Who bears the tax burden if heathcare reform passes?

It is distributed progressively across the populace, with the wealthy bearing proportionally more of the burden, and with many middle- and working-class families receiving aid in the form of subsidies.

@dpworkin If what you said is correct, will middle class get a tax increase? If not, how is it “progressively across the populace”? Just Curious.

@missingbite: The middle class will get a tax increase. What dpworkin said is not accurate.

@dpworkin say if you’re a college student graduating next year, making 50k a year, will you have to worry about increased taxes? I think the answer is no, but I need to confirm. I am under the impression that the majority of the burden is on couples with income of 250K + (A tax on investment income).

But, I need to confirm before I go make any assertions!

There will be no increase in cost for the middle class. In fact, health care cost for the middle class and small business should go down almost immediately by 15% to 20%. (These are not my figures, they are the non-partisan CBO figures.)

@jhbao You are safe, although you will be required to be insured, you will likely receive a subsidy for your premium.

@jhbao: If you earn 50K a year in your day job you should be investing 10K of it. If someone earning 50K per year saves their money instead of relying on the government for retirement they will likely pay MORE taxes on the investments in absolute dollar amounts than on the original money earned.

@malevolentbutticklish I think @dpworkin is right. No increase in taxes for the middle class. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/health-care-reconciliation/

@dpworkin jhbao: Wrong! How is someone investing 10K/year not paying increased taxes? Or are we going to say middle class people shouldn’t save for retirement and should just trust it to the government when they retire?

@jhbao, @dpworkin can’t be right then. He said the tax increase would be across the board and then said middle class would get none. It can’t be both. “Distributed progressively across the populace” would still be a tax increase for middle class. Otherwise the rich pay it all in tax increase.

@malevolentbutticklish As usual you make blanket statements with no factual support. Let us see the numbers behind your claim, please, and let us see that they are from a non-partisan source, otherwise, STFU.

@missingbite: Thank you. I wanted to say this myself but was worried about getting off target.

@dpworkin: The washington post is a partisan source. Are you telling jhbao to STFU?

Where did I quote the Washington Post? I quoted the CBO. Where are your figures from, please?

@malevolentbutticklish Is that what you think the average American does? Saves wisely?

@dpworkin—jhbao said the money was coming as a tax on investment income. Why don’t you ask him for his non-partisan source showing the money is coming from there?

@malevolentbutticklish The bill says a tax of 3.8% will be imposed on investment income from couples making 250K or greater. So if you’re making less than 250K, you’re safe,except you’ll be required to get insurance for yourself or pay a $700 fine.

I think @dpworkin meant that it’s progressive because it’s increases as your income increase because it is by percentage of income. Also, it is progressive because it separates people into income levels (less than 250k and more than 250k).

PS. Be cool, all! Let’s stay civil.

@JLeslie – many americans save, many don’t… more should

@malevolentbutticklish As usual, you have no sources. Your “contributions” to the discussion are just hot air, and can safely be ignored, which is what I intend to do.

@jhbao: You fail to mention the tax increase on capital gains for everyone coming in 2011. Here is my source for dpworkin http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704402404574527781844595304.html

Until Americans get past the idea that taxes are total anathema, we will not be able to make progress as a society. IN all other civilized countries, people are taxed to pay for health care. It is necessary that people be taxed progressively so that the burden doesn’t fall unfairly but the benefits of increasing access to healthcare and providing it more efficiently are enormous.

@janbb: It isn’t necessary that people are taxed for health care AT ALL. People should provide their health care with their own money.

I see, the WSJ is non partisan but the Washington Post is partisan. You are a stooge for the right. I suggest you write to Congress and exempt yourself from the bill.

@dpworkin: The Democrats would write me special exemption for the bill just like all the other kickbacks they provided if I had a vote in congress to bribe them with.

@malevolentbutticklish See, I guess that’s the basic difference between you and me. You think that everyone should take care of themselves, and I think we have a responsibility, as a humane society, to provide help with healthcare for those many who cannot afford its enormous costs.

@malevolentbutticklish I have a personal question that you may not want to answer. Have you ever taken advantage of Capital gains taxes? If yes, do you think you have decided to not invest if the taxes had been higher? Or, were you just happy to pay less? Happy the tax law happens to work that way?

@JLeslie: I will always invest. The question is where. America doesn’t have a monopoly on investments. Once they start taxing me (and people like me) beyond a certain level we simply leave. I already invest outside America and the country is on a path which is forcing me to invest more elsewhere and less here.

@malevolentbutticklish and @dpworkin I just went to the most reliable source: The Bill. See it here: http://www.opencongress.org. Read section 313, to start.

So, the verdict is, in terms of the healthcare bill, if you’re marking less than 250k, you’re generally safe! Thanks all!

@malevolentbutticklish the capital gains tax rates are not related to the healthcare bill, at least directly, so not within the scope of my question. Also, what they are doing is NOT renewing the Bush tax cuts and letting it return to old levels. It’s not a new law.

On a personal note, I’m a investor myself and not too thrilled about the capital gains tax, but there are worst things in life. If it helps pay for people to have a better, healthier life, great. We’re all the same biology.

@jhbao: NOT renewing the Bush tax cuts under Obama is an increase. It would be easier to say that they are not connected but this is still hard for me to swallow.

@jhbao Done.

@malevolentbutticklish I dont want to hijack the thread about investments, so I will let it go for now to be respectful of @jhbao original question.

You get a GQ from me. lurve whore

@jhbao I almost gave you a GQ but then read your response that quoted the bill which showed me that you knew the answer to your question before you asked it! Why did you ask if you knew the answer?

Thanks for the lurve @janbb @dpworkin . @malevolentbutticklish , look your way man. Give the left some lurve.

@missingbite I didn’t… but the discussion got me excited so I went looking!

@ jhbao: For how many years has your family been in America? Why did they come? When the deal is better elsewhere do you pretend your family will still stay?

@jhbao I was just messing with you! GQ!

@jhbao: The new requirement for health-care insurance purchase: Why is this not a tax on people earning 50K/year? Right now they could have a bill as low as $0/yr. A couple years ago I had a $0/yr bill.

Plus @missingbite I live in the bay area so I get all my answers from Dems. I like to hear from people with opposite views, see what they have to say.

@malevolentbutticklish my family has been in america for 17 years. We came here because it’s a country that takes care of it’s people. Tax rates are pretty low in China, don’t think I’ll move there for that deal, haha.

@jhbao: It is interesting to me that you believe a communist nation does not take care of its people but that we do and then after coming here you vote to move us closer to communism?

Having healthcare is not moving us closer to communism. I’m thinking we should give veterans private health insurance, and let them fend for themselves since it is so good.

@malevolentbutticklish Haha, let’s leave the communism discussion for another day my friend.

