I don't think the question is very personal at all, but my point was, if you do, then why do you care so much about the mandate (which is only a detail of the bill anyway)?
Should Americans be required to buy health insurance?
- Thread starter TheLonelySquire
- Start date
I don't think the question is very personal at all, but my point was, if you do, then why do you care so much about the mandate (which is only a detail of the bill anyway)?
15% of what? Where specifically are you getting that figure?
So now you're against those who are working receiving benefits because they aren't earning enough in your estimation? That's a LONG way from a "free ride". Make up your mind. Stop moving the goalposts.
Which would be no different what happens now (a point that certain people seem unable to grasp). When they pay their insurance premiums it all goes into one big pool of money from which other people's claims are paid out. So it along comes Mr X with heart condition the insurer could pay out $200,000 to cover his surgery which is well in excess of what premiums he's paid and is likely to ever pay. So those premiums paid by Ms Y have gone to cover some-one else.
Just like what would happen with UHC system.
IOW pretty much every complaint that gets made by certain people about UHC already exists within the U.S system while at the same time not always existing in countries with UHC.
Well for starters, you are free to not have children. And in any case, in Arizona you don't need permission or approval to homeschool, you just have to "notify" the local school board of your intent to homeschool.
But I digress. I concede the point that you must educate your children. However, you do NOT have to educate them via the "government option".
Does Arizona require you to pay a school tax even if you are childless?
I have never heard of a specific "school tax" per se.
As I understand it the educational system is paid for by property taxes. I think the various school districts get some kind of state subsidy which varies by district and which could come from either sales tax or state income tax. However the vast majority of public school funding comes from property tax.
Obviously you don't pay property taxes if you don't own property, and the amount you pay is not at all affected by your child status.
Child status indirectly affects how much sales tax you pay, since typically if you have more children you'll buy more things and pay more sales tax.
Child status REDUCES the amount if state income tax you pay. More kids equals less tax.
In SC, the county hits you with the school taxes, in addition to property taxes. Also, bond referendums, etc. I agree with you regarding the sales/income tax effect of having a child. I've often wished that I could count my dogs as deductions too...
Which is WRONG in my opinion. I ay 1 deduction regardless of number of kids. Ideally, and more fairly to those that don't have kids, no tax deduction for having kids. Plus do away with the marriage deductions.
I'm more in favor of one set standard deduction per each member of the household, whether they work or not, and no difference in the rules between filing as single or married.
Severely limited government.
Do away with ALL deductions for people and business. Flat tax of perhaps (guessing) 8% for anything over $30K/year. Trim government to work within that budget.
ST-One
Vice Admiral
Great!
You just solved the health care problems of America: Businesses for all.
Miniature American flags for the rest.
Basically only the dependent deduction, and do away with any additional tax credits? If I was going my way, I'd do away with every deduction but a standard 8 to 10% of combined income, and medical or work related expenses, maybe medical insurance if we don't have UHC.
Example: Say you and your spouse make 65K, your deduction (barring medical/work) would be 6500 dollars. The same as a single person making the same amount of money. Since's it's a percentage, there's no preference of married over single.
Of course my long term goal would be to do away with tax refunds.
And how do you expect roads to be maintained? Pixie dust?
So did slavery. So, songs aside...it's a pretty worthless phrase.
In my perfect system there would be NO tax at all on any kind of income, and no tax at all on property. There would only be "transaction taxes", sales taxes, excise taxes, etc.
I have no problem with transaction taxes, but we'd have to set them at around (off the top of my head) 25 to 30% to make them a revenue generator, plus still have state and local taxes as a revenue stream for the states.
Roads could be offset, a bit, by making all interstates toll roads.
You do know that slavery has been gone for 144 years, right?
Roads=vehicle registration fees and gas taxes. Drive more, pay more.
30% would be a bit high, so you can imagine that in my "perfect system" the federal budget is much, much, smaller.
30% would be a bit high, so you can imagine that in my "perfect system" the federal budget is much, much, smaller.
Smaller federal budget I think is a dream long since dead.Roads=vehicle registration fees and gas taxes. Drive more, pay more.
30% would be a bit high, so you can imagine that in my "perfect system" the federal budget is much, much, smaller.
Oh I am well aware of that, but, you do what you can, you know?
