HR-2: Repeal of "Obama Care"

[JStep]

IIRC somewhere in the founding documents, it was mentioned that an "inheritance tax" (and, quite substantial) was to be levied, to prevent "dynasties" and or feudalism..........
I'm not sure I agree, but, do see it's point.

Yes, that is what the estate tax is. The right wing likes to call it the "death tax".

[littleflower]

if there is a way to pay personal expenses to avoid taxes, people will use them ... OF COURSE. hahaha, i resemble that remark too, although i did avoid using my corporate credit card to take my nephews out to sushi tonight. i thought about it, though ,,,

my problem is still with the question of who, exactly, IS the wealthy. i am absolutely for a progressive tax, but i have trouble with this idea of taxing people at top rates who are not necessarily wealthy.... in my mind, that is just a mechanism for the truly wealthy to keep bright young people from becoming wealthy.

400K sounds like a great deal of money to make in a year, but for a younger, extremely hard-working successful person with a mortgage, kids in college, and shackles on that income - ie, non-liquid income (e.g. company stock) or huge loans to buy into a business - it can quickly be reduced to comfortable middle class, especially if one is in CA or NY, which is where most of those jobs are. of course, the taxes in those states are higher than the rest, so you're looking at 50% tax rate if you add state and local taxes into it.

meanwhile, a truly wealthy person with 500M in the bank and a great deal of money tied into munis might get away with a relatively small amount of tax.

i have less sympathy for people making over 5 million/year, and no problem with inheritance taxes.

breaks on capital gains taxes and dividends do make sense to me, though... capital gains, because time is in the mix (ie, money value changes) and dividends, because they are double taxed.

i would really, really like to see more oversight on the government, and more careful spending of the money. add me to the list of people who think they're out of control ... especially where pensions are concerned.

[ygmir]

IIRC somewhere in the founding documents, it was mentioned that an "inheritance tax" (and, quite substantial) was to be levied, to prevent "dynasties" and or feudalism..........
I'm not sure I agree, but, do see it's point.

Yes, that is what the estate tax is. The right wing likes to call it the "death tax".

I'd say that's an accurate moniker.

again, I understand the theory.
it's what got Europe into the feudal state, and the like.

But, obviously, it doesn't work.......ie: Kennedy's', Rathskellers, etc........
they just put it all in huge trusts, and, the family "lives" on it in perpetuity, but never really owns anything.
and, since the "trust" never dies, there is no "inheritance".

so many structures, come with so many loopholes.........I'd go for simple..........

[Elderberry]

IIRC somewhere in the founding documents, it was mentioned that an "inheritance tax" (and, quite substantial) was to be levied, to prevent "dynasties" and or feudalism..........
I'm not sure I agree, but, do see it's point.

Yes, that is what the estate tax is. The right wing likes to call it the "death tax".

I'd say that's an accurate moniker.

again, I understand the theory.
it's what got Europe into the feudal state, and the like.

But, obviously, it doesn't work.......ie: Kennedy's', Rathskellers, etc........
they just put it all in huge trusts, and, the family "lives" on it in perpetuity, but never really owns anything.
and, since the "trust" never dies, there is no "inheritance".

so many structures, come with so many loopholes.........I'd go for simple..........

And then there are people like Warren Buffet who is leaving his family next to nothing for his own altruistic reasons. It's nice to focus on those that are not trying to game the system occasionally too.

JK

[ygmir]

Yes, that is what the estate tax is. The right wing likes to call it the "death tax".

I'd say that's an accurate moniker.

again, I understand the theory.
it's what got Europe into the feudal state, and the like.

But, obviously, it doesn't work.......ie: Kennedy's', Rathskellers, etc........
they just put it all in huge trusts, and, the family "lives" on it in perpetuity, but never really owns anything.
and, since the "trust" never dies, there is no "inheritance".

so many structures, come with so many loopholes.........I'd go for simple..........

And then there are people like Warren Buffet who is leaving his family next to nothing for his own altruistic reasons. It's nice to focus on those that are not trying to game the system occasionally too.

JK

so true, JK.
we tend to focus on the turds to often..

I'd bet, most of us would be pretty happy with Buffets "next to nothing" though.

[geospyder]

I've had people get upset with me that I haven't set anything aside for the kids and grandkids. My parents were alcoholics and lived on welfare. We've been lucky enough with saving and careful planning (mainly the credit goes to my wife) that we are comfortable in our retirement. We earned it and we'll spend it.

[Elderberry]

I've had people get upset with me that I haven't set anything aside for the kids and grandkids. My parents were alcoholics and lived on welfare. We've been lucky enough with saving and careful planning (mainly the credit goes to my wife) that we are comfortable in our retirement. We earned it and we'll spend it.

I'm right with you on that! Not to mention the money you spent and the sacrifices you made along the way raising those kids. I can't imagine those people that would be upset...maybe someone with guilt issues about how bad a job they did raising their own kids?