@JLeslie: We have health care in America. We aren’t talking about having health care. We are talking about a government takeover of health care.

The tax rate is set regardless of what that money is spent on, so don’t go blaming healthcare reform for any of this. If the middle class winds up paying disproportionately more then it’s because they were getting raped before the bill was even drafted. If the uber-rich take a hit, it’s because W went too far onto the other side of the Laffer Curve.

Personally, I would like to see government not need to take over anything, but since there are so many sharks in the water and the government is there to protect us all, they have little choice.

Now, we could just say “fuck it” and go with anarchy. The businesses could do whatever, the people could do whatever, and there would be no government to intervene or tax us.

@JLeslie Having healthcare is not moving us closer to communism but having a government force someone to purchase something they don’t want is.

@missingbite: I estimate less than 20% of fluther.com users recognize this.

@malevolentbutticklish If that many.

Just out of curiosity, how is it that Germany manages to have both government healthcare and so many private insurance companies? Is it possible that the concept is sound even if the Obama administration’s specific plan is not? If so, is that any reason to denounce the whole concept?

@malevolentbutticklish – what exactly is the objection to paying taxes? No normal person likes to pay taxes, but reasonable people know why we have to pay them. This resistance to universal health coverage is very puzzling to us outside America.

I will not be getting what I want if this health care bill passes. I want the government to force people to pay into the healthcare system. I want single payer. If we can’t get that I want competition to be better, I hate that healthcare options are basically attached to our employers. I am a capitalist at heart. Right now it is not free enterprise, there are good ol’ boy back deals between CEO’s and their friends in the various health insurance companies, I don’t really get to choose much of anything because it is so much more expenisve for me to get healthcare outside of my employer, I should be able to shop anywhere. Even if the Republican point of being able to cross state lines was listened to, that does not solve that I still have to buy it from whoever my employer chooses.

It is currently set up for big business to control our health care, both our employer, the insurance companies, and even the doctor (well he is more small business) who is doing procedures to make more money or not get sued, instead of focusing on good health care.

Again, if siingle payer is so horrible why do we provide that to our military and veterans? I grew up military and I think it was better. I know a couple of doctors who went from the military to the private sector, and they agree the insurance companies screw around with good health care. The military has its flaws also, I know.

I might also point out that some of our best medical institutions have their doctors on salary, Johns Hopkins, Mayo, and more.

This bill will not change my health insurance at all. I hate my current insurance.

I regards to the government “forcing” us to have healthcare, I have a quick story that can shed some perspective on that.

When I was a teenager, I hated the law that fined us if we didn’t wear our seatbelt in the car. “If I die in a crash for no wearing a seat belt, that’s my problem!” Some times, I didn’t wear my seat belt just to make my point.

A few years later a Berkeley, a professor explained the law to me. It would change my perspective forever.

“That’s fine if you want to not wear a seat belt, but consider this: every time a patient is sent to the hospital because he was not wearing a seat belt, he’s taking the spot of someone else in the emergency room that needs treatment. If wearing a seat belt can reduce the chance of you going to the emergency room, you owe it to the public to make sure you don’t take the spot of someone that really needs it. Now get out of my office.”

I think this relates to healthcare. If we as a society are healthier (by going to the doctor more without worrying about costs), we allow doctors to have more time curing deseases that are not preventable. That’s why we owe it to the public to have this bill.

@JLeslie The days of competitive markets are over. If Capitalism was still about multiple entities trying to supply the needs/desires of the market with the best combination of quality and price then I would be right there with the Laissez-Faire crowd.

Too much collusion and corruption along with a lack of self-regulation at the expense of the consumer makes me think that we need a bit of intervention however. If your kid picked up a gun and started shooting, would you:
A) Take the gun away? That is Socialism.
B) Let him have his fun? That is ineffective government.
C) Give him more ammo? That seems to be how our system has been set up during my lifetime, and I wish it weren’t so, but we can’t get the good old days back.

While I often seem partisan, it is mostly in response to the fact that I am jaded/cynical enough to realize that many of the theories of modern Conservatives are highly idealistic. The same is true of Liberals, but at least their flaws are obvious to most intelligent people so I don’t slam them often.

@jerv yeah, I believe we are thinking along the same lines. The golden rule is out the window, we can’t leave it up to a business owner’s good nature and integrity to treat the public fairly. Greed has gone too far, and businesses have become too big. Ironically, I am annoyed with the idea that big business is basically like mini-governments with too much control over our lives. I know it sounds like I am talking out of both sides of my mouth. But it is the right wings defending of these big business’ that I cannot understand.

I look at it like this. The government would not do a perfect job at healthcare, but their main intent would be to provide healthcare to the masses. Sure, some money would be wasted or spent poorly. Medical insurance companies have the priority of making money, their business happens to be health care because they can make money at it. They too make some stupid decisions concerning costs, etc. But, if I have to choose who is going to help take care of me I want the one with the intention of providing health care, not of making money.

@jhbao Your professor was almost correct. However the flaw in their reasoning on the seatbelt law is that like most things it was about control. I would argue that as a passenger in the backseat of the same automobile will end up in the hospital. Also if the car hit a city bus, some of the injured, who are not even supplied a seatbelt, will end up in the hospital. Should you wear a seatbelt? Sure. Should I be forced to pay for my own medical bills if I’m not wearing one? Sure. Should the government force me to wear one? No! Not to mention, Let’s say you don’t wear a seatbelt, get into an accident, go to the hospital, and have $50,000.00 worth of medical care. Will it really matter to you that you got a $25.00 ticket for not wearing one? And on top of that, the $25.00 you pay in a fine won’t go to paying down the medical costs. The law was about control and raising taxes.

@jerv If you truly believe that competitive markets are over then do you really want the government to control everything? You lost me a little bit on the gun issue because your analogy shows the problem with government intervention. It leads to a nanny state where it take responsibility away from the citizen. I grew up with guns from a very early age and therefore knew the consequences of shooting one. That came from my father, not the government. We need more people to take care of things themselves. The more the government gets involved the less people do for themselves and nobody can do everything, even the government.

Who always bears to burden of additional taxes? Everyone who worked hard and saved their money and invested wisely. They are taxed to support the needs of those who did not work hard, did not save their money, did not have money to invest, who didn’t take care of themselves, and who now think the rest of the Country owes them free healthcare, free food, free housing, and God only knows what else.

@missingbite I also grew up with guns and learned at a young age that they are not toys. However, that option is not available in this analogy since that would be acting responsibly, which is apparently verboten in 21st-century America.
Please prove me wrong on this! I would love to see us act all rationally and fairly without intervention, to be able to govern ourselves and protect ourselves without needing some higher authority to intercede on our behalf. But the truth is that in that regard, we (collectively) are basically the equivalent of a petulant three year old.

