews.com by John Kartch of Americans for Tax Reform called “Five Major Obamacare Taxes that will hit your wallet in 2013.” Shockingly, it is very misleading on nearly every issue it discusses.

Medicare Payroll Tax:
Kartch:
“The ObamaCare Medicare Payroll Tax increase
This tax soaks employers to the tune of $86 billion over the next ten years”

Facts:
You already pay a Medicare Payroll tax of 1.45%-2.9%. Starting in 2013 an extra .09% Medicare tax will be charged on individuals with income over $200,000.

Nowhere in the article does it mention that this extra .9% tax is on incomes over $200,000. The article misleadingly insinuates that everyone will have to pay this.

Surtax on investment income:
Kartch:
“The new ObamaCare surtax takes the top capital gains rate to 23.8 percent and top dividend rate to 43.4 percent. The tax will take a minimum of $123 billion out of taxpayer pockets over the next ten years.”

Facts:
Currently max federal income tax rate on long term capital gains and dividends is 15%. In 2013 it is scheduled to rise to 20%, and the max rate will increase to 39.6%. In 2013 all or part of net investment income, collected by higher income individuals will have a 3.8% Medicare contribution tax added.

The story, again, leaves out the fact that you must make over $200,000 per year to see this 3.8% increase.

Flexible spending account cap:
Kartch:
“The 24 million Americans who have Flexible Spending Accounts will face a new federally imposed $2,500 annual cap. These pre-tax accounts, which currently have no federal limit, are used to purchase everything from contact lenses to children’s braces. With the cost of braces being as high as $7,200, this tax provision will play an unwelcome role in everyday kitchen-table health care decisions.

Facts:
Under current law millions of people don’t take advantage of these accounts, because if you don’t use the money in them within a year, you forfeit all of the money in these accounts. It is known as the ‘use it or lose it rule.’ Most people don’t use these accounts because they can’t predict their future health care needs, and don’t want to forfeit the money at the end of each year.

Another thing he doesn’t mention is although before Obamacare there is no legal limit on these accounts, 78% of large employers set limits, typically around $5,000.

Be on the lookout for a change to the ‘use it or lose it rule’ sometime in the future.

Medical Device Manufacturing Tax:
2.3% tax on Medical Device Manufacturing: This is true, and there is a chance the manufacturers will pass this tax onto consumers.

High Medical Bills Tax:
Kartch:
“Currently, Americans are allowed to deduct medical expenses on their 1040 form to the extent the costs exceed 7.5 percent of one’s adjusted gross income. The new provision will raise the threshold to 10%. “The new ObamaCare provision will raise that threshold to 10 percent, subjecting patients to a higher tax bill. This tax will hit pre-retirement seniors the hardest.”

Facts:
Through 2016 taxpayers 65 and older, it stays at 7.5%, and for taxpayers in the alternative minimum tax (high income earners) they already pay 10% now. Also, to get the deduction in the first place you have to have enough other itemized deductions to beat taking the standard deduction.

 

[OrbitalDawn]

So what now empirex? Will you adjust your view, or keep regurgitating the FUD?

Did you see that MIT Professor saying that 60% of small businesses are already paying for healthcare for their employees, so Obamacare will actually help them by leveling the playing field. It seems the massive corporate leeches are the ones who don't want to assist their employees, thereby making life harder for the working class.

 

[empirex]

So what now empirex? Will you adjust your view, or keep regurgitating the FUD?

Did you see that MIT Professor saying that 60% of small businesses are already paying for healthcare for their employees, so Obamacare will actually help them by leveling the playing field. It seems the massive corporate leeches are the ones who don't want to assist their employees, thereby making life harder for the working class.

LOL OD, did you actually read both articles??
I suggest you take actually read both before making such comments, as it makes you look foolish.

It's an apologist fudge piece, nothing more.

I suggest you read what I posted here.

There are some outright lies like:

"The story, again, leaves out the fact that you must make over $200,000 per year to see this 3.8% increase."

"Nowhere in the article does it mention that this extra .9% tax is on incomes over $200,000. The article misleadingly insinuates that everyone will have to pay this."

It very clearly mentions the $200,000 figure!!! :wtf:

Then the article disgustingly just fudges points like this:

The Obamacare “Special Needs Kids Tax” – a $13 billion tax increase: The 30-35 million Americans who use a Flexible Spending Account (FSA) at work to pay for their family’s basic medical needs will face a new government cap of $2,500 (currently the accounts are unlimited under federal law, though employers are allowed to set a cap).

There is one group of FSA owners for whom this new cap will be particularly cruel and onerous: parents of special needs children. There are several million families with special needs children in the United States, and many of them use FSAs to pay for special needs education. Tuition rates at one leading school that teaches special needs children in Washington, D.C. (National Child Research Center) can easily exceed $14,000 per year. Under tax rules, FSA dollars can be used to pay for this type of special needs education. This Obamacare tax provision will limit the options available to these families.

It's a useful hit piece for people who don't actually take the time to read both articles.

 

[akescpt]

i wonder if normal voters realized this when they went to the polls...

 

[OrbitalDawn]

It very clearly mentions the $200,000 figure!!! :wtf:

I dunno, maybe the article was changed? Or maybe the guy didn't read properly.

Then the article disgustingly just fudges points like this:

What did it fudge? Just seems to me the article you posted didn't give the whole context and reality of the FSA.

What about the rest of it? Is it all nonsense? And what do you say about the majority of smaller companies and business owners already paying for healthcare benefits, and how this will effectively help them? Is this incorrect?

And anyway, a lot of that is for people earning over $200k per annum. Do you know how much money that is? 1.37% of the population earn that much.

 

[porchrat]

LOL OD, did you actually read both articles??
I suggest you take actually read both before making such comments, as it makes you look foolish.

It's an apologist fudge piece, nothing more.

I suggest you read what I posted here.

There are some outright lies like:



It very clearly mentions the $200,000 figure!!! :wtf:

The article referred to is not the article you posted. Did you perhaps not bother to read both articles?

The article clearly says it is responding to “Five Major Obamacare Taxes that will hit your wallet in 2013.” appearing on FoxNews.com written by John Kartch.

The article you refer to is "Top Five Worst Obamacare Taxes Coming in 2013". Also written by Kartch, but a different article. The response was pretty irrelevant for sure as it doesn't apply to the article you posted but you definitely didn't read both articles properly.

The original foxnews.com article does indeed not mention the $200 000 figure.

Take your own advice perhaps?

It's a useful hit piece for people who don't actually take the time to read both articles.

Oh the irony! You must really like the taste of your feet.

Feel free to apologise for your error whenever.

 

[RanzB]

i wonder if normal voters realized this when they went to the polls...

No, because most of it is nonsense.

 

[alloytoo]

It's a useful hit piece for people who don't actually take the time to read both articles.

FSA's are interesting animals.

It seems to involve setting aside pretax money for potential medical expenses.

The gamble of course is that the funds can only be used for their designated purpose, so that imposes a practical limit to how much people can put away. (So they're weren't really unlimited in reality.)

The other factor is that these funds are "Use if or Lose it." so potentially they can effectively be 'taxed' at 100%.

There are two kinds, Health care, limited to $2500 per year and dependant care deductions are already limited to $5000 pa.

It would seem to me that the special needs kids would fall under the later, which is unchanged.