JK

[JStep]

I've had people get upset with me that I haven't set anything aside for the kids and grandkids. My parents were alcoholics and lived on welfare. We've been lucky enough with saving and careful planning (mainly the credit goes to my wife) that we are comfortable in our retirement. We earned it and we'll spend it.

In at least one study I read, wealth inherited gets spent within 2 generations, generally. Probably much better for millionaires (and society) to teach their kids how to be industrious, entrepreneurial and maybe give them a trust fund with an expiration date rather than just leaving them a fortune.

Money spent into the economy is a good thing!!

[thisisthatwhichis]

Ok, here is my .35 cents to try and re-focus the topic in a bigger picture (I’m a big picture kinda guy). While some of the discussion makes sense, there seems to be a lot of political perspective influencing the opinion.
I’ll start with my opinion of Economic theory (there are a few), as a starting point.

The Economy relies upon the circulation of currency (money tucked under the mattress is just as worthless to the rich guy as the poor guy). Money is simply a vehicle to exchange assets or labor on an equivalency. There are some major groups involved in the circulation of money in the economy.

The Government(s)
The Businesses
The Financial institutions
The Consumers

Lets look closer at them (Well, how it’s supposed to work).

The Government’s income(Tax)/expense(re-distribution) goals are primarily politically motivated (stay with me here). They produce few tangible assets, some services, but mostly use taxes and re-distribution on the other 3 groups to promote incentives (or penalties) for societal evolution within the state. They’re incentive is not to produce tangible assets, only to make sure that society is harmoniously evolving within their political idiom (this includes protection of the state, adherence to law, infrastructure, re-election,etc, etc).

The Businesses income/expense goals are mostly to generate value through the production of assets/services at the least expense. Their goal is to make produce as much value as possible at the lowest cost. Income (sales, loans, stock, tax breaks) and expenses (materials, labor, taxes, interest, dividends) involve all 3 groups.

The Financial institutions (Gov, private, insurance) goals are to generate more money into the supply by devaluating assets (stay with me here too). This is also the “gambling hallâ€

[JStep]

- If incremental-ism holds true, the direction of the Bill is flawed (some things are good, though). Going this way in future legislation isn’t sustainable, just as Social Security isn’t. Instead of throwing political funny money at the problem and bankrupting us, they should look at some of the root causes to make their social engineering re-distribution work.

These include: patent and copywrite law, tort reform, and medicare/medicaid. The healthcare (not insurance) industry is already in the Business group and motivated to bring value added products at reduced costs. If allowed to work right, costs will go down, care will go up, and Gov can re-distribute very much less for those truly in need.

Word to YOUR mother!

Whew…. Ok, where’s my cocktail?

Waiting for you in Da Bar.

[Elderberry]

Well said TITWI. I'm not so sure I agree with all of your thoughts on the functioning of government, but certainly we are pretty close on most of the rest.

JK

[Trishntek]

Thanks for getting back (sideways?) to the OP,,,,

Using Social Security for example, we started as a "Social Security Insurance" which has gradually morphed into more of a retirement plan. Medicare was originated similarly as a supplemental health insurance plan which has morphed into full-benefit health care insurance. Because of these gradual (progressive?) morphologies in the benefits of these programs they have become endangered by the same deficit mentality of most gubmint programs. And just like the National Parks who do not keep the funds raised at their gates, these entitlement programs do not keep their funds in dedicated accounts.

Congress is very good at raking in the dough to the General Fund and then "budgeting" out payments to those entities which, by nature, should be self-supporting. At the same time, they are more than glad to spend all of any surplus, and then some on anything and everything to promote their own job security! I simply do not see any indication that PPACA will end up any different than those mentioned.

Oh they use the words "budget" and "funding" and,,,, oh I like this one the best,,,,, "investments",,,, LMAO. If you think the actual money is sitting in an actual account,,,,, just waiting there to take care of you and yours,,,, then just think about where Congress might find the $500,000,000,000 annual interest payment.

[Elderberry]

Thanks for getting back (sideways?) to the OP,,,,

Using Social Security for example, we started as a "Social Security Insurance" which has gradually morphed into more of a retirement plan. Medicare was originated similarly as a supplemental health insurance plan which has morphed into full-benefit health care insurance. Because of these gradual (progressive?) morphologies in the benefits of these programs they have become endangered by the same deficit mentality of most gubmint programs. And just like the National Parks who do not keep the funds raised at their gates, these entitlement programs do not keep their funds in dedicated accounts.

Congress is very good at raking in the dough to the General Fund and then "budgeting" out payments to those entities which, by nature, should be self-supporting. At the same time, they are more than glad to spend all of any surplus, and then some on anything and everything to promote their own job security! I simply do not see any indication that PPACA will end up any different than those mentioned.

Oh they use the words "budget" and "funding" and,,,, oh I like this one the best,,,,, "investments",,,, LMAO. If you think the actual money is sitting in an actual account,,,,, just waiting there to take care of you and yours,,,, then just think about where Congress might find the $500,000,000,000 annual interest payment.