@jerv That is where we disagree. We only act responsible when we are forced to. Like I said before, the more we let the government do the less we will do for ourselves. We will always have to have some sort of government oversight, but we don’t need and most people don’t want government intervention. Responsibility comes from a lack of others not doing it for you. You learned about guns from your family or other adults because nobody else would. Now the answer is to just make them illegal because someone did something bad.

As to healthcare, so as there is no thread drift, the more the government “makes” us do, the less responsibility we will take. What’s next, no more salt on food in restaurants because it’s bad for us? Oh, wait, we are trying to outlaw that in NY. It’s a slippery slope and the wrong direction for this county.

I am not some heartless person that doesn’t want the best for our citizens. I would like all people to have affordable healthcare. However, the answer is not in this bill. Nor is it in a one payer system. It is not the governments place to tell me what to buy. This bill is about control, expansion of government, and entitlement programs.

I think we need to re-work many of our entitlement programs in the US. Welfare, is a great example. Why do I have to pass a drug test to work, but not to receive welfare? Why, barring physical or mental limitations, shouldn’t people accepting welfare have to work a few hours a week for their check? Welfare is supposed to be a short term crutch for the needy yet where I live we have people teaching their kids how to stay on it forever. I’m all for helping the people of need but it can’t be a handout, it has to come with limits.

Healthcare will pass. It’s too far along not to. I am against this bill if you had any doubt before. Something will give in the near future. We can’t keep on with entitlement programs. If we truly wanted healthcare reform, we would do simple things that would help before trying this 2000+ page bill that includes student loans and adds 16000 IRS workers.

Let’s spend stimulus money to open health clinics all over the US freeing up the emergency room and create jobs. Let’s open up state lines for insurance companies. Let’s see real tort reform. Let’s do anything and everything we can before we force people to purchase something they don’t want.

@bea2345: What is my objection to paying taxes? I know what I get done for $100. I know what the government gets done for $100. I know whatever little the government does get done for that $100 is going to be a big fat reward for some big fat welfare mother to continue sucking down even more taxes and having even more mentally challenged crack-baby kids.

@jhbao: Your professor is wrong. If you pay for your medical care you are creating your own bed. Imagine if we applied this argument to the PlayStation 3. When you purchase a PlayStation 3 it isn’t one less for someone who really needs it.

@missingbite “We only act responsible when we are forced to.”
If you think we disagree then either you misread or I mis-typed! Now, if the insurance companies hadn’t been such greedy fucktards all these years then maybe this sort of reform would never have become necessary. Unfortunately, they were and thus it did.

I don’t want to see us become like Demolition Man where they outlaw sex, chocolate, spicy food, salt, smoking, and anything else not good for you (“Anything not good for you is deemed bad, and thus illegal.”) but I would like to see someone take care of the people who, through no fault of their own, can’t take care of themselves.

Of course, what I’d really like to see is us hit the reset button and restart from scratch instead of taking a flawed system and try to fix it with bandaids and baling wire. And while I applaud what the intent of this bill is, I agree that it is FAR from an optimal solution, and will cause many other problems down the road. Unfortunately, it’s the best we can do unless we want to go back to square one and start with a clean slate.

You and I are actually closer on this issue than you think.

@jerv My mistake. Glad to hear we are closer than I originally thought.

I think it is not all or none. Many times I here people talking in very black and white terms. The government will control EVERYTHING, or the government should not control ANYTHING. We can find a balance; it is what American has been for a long time a hybrid of capitalism and government that helps to protect us and keep society civil. Sometimes we need to tweak the balance, we make mistakes, but then we need to adjust again. Society changes over time, and we need to learn and change with it. We also need to be willing to try new things when a process or system has not been working, or has ceased to work.

@JLeslie We need the government to govern through regulating. Not control through governing. We as a people will always be able to do anything better than the government. When a government controls what I spend my money on for the better good of the rest of the people, I believe, that is a step toward socialism at best.

@malevolentbutticklish Do you know how much your doctor charges for various procedures? Many times they don’t even know, it seems it is up to the insurance company, and let’s not forget you better have the right coding. I get surprise bills all of the time, that is where my $100 goes. Well, about $500 very recently. I will be paying another $500 shortly for my colonscopy because it is considered diagnostic, because I am under 50, even though I am getting a routine one considering my medical history, it is not diagnostic it is preventative. If I were 50 years old it would be covered 100%. Same procedure. How is that ok in your mind?

I felt some pain in my breast, boom, now considered diagnostic to get a mammogram, only partially covered as diagnostic. If I am sick and might be dying I have to pay more. Routine mammogram free for me.

I was once denied coverage for medication to rid myself of an ectopic pregnancy. Ectopic pregnancy! You know, the kind if it progresses your tube bursts and you can bleed to death, at minimum you need expensive surgery. The insurance company did not want to pay the $450. I finallly said I would ay and fight them later. I was chanrged around $45. Totally f**ked up system. In that my insurance company is getting ripped off. I am 100% sure that if I had that ectopic while under military care, I would have received the shot, no questions asked. I actually received my first shot when I was in the hospital and it was all covered, but then when it did not work (which happens in about 15% of the cases from what I understand) I needed to attempt a second dose, and that time they decided they wouldn’t pay. All seems pretty random and stupid to me. Doesn’t seem like doctors who know what they are doing are running my medical care, seems like non-medical businessmen are.

@JLeslie: It sounds to me like you purchased health insurance which only covers limited procedures and then you had buyer’s remorse. If you only get insurance for your teeth why would you be upset your eye bill wasn’t covered? You need to look at what your health care covers and then purchase accordingly. As for me I am always covered 100% for every procedure all the time. I am self-insured. No hassles, no red tape, no denials. I do find out what procedures cost in advance unless I know the procedure to be trivial.

It’s all moot now, folks. It will pass tonight, around 8:00.

@JLeslie Your examples are all valid. Part of the reason doctors charge so much for some is because they have to cover the cost of procedures that medicaid patients don’t. In other words, a medicaid patient needs a procedure. It cost the doctor $500.00 to do the procedure and make a profit. The government decides that is too much and pays him $75.00. Guess who pays the rest. The next person with cash or insurance. So what do the insurance companies do? Charge more. Billing is impossible to understand in the medical field because nobody pays the same. That is a big problem with this bill. We will add about 30 million new patients with no new doctors or nurses (who are already in short supply) and the government will regulate how much money they can charge. That means more doctors will stop taking medicaid.

You said before that you were a capitalist at heart but wanted forced health care. You can’t have it both ways. Remember that the VA and military have a different system as a benefit for people to volunteer their service. Which you must have done and I thank you for that. That doesn’t mean the same system should force me to purchase anything. Did they force you to sign up and serve? Maybe we should do that too.

@malevolentbutticklish The problem @JLeslie has is that her company chose the insurance. She could have purchased more or looked for a better company, but @JLeslie has a problem with the insurance companies being greedy.

At least that is the way I read it. I apologize if I got it wrong.

@malevolentbutticklish I have what my husbands company offers. My insurance right now is the sucky one that does not cover my colonoscopy or mammogram if it is coded diagnostic. The ectopic was years ago, different company, different coverage. If his employer gave me the thousands they pay for my insurance coverage I would go shop for myself.

@missingbite @JLeslie: When you accept a job you also accept their benefit plan or lack thereof. If you don’t want their benefit plan don’t take the job!

Around 8 p.m., you say? I’ve been awatchin’ and awaitin’!

@dpworkin The real fun will begin at about 8:15. Obama signs it into law at 8:05 and about 10 minutes later the states will start filing suit to find out if it is Constitutional. It ain’t over till it’s over.

The Chinese. They pretty much own us.

@malevolentbutticklish Okay then, you just endorsed people living on the government dime at taxpayer expense. Congratulations, you uber-Socialist slacker!
Sorry, but employers will always try to cut costs and the first place they often do so is insurance.

@lillycoyote, Actually the Japanese own more of us than the Chinese, we just like Chinese products better.

@jerv: Where did I endorsed people living on the government dime?

@missingbite My father was in the military not me, did not want to be misleading. I agree doctors try to make up for low medicaid reinbursements by charging others more. Let’s get rid of that crap. Medical care should be a fair price for everyone. I want doctors to make great salaries, BUT my uncle was making a million dollars a year for a while there, that seems excessive to me. Because back in the day opthamologists charged mega money for the surgery that corrects vision, and other procedures he did/does. They, the doctors took advantage of the new technology to really stick it to the consumer. Finally over time, you could say through competition, the prices came down. But, I would argue the prices should never have been that high.

@malevolentbutticklish You are kidding me. I have enough money to pay for whatever medical care I need. That is not the point. The point was the illogic of the medical coverage. It is not what any of these companies and politicians preach as being our current system. In my mind my insurance company is not focusing on preventative care. I guess that just means flu shots to them. They keep saying the majority of Americans are happy with their insurance, and I say bullshit.

@JLeslie: I do not see any illogic in the medical coverage. The list of what they cover is minimal to reduce costs. This is logical since many people just want to purchase “health care” without much regard for what is covered. They worry about that later when it is too late.

@JLeslie Thanks for correcting me and thanks to your father! I have no problem with your Uncle being a millionaire because he learned how to do elective eye surgery. I have had Lasik and it was the best thing ever. However, your analogy is exactly why we don’t need the health care bill. Lasik is not covered by insurance or government run systems. The price was high at first and with capitalism, the more it became available the more affordable it became. What we do have with Lasik is government regulation and oversight.

@malevolentbutticklish So, it is better for me to get diagnosed with cancer at 48 than to have a colonoscopy at age 42 to catch a polyp before it ever become cancer? How is that cost effective. It’s stupid.

@missingbite I would argue that capitalism only works for the consumer when there is competition. Sometimes there isn’t. If you live in a smaller town and there is little competition you are at the mercy of the one person providing the service whether it be medical, or cable tv, or a hair cut. I agree regulation can cure some of this. I am open to other solutions. I just, like I said, do not see it as black and white; or, all or none. And, vehemently disagree with @malevolentbutticklish and others like him/her (sorry I don’t know your gender) who think everything is fine how it is.

@malevolentbutticklish Though unintentional, you basically said that people didn’t need jobs. Reread the last sentence of my previous post until you understand.

Preventive care is not considered cost effective since funerals are cheaper overall than even diagnostic care. Only the rich and well-insured deserve to live anyways.

@JLeslie: You won’t be. In the end, didn’t you pay for your colonoscopy?

@malevolentbutticklish You always pay for your colonoscopy in the end!

@jerv: People do need jobs. I never said otherwise. They must select out of all possible jobs (including self-employment). You are of course responsible for your own employability.

@missingbite O.K. Well, you’re right but it’s only been recently that the Japanese surpassed China as the biggest holder of U.S. debt. I know that now (thanks :) ) but they’re still pretty close ($768.8 billion for Japan vs. $755.4 billion for China, down from $801.5 billion in may 2009). Apparently China dropped about $35 billion of it’s US holdings at the end of last year, and another $10 billion went somewhere, so it just recently dropped behind Japan. I think I knew that, but forgot. Just tossing off a smart ass answer, without checking my facts. Mea culpa.

But if you want to get technical, Hong Kong holds another $146 billion in US debt which is not included in China’s total.

I can’t say that these numbers are completely accurate as of today, but I think they should be pretty close, give or take a few billion, here or there.

O.K. I hope that settles that. : ) And thanks for setting me straight. Really, I should know these things and that one just kind of slipped by me.

@lillycoyote GA. I was just playing. It’s all bad. We should “own” ourselves!

@malevolentbutticklish So you were full of it when you said, “If you don’t want their benefit plan don’t take the job!” then, right? I mean, by that logic, most people would be unemployed! Would you rather I stayed on unemployment forever since no employer wants to offer me affordable insurance or a high enough wage to buy my own? If not then you put your foot in your mouth big-time and should really read what you are actually posting before you hit the button.

Oh, and insurance for the self-employed is almost as much of a bitch as it is for the unemployed. The tax codes generally are not friendly to small business anyways, so the only way many self-employed people can afford insurance is to price themselves out of business.

@JLeslie I agree. That is why I want things like insurance across state lines. Something we don’t have and the Democrats will only say they will create a panel to look into it. It is law now that insurance companies can’t offer insurance across state lines because of state laws. That is where the government blocks competition. Rest assure, this bill is not about health care. It’s about control.

@jerv: I wasn’t full of it. If you don’t like the insurance take another job. If you don’t have any other choices you didn’t do what it takes to be more than marginally employable.

@missingbite Yes, absolutely, it’s all bad and we very much should own ourselves. But people want everything and they don’t want to pay for it. We should go back to selling war bonds to fund our little excursions overseas. See how that goes over with the folks on the homefront.

@malevolentbutticklish I will be paying, yes. Because I have little choice. I can’t believe you are going to try to stick by that it is good healthcare. I have agreed with ideas about capitalism and competition even though it goes against the basic idea that I want single payer, you seem unable to agree where the current system has some failures.

And, what if I don’t need or want to work? I am not entitled to be part of a group? That group shit is ridiculous also. If the insurance company has 450,000 people covered by them, why do I get counted any differently whether I work for a company or not if I am paying for coverage? We are all Americans.