J-Step said something that really resonated with me when he repeated the words "We the people..." We the people means you and me and all of us. We forme and we are the government. It shouldn't be (actually can't be by definition) an us and them debate. That being said...

I agree with most of what you said about the government "budgeting" money that comes in and taking funds from something like social security money and using it for something else. There are lots of things that I don't like about what our government is doing or not doing, but it is our government and we need to be responsible citizens and work to change it in constructive ways. Just the change in mindset and taking ownership of our government and our problems, as opposed to their problems can make all the difference in the tone of the discourse.

Look at all the time we spend and the typing we do here. Imagine what could be accomplished if we all were to regularly share our thoughts in letters and phone calls to our elected representatives to let them know how we feel about the job they are doing representing us.

Imagine how a kid would turn out if it's parents would each blame the other for everything the kid does wrong and then tries to take full credit for everything the kid does right. Each parent should be equally responsible and accept the kid for what he is and each take responsibility for correcting the bad and complimenting the good. Why can't this same attitude toward our government? I'm sure the founders did when they "gave birth to our nation".

JK

[Trishntek]

I fully concur the bickering accomplishes nothing. The basic problem is PPACA was manipulated into law by a very slim margin. My representative is pretty much in agreement with me on most issues. Unfortunately, my senators pretty much disagree with my representative, as do most of the other representatives in the Golden State.

In fact, I will go so far as to say PPACA would not have passed into law without the CA contingent. I did write both senators and received nothing but canned letters acknowledging nothing I wrote and basically telling me what my opinion should be.

[thisisthatwhichis]

I did write both senators and received nothing but canned letters acknowledging nothing I wrote and basically telling me what my opinion should be.

Hehehe... +100

[Elderberry]

I fully concur the bickering accomplishes nothing. The basic problem is PPACA was manipulated into law by a very slim margin. My representative is pretty much in agreement with me on most issues. Unfortunately, my senators pretty much disagree with my representative, as do most of the other representatives in the Golden State.

In fact, I will go so far as to say PPACA would not have passed into law without the CA contingent. I did write both senators and received nothing but canned letters acknowledging nothing I wrote and basically telling me what my opinion should be.

Yup, I get the same letters and emails back. I still think that my opinions on the issues are carefully monitored and I continue to write and email to make sure my voice is heard.

I am glad some form of health care reform has passed and I appreciate you referencing it correctly. I think the act is flawed in many ways, but it was the first time in decades that anything major regarding HCR has been able to pass in the congress.

I firmly believe that if we continue to make our voices heard, congress will eventually make the necessary changes in the bill to fix its deficiencies.

And I encourage you to not only continue writing, but go to town hall events in person and volunteer some time. It's a great way to get to actually know your representatives and make sure they hear from you personally and directly. (just be careful you don't get hit by any stray bullets.)

JK

[Elderberry]

I did write both senators and received nothing but canned letters acknowledging nothing I wrote and basically telling me what my opinion should be.

Hehehe... +100

Stop being such a cynic!

JK

[ygmir]

Yup, I get the same letters and emails back. I still think that my opinions on the issues are carefully monitored and I continue to write and email to make sure my voice is heard.


JK

[youtube][/youtube]

[Elderberry]

Yup, I get the same letters and emails back. I still think that my opinions on the issues are carefully monitored and I continue to write and email to make sure my voice is heard.


JK

[youtube][/youtube]

And of course, the OTHER cynic.

Hey, don't you think the Tea Party are writing and making phone calls and dropping by their representatives' offices?

Most of the so called silent majority just sit at home and complain, while the extremes are grabbing the ear of their representatives. If they are grabbing the right ear, I'm making sure I grab their left one.

JK

[littleflower]

Hey JK ...

i just found this link, and wondered what you thought of the analysis (i know what you think of the commentary!)

http://www.atr.org/comprehensive-list-t ... care-a5758#

[Elderberry]

Hey JK ...

i just found this link, and wondered what you thought of the analysis (i know what you think of the commentary!)

http://www.atr.org/comprehensive-list-t ... care-a5758#

Nothing is free. It's just as expensive to pay for emergency room treatment now for everyone that isn't insured. It's just accounted for differently.

I'm also for higher taxes to pay down the national debt too. As long as new spending is capped and there was a balanced budget amendment.

jk

[ygmir]

Yup, I get the same letters and emails back. I still think that my opinions on the issues are carefully monitored and I continue to write and email to make sure my voice is heard.


JK

[youtube][/youtube]

And of course, the OTHER cynic.

Hey, don't you think the Tea Party are writing and making phone calls and dropping by their representatives' offices?

Most of the so called silent majority just sit at home and complain, while the extremes are grabbing the ear of their representatives. If they are grabbing the right ear, I'm making sure I grab their left one.

JK

wouldn't it be a pretty big leap in logic, to think a politician listens to the fringes, on either side, much at all?
And, that's assuming they listen to constituents, (general pop, not the ones that grease their wheels) at all.
Nope, I think the only sound they hear, is the sound of money.
and, power=money, to them.