@malevolentbutticklish So NOBODY is employable. Gotcha ;)

Many employers don’t even offer insurance anyways, rendering it moot. But if the current job market where the employers can afford to get away with murder make you think that anybody who can’t get any job they want is inferior and unfit to live then it might be best if we all just shut up and left you alone in your little world. It’s obvious that you have no empathy, no compassion, and nothing constructive to add here.

@missingbite I agree that if we stick with our system, which we are, even with the new bill, we should have competition across state lines, BUT the problem is still there that health insurance for the most part is attached to our employer, and the employer is picking.

Imagine if when you bought your house the builder said you must buy State Farm or Allstate.

@lillycoyote We agree. Let’s also sell health care gift cards. The rich who want health care for everyone and can afford it can by procedures for those who can’t.

@JLeslie You are correct. But keep in mind that the insurance your employer provides is highly subsidized by the employer. It’s a benefit. It’s not perfect but with more competition like crossing state lines, more employers will be able to get better insurance because it will be cheaper. Small companies should be able to pool resources to get better coverage. Kind of like the IGA does to offer small grocery stores better prices. All of these things are great but aren’t in the bill. Because that give us control and not the government.

@jerv: I am employable. People call me up with job offers from time to time or invite me out to dinner because they haven’t seen me in a while and then drop it on me that they want me to work on some project.

@missingbite So let the employer give me the option to take the money and I will buy my own insurance. I am fine if he makes me prove I am using the money for health care.

@JLeslie: If you don’t need or want to work then you can pay for your own health care (as I do) or you can find a policy for an individual. If you are not part of a group how could you expect a group policy?

@malevolentbutticklish You must either have a rare occupation with high demand or not be in America then.

@JLeslie That must be a state law. I can do that with my employer. You should be able to do that if you want to. Check it out.

@jerv: I am in the USA. My skill set includes software, banking, and real estate (including renovation such as electrical and plumbing as I know you were once an Electricians Mate).

@malevolentbutticklish How old are you? Have you ever been very sick?

I am saying I don’t think the idea of a group policy is legitimate when it comes to health care. This is people’s health we are talking about, not buying paper towels in bulk.

@missingbite Interesting. What state do you live in? But you would still run into the problem that group insurance is less than private as it stands now I would guess.

@JLeslie: I am in good health and have not been “very sick” since I was a teenager.

@JLeslie You are correct it will cost a lot. That is why we need more competition. I live in Louisiana and as long as I show I have insurance, I can drop my employers. Let’s say I have a company on the side that is very lucrative. I can purchase my own and drop my employers. Or I can use my wife’s if hers is better. We have options. They are usually more expensive. Small companies pay more because they have fewer employees putting into the “pool”. That is why we should allow small companies to join forces. Again, not in the bill.

@malevolentbutticklish And there lies the problem. Insurance is great until you get sick. That is what we liberals have been complaining about.

@missingbite I think we are all part of the pool. Again, look at home and car insurance. Why is medical insurance so different? I don’t have to get all of my neighbors to buy the same windstrm policy to get decent coverage or have a choice. Small companies joining forces is reasonable short of what I want, but still does not help the self employed.

Also, the pool would be biggest with mandatory participation from the government, but then I know you don’t want that.

@JLeslie: Again, I do not have, need, or want OR LIKE insurance. I always advocate saving your own money but almost no one wants to do so.

@JLeslie Because home and car insurance is optional. Nobody if forced to buy a house. Competition is why home and car insurance is priced reasonably. That is why we have so many Geico commercials. Again, it’s about competition. If Geico goes up, switch to State Farm. We are governed against that in health insurance. The government is in the way of competition with health. Free up the laws to provide competition and prices will go down.

@malevolentbutticklish I stand corrected. Anybody with less luck than you is unfit. At least that is how you are coming across.
When was the last time you’ve been laid off and found that every skill you have is one that pits you up against hundreds of people with at least twice the experience you have in that field? That is why I got out of being a machinist; no demand here, and what there is is too competitive. Ditto the electrician gig. Ditto the computer repair or auto mechanic jobs. Hell, even the grunt laborer jobs are hard to find and those pit you up against thousands instead of merely hundreds.

Also, when was the last time you got injured on the job badly enough to be medically unable to work for months and still suffer physical limitations over a decade later? Did your employer pay all of the bills or did they try to make you pay at a time when you had no income and little savings, most of which you needed to make rent while you healed?

Maybe the reason you and I can’t see eye to eye here is that you have lived a charmed life and yet consider yourself the minimum; the lower limit of acceptability. You think that good jobs are out there for the asking because you never had a problem getting one.

You seem to think that everybody is either rich enough to have a large nest egg/rainy day fund or too lazy to live. In short, you seem delusionally elitist. Can you see why there is so much backlash against you here?

@malevolentbutticklish So if you get sick and need $100,000 worth of medical treatment you are all set? I think you think I don’t want to save?? I own my house and three porsches outright, because I saved. When I say Americans don’t save I am not talking about myself. I’m saying I want the government to force people to save, because I don’t want to get stuck paying for the idiots who don’t save. I have the same argument for social security. There is also an element of any of us could get stricken with something that will be very expensive to afford the healthcare, and even if we are savers it could wipe us out. No one should have to lose their home because they get sick.

@missingbite We are almost agreeing. Free up the competition ok, but geico lets the individual get reasonable prices. If United Health care has 400,000 people in their system, they do whether it was acheived by a group or 400,000 individuals.

@jerv: You may think it is luck but I know it isn’t. I think that most people could have a much better life but choose not to through their choices. For instance, I see that self-employed electricians in MA (a place you would live) with 4 years experience earn over $20/hr ON AVERAGE. If you worked 60 hours/week you would earn 60K (unless you were a below-average electrician). There may be places in the USA which earn even more.

@JLeslie: Yes, I would be set, but what should force others to save isn’t reliance on the government but rather an unwillingness to rely on the government.

@malevolentbutticklish I find that naive. I understand that government programs can lead to people not supporting themselves, but most people only think about healthcare when they get sick. It is not like living and being able to eat every day. Plus, for many people in America, even if they did save, they would not be able to handle the $100,000 bill. So, do you not buy any insurance? Home insurance, car insurance, etc?

@JLeslie If we ever established a “living wage” then I would be all for having people save up. As someone who has largely been forced to live paycheck to paycheck for over a decade though… well, what works fine in theory doesn’t always work in practice.

@malevolentbutticklish I was trained as a shipboard electrician, so when it come to civilian electrical work I am officially the equivalent of a 2nd/3rd-year apprentice. I tried to get into the programs to get my WA license so I could get a piece of that action (they earn even more here) but either there are too many already licensed for anybody to want to bother with somebody without all of the documentation or just too many other people trying for the same program(s). Either way, I had to go knocking on other doors to pay the bills.

So I guess choosing to work for less money and remain living indoors instead of waiting for an electrician slot to open up was a bad choice. I suppose being laid off from my $40k+ machinist job and not being able to get back in was also a mistake on my part.

@JLeslie: I do not buy any home insurance but I am forced by law to purchase liability car insurance (*which I resent). Even a high-school dropout on minimum wage can easily save 100K in the USA by the time they are 25.

@JLeslie I think you and I are very close in opinion. We are apart on the single payer system. I’m not sure I follow the United Health Care part of your post. What did you mean by that. Unlike car insurance that is state regulated as to how much coverage each driver must have, health insurance is open. They can sell as little or as much coverage as you are willing to buy. Each policy is based on a “pool” that can have one person or several hundred thousand people in the “pool”. Prices are based on that which is why we should have less competition and more freedom for people to group policies together.

Tort reform is also another huge problem that we haven’t even talked about.

@malevolentbutticklish Easily? Maybe where the rents are cheaper than the women, but just because you live somewhere where you’d have to pay most people to move to doesn’t mean that the rest of the world is the same way.

Minimum wage is ~$15K/yr gross. $100K/ ($15K/yr) 6.6 years if they spend NO money at all.

@jerv: Why not study the NEC and get licensed in a state (or region) that simply allows you to take the electricians exam?

@jerv That is part of our problem. If it takes me moving to a place where I would rather not live in order to have what I need to live, I will. More should. It’s about freedom. I choose not to pay high rent so I can afford what I need without having the government tell other people to pay for me to live where I can’t afford.

Here is my math: $330750 = ((40*7.35+40*7.35*1.5)50)(25–16)

If they invested at 0% they would have to invest a third of their income but of course a reasonable rate of return may be 8% which would require just over 20% savings rate which is very reasonable.

@malevolentbutticklish Partly because I am not yet in a position to move anywhere yet. Once I get out of the hole and back on my feet it’ll be different. As it stands that may take a few more months, but at least I am able to pick myself back up unassisted… so long as we don’t hit another round of lay-offs.

And I don’t think that the interest rates are nearly high enough for that to happen with any low-risk investments, which is why I am a little skeptical. Last time I looked, they were less than 5% most places and even that high rate required a hella minimum to get.
Add in that living expenses often exceed ⅔ of minimum wage and I see your claim as an idealistic “best case” scenario. Now, if you had said $50K, I would’ve believed you easily. Even $75K maybe. Not $100K though. Not here and now.

@jerv: This isn’t best case. Best case is you live with your parents and save your money having 100K banked by the time you leave the house as others are graduating college.

@missingbite I am not explaining myself well. It is my fault. Take for instance the fact that the company I have home and car insurance with gives money back at the end of the year if their kitty is over a certain amount. Not sure if all insurance companies do this? I have always been with the same company. After the big hurricanes several years ago no checks were in the mail at the end of the year, but a few year later, having built up funds again, we received a check this year. Same with my real estate license. I was paying something like $60 a year to renew, but then the state’s pot of money to cover realtor insurance needs filled up to its maximum, and last time I renewed it was just $5 for administrative fees I would guess. I don’t see any medical insurance companies giving back money or lowering fees, rather they are paying their CXO’s and doctors (doctors who work for the company) very well and showing fabulous profits for their stockholders.

So back to my point. If UHC, or BCBS, or Aetna, whoever you pick, has three insurance plans each let’s say to pick from, I don’t think prices should be higher or lower if you are part of a group or not. If they are good plans they will get the people to sign up. They can use the scenerios I describe above to reimburse people if they wind up not needing all of the money. If it does not work for business to offer a singleton the same as a person in a group then that is just another reason I am for single payer.

I have to log off, I will look for your answer later. :)

@malevolentbutticklish .. and then move as far away from Texas as humanly possible :D

I tried something similar. I seem to blow up cars, tear up my knees, get laid off, or something similar often enough that compound interest never gets a chance to work. It seems that the more I try to do the right thing, the deeper a hole I get into.
The last time we had a few thousand saved up, we blew a transmission that ran us dry. We saved up a chunk to move West and had to spend a bit of it staying alive with no heat, water, or power for a week after a nasty storm; a few hundred dollars that would’ve eased our move had we been able to cook at home and not needed to buy survival gear.

Some of it is me, but you have to admit that luck is an element, and one that I seem to lack.

@malevolentbutticklish And having a father-in-law get laid off, lose his insurance, then spend four months in the ICU doesn’t help either. $100K out of pocket and they needed our help to keep the house. THat’ll bleed a nest egg dry too.

@jerv: a few thousand? That should be enough to purchase two (or three!) used cars. If you helped your father-in-law that is terrific but you should of course now have a lien against the house in that amount so you are sure to be paid back and consider it an investment at the 10% interest rate you charged.

@JLeslie I understand your concern. The difference is again that government is regulating health insurance companies into a fault I believe on purpose so they can run health care. Joe Biden even said it yesterday. “We will control the insurance companies”. Even after the hugh salaries paid to executives, all insurance companies operate on a very small profit margin. It’s like gas prices. A couple of years ago everyone was pissed at Exxon/Mobil for making a profit with high gas prices but everyone failed to mention or realize that Exxon/Mobil only makes about 3 cents per gallon sold while the government taxed close to 40 cents per gallon sold. Exxon/Mobil just sold a lot of gallons. OPEC raised the prices but we were convinced it was the greedy oil execs.

@malevolentbutticklish Are you freakin’ kidding? What your source says there will be a 5% surtax on incomes of over $500,000-The same people who pay a lower proportion of their income in taxes because of current tax code. Now they will have to pay at least $25,000 a year. A single person making $50,000 pays about $10,000 almost 20% Duh!.

And the capital gains tax, another red herring. I think capital gains should be taxed like ordinary income. After all, most of us can’t afford to buy a Picasso to hang on the wall and when it is sold at 5 times the price, pay only 15% tax on the profit. I pay over 30% tax on every single extra $ I earn by the sweat of my brow. The capital gains tax pre-Reagan was 28% during the greatest American decades. Over 54% of that tax affects millionaires, almost none by people earning LT $75,000. You have the wrong forum with that kind of information.

@malevolentbutticklish The in-law thing is a long story that I won’t derail the thread for beyond saying that if we tried to put a lien on that house, we would’ve had to take a number (a fact we didn’t know at the time).

As for the thousands, we’re only talking ~$3K here, and we had to loo around quite a bit to get the job done and done right for under $5K. Had we owned the car outright, we would’ve ditched it in a heartbeat but we didn’t want to take the hit for defaulting on the car loan, or pay for a car we no longer had. Of course, nowadays the situation has changed to where it’s actually encouraged to bail on any such debt, but a decade ago it was expected that you would repay your loans regardless. Since that little fiasco, we have yet to buy any car that we couldn’t pay for outright. Then again, had I known that I would’ve been laid off two years into the loan, we never would’ve even got that car. Live and learn.

My point is that even doing things right doesn’t always work out. Employers lay people off. Unforeseen expenses don’t always wait until your CDs mature. In short, shit happens.

@malevolentbutticklish – What is my objection to paying taxes?: my objections to taxation are pretty much the same as yours. Too much gets spent on make work programmes and the like to keep the voters happy. At the same time, my taxes pay my pension, my mother’s pension and that of countless thousands. These same taxes make it possible for me to obtain my diabetic supplies free of import duty and VAT. I can even get them free if I were willing to sign up with the public health services (but I am perfectly satisfied with my GP, whom I see privately). Our police may not be like the cops in Law & Order, but they are not Keystone cops, either. Their uniforms, equipment and training are provided by the State. Taxes pay for the air traffic control in the Piarco Area (from Antigua to Guyana) provided by the government of Trinidad and Tobago.

But above all, the chief function of government is to make the playing field level, to use a cliche. That’s why we pay taxes. Were it not for government’s involvement in health, education, transportation, communications, security, etc. etc. etc. these services would be beyond the reach of everyone except the very wealthy. Nothing stops the local equivalent of Bill Gates from going to a private clinic for an ingrown toenail. But what makes the private clinics here so attractive to visiting Americans is that they are cheap, relative to the same services in the US. And that is partly because the public health service, with all its flaws, is a reasonable alternative if you cannot afford private fees.

@bea2345 That is why I like sliding scales. Before my wife was eligible for insurance, we only got a 25% discount at the neighborhood medical clinic because our income (her pay plus my unemployment benefits) was just that high. Someone like Bill Gates would pay full price there while some people wouldn’t pay a dime.
Unfortunately, I don’t know what the cost would be to implement such a thing at every medical care provider so I can’t honestly say whether it would actually be a good idea overall. Still, it’s a thought.

In most modern civilized countries, citizens benefit from some form of universal health care. This benefit is funded by the populace through taxes that are scaled according to net income (gross income minus eligible deductions).

Taxes are not an evil in themselves. Neither is Universal health care. It is good public policy.

@jerv I have to think about the sliding scale. There has to be more than just that. I guess I want to focus on overall fees. Crack down on where the fees are too high in the first place, and like I have said above, stop giving doctors incentive to perform procedures that are unneccesary. I also think there should be laws against doctors having ownership in MRI centers, things along those lines. what do you think? Also, I think it was you who mentioend above getting paid a decent wage, I agree. People who work full time, work with integrity, and want nothing but to just do the right thing and take care of themselves and their families, should be able to live safely, afford food, shelter, and water. Those basics should not be such a struggle.

@missingbite I agree it was OPEC, and maybe the taxation of gas should be looked at, but also the profits are hard to ignore. Also, I think Americans don’t change their behavior unless things get very painful, so since I prefer we were not dependent on other countries for oil and gas, I have mixed feeling on the whole thing, and it is of course a whole other topic we could get into that I will resist on this thread.

I probably would agree with you about the government messing some of it up with regulation, and in other places I would probably think it is underregulated. What it comes down to for me is I wish I was still on military health care, which is single payer run by the government. The discussion I have had with you is me knowing I will never see it, so what is the best alternative.

I getthe feeling that this health care bill won’t change much, excpet for the preexisting clause, I think that is important. Since they are not forcing anyone to buy health insurance (I think many of the Americans who don’t have insurance don’t want to spend the money on it, rather take the risk) and if I am not mistaken the public option isn’t in the bill, so these people with no inusrance stil lhave to deal with these expensive insurance companies who can still charge individuals higher rates, I don’t see what really changes in terms of more Americans being covered, unless I am missing something?

I guess maybe there could be some sort of grass roots effort to form “groups” of individuals outside of the employer. Almost like how unions organized. That might be a good business idea. :)

@JLeslie As we all know now the bill has passed and it looks like it will be law. As far as the bill not changing much except for the preexisting clause, that is not really the case. Most of the bill won’t go into effect for another 3 to 4 years although we start paying for it now. The bill is not forcing a public option but it is forcing everyone to have insurance. That is why we will have 16000 + new IRS agents. We are paying higher taxes to subsidize less fortunate people to purchase insurance. If they don’t, they face a fine. Also, companies with a certain number of employees will have to provide insurance that meets the governments standards. If they don’t, they get fined. What this bill has done will cost all American more money. I will concede that this system may work but I have major doubts.

Back to the topics of what would work. Beside what we have talked about, I wanted to bring up a point that I thought of last night. (I have thought a lot about our discussion and really enjoyed it!) We were talking about your car insurance and how it is much more affordable. I would like to remind everyone that thinks that way that many people (myself included) have paid car insurance for years and never made a claim. I’ve been driving since I turned 15 and paid about $1000.00/year since then. (an average). I’ve been with the same company so they as of today have collected about 23K from just me. Some people have claims and pay more some less. I wonder how much my cost/year would be if I wanted them to pay preventive maintenance like oil changes and still cover me if I have an accident. I know this is simplified and someone will flame me for making an analogy that doesn’t work. However what I am trying to do is remind people that health insurance and car insurance are two different animals and can’t be compared.

In our country, we want to be able to eat anything, not exercise, smoke, drink, and whatever else and have insurance that only charges a copay of $20.00. This brings me back to responsibility and the fact that the government wants to make it “fair” for everyone by charging the rich higher taxes. I don’t think it will work without the government either intruding in our lives or limiting care of everyone unless you can afford everything out of pocket.

As for the fixes because I know someone will say all I can do is say the bill is bad and not offer solutions so here goes. Why didn’t we start with zero cost items to see where it led? Open up state lines and let insurance companies compete. (0 cost) Pass real tort reform. This will keep doctors from running sometimes unnecessary tests just to cover their butts from a law suit. (0 cost) Pass legislation that allows people to group together for group benefits. (0 cost) These are just three things that have at least little or no cost to taxpayers. Another idea is to sell bonds like we did during WWII. I know that sounds a little crazy but try it and see where it leads. We have to think outside of the box. Look at the money we as Americans sent to Haiti. Anyone who thinks the golden rule is dead hasn’t looked at the Charities we give to in this country. (feel the link to responsibility coming?)

I know that people are going to say none of these will work. I know people will say, those greedy rich people who make huge profits won’t donate. I disagree. Bill Gates is giving away his entire fortune. Most Americans who can afford it, donate some of their income. Set it up to see if we can change health care like this before we start another entitlement program that really is more about control over the people than it is about health care.

Someone will read my post and think, Republican/Democrat! Drop that thinking. Both parties have failed us. Think FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR OUR COUNTRY. We can’t afford to keep giving people things regardless of their income level. That sounds harsh I know. But, it’s like most of our parents taught us, we all take care of things we have a vested interest in. That is why kids who buy their own first car usually take care of it more than the spoiled rich kid who gets a BMW for their 16th birthday. I know that is a generalization but it typically applies.

One more thing I would like to bring up about your military insurance. I don’t think you can really call that a single payer system. I could be wrong, and correct me if I am, but all Americans pay taxes for military funding which includes health care. The money that pays for that health care comes from all Americans that pay taxes yet covers only the military members. That is American tax money. It is a right that military members get for serving our country. A deserved right I may add. Again, correct me if I am wrong.

@missingbite About your point on copay. I am not looking for every medical service to just cost $20 (I know I am simplifying) what I do want is for a procedure to cost me the same amount under my insurance if it is medically necessary. So back to the colonoscopy, mine is necessary at 42, just like a routine one is for most people at 50. I think the procedure should cost and be covered equally in both situations.

You are right that the military health is paid for by our tax dollars. It is run by the government essentially, because the military is our government in my opinion. Doctors and all medical personnel are salaried, they are paid at their pay grade like all other enlisted men and commissioned officers. They do not get more money for doing surgery or seeing more patients. They are expected to work a certain amount of hours, like any other employee of a company or the government. The doctors are not in “business” they are medical professionals. The military gets paid less while working for the government, but get some great perks, like healthcare, everything is free. It would be akin to paying more taxes (a little less money in your pocket) but you know your medical need are taken care of. I don’t think the tax would be much more than what we pay now for health insurance, because doctors would not be able to be greedy with a businessman’s mindset. They would still have to do their job, so it is not like they are welfare candidates with lack of incentive to work. Probably the majority of America is an employee for a company, and I think the majority of Americans work hard.

I would have been ok with trying some of your ideas, I think you know this before I say it, before passing the BIG bill which tries to deal with many things. But, I have no trust at all that Republicans will work on any of these issues when they are in charge, Honestly, when I hear a republican politician say. “we care about fill in the blank also,” regarding Americans having coverage, preexisting, whatever, for the most part I think they are full of shit. So there is some desperation with the Democrats to cram in as much as posible I think. We only started hearing about opening insurance cross state lines when the Democrats pushed the topic of health care again onto the top of the agenda. The Republicans are too late it seems, even though I find some rational thought in what some of them are saying. But, too many of them are fear mongers, and lose credibility with me.

@JLeslie Far enough and like I said, both parties are messing up. Politics get in the way. I don’t trust Republicans much more than Democrats.

As far as military doctors and public doctors. How much do military doctors pay for their education? How many private doctors do you think would go into sometimes hundreds of thousands of dollars of debt if we told them they were only going to make $150,000.00/year because we determined nobody “needs” more than that. I guess we will have to give all doctors free educations to make your plan work? How much will that cost taxpayers? How many military doctors get out after their term to go on to lucrative careers? I’m guessing most? Telling doctors they make too much for the better of the people is getting close to communism. Where does it start and end? Do we tell Oprah she can only make a certain amount because nobody “needs” to make what she makes?

I understand you enjoyed your military insurance and that is great. But it won’t work for a free society. Somebody has to pay for it.

@JLeslie: You state that people don’t think about health insurance until they get sick. What if you don’t think about your wallet until you get to the store? What if you don’t think about retirement until you retire? What if you don’t think about things until it is too late? What if you don’t think about a condom until you are pregnant and have Hepatitis C? YOU LOSE. This is how it should work. Otherwise why would anyone ever think about things in advance? If we can jail someone for years for negligence resulting in injury to someone else why can’t people suffer consequences for their own negligence?

@bea2345: “These same taxes make it possible for me to obtain my diabetic supplies free of import duty and VAT.” <== please think long and hard about this statement.

@jerv: I have never in my life purchased a car for other-than-cash. Financing increases the cost of the car! I think the thing that people miss is that

WEALTH = YOUR_MEANS + INVESTMENTS – TAXES – YOUR_EXPENDITURES

It isn’t that they don’t understand the formula. It is that they don’t understand the implications. The less you spend NOW the more you will spend over your lifetime. Early in life the playing field is level but later in life people who spent less start to pull ahead. At some point investments become more important than base income. This is also why people cannot wait to save until they are old. You can NEVER catch up! Once a day is lost you are always one day behind. Put some numbers into a spreadsheet and watch the miracle of compound interest for someone who starts saving at 16,18 or 20. Next try the same thing with someone who starts at 55, 60, or 65.

@malevolentbutticklish – believe me, I have. There is a certain irony in that, isn’t there: on the one hand, as a taxpayer, that is one less item to pay. On the other hand, as a citizen, that is one less source of income. The point is not the money itself, but its distribution. Prevention of the complications of diabetes is a lot less expensive than treating them (at one time Trinidad was known as the amputation capital of the Caribbean). So as an inducement, most medications do not attract duty or VAT.

@malevolentbutticklish Just another thing to thank the in-laws for, but kind of a convoluted tale:P
As for the rest, I was pretty much wiped out about a decade ago and haven’t really had a chance to get far enough ahead afford enough investments to matter or enough savings to let that compound interest to do it’s thing. Of course, our system is fairly unforgiving and growing increasingly so. One small mistake in your youth no longer makes the difference between retiring in a mansion or a modest house; it means the difference between having a decent life and eating dog food when you’re 30.

If I had it all to do over again, I would’ve just told my mother-in-law to go fuck herself, or at least kept enough of a paper trail to take her to court, though that wouldn’t have been fair to my father-in-law.

Now I understand why my stepfather keeps saying, “I’m rich, you’re not!”. Then again, he was in even worse shape financially at my age so all is not lost. If I could only get market wages as a machinist full-on, not merely an operator again, even if only for a few months….

@bea2345: What I meant is that taxes don’t “pay for” something else to be tax free.

@jerv: Best of luck to you!

@malevolentbutticklish Thanks. But regarding taxes not paying for something else to be “free”:
I think it’s really a matter of perspective. For instance, many people seem to think that Windows is free with all new PCs because it comes preinstalled. Why, then, was the Linux version of the Aspire One $5 cheaper than the Windows version with identical hardware? I see it as the difference between “free” and “included” but many people just don’t seem to get that.
By the same token, when Glen Beck was ranting about Progressivism, he said that he didn’t need a fancy education because he got all of his information from the free library, apparently oblivious to where his tax dollars were going. It also illustrates how, when you take an idea too far, you often leave intelligence and/or rationality behind.

Hidden costs seem to trick a lot of people. Unfortunately, some people who are financially savvy sometimes seem to overlook those costs that cannot be measured in dollars.