Comments on: Dems breaking ranks on health care

By: John Ballard

John Ballard — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 11:13:31 +0000

The real issue relates to the fact that all citizens should participate in a national plan of this type. Selective taxation for specific programs that effect all is bad policy and sets a bad precedent….The fact is that many millions of working citizens do pay nothing in federal or state income taxes (they may pay property taxes and certainly pay sales taxes, to be sure). It is also a fact that many of those are on the lower end of the wage scale and have been removed from the tax rolls by both Democrats and Republicans. In my view, not a good way to promote citizen involvement and investment in their nation.

Agree.
But there are two little realities left out of all that.

First, you cannot get any more money where there is none. It is not realistic to imagine that those now not receiving anything more than emergency care are in a position to afford more. The money is not there. Like Willie Sutton, we have to look where the money is to get it.

Second, you mentioned that they pay sales and property taxes, but you left out the most ubiquitous tax of all: payroll. Moreover, except for the Medicare portion (which presumably eventually helps everyone, there is a cap on the biggest portion. That is a regressive tax that only affects wage earners at the bottom, which in today’s dollars amounts to about five times the federal poverty rate. (I don’t know what the numbers are with precision, but you get the idea. I paid the max into SS over twenty years while working in a job managing the working poor, so I am keenly aware of the disparity.)

If itg doesn’t get knocked out, the latest proposal does, in fact, call for universal participation with a payroll tax funding it. Those who opt out (if that remains a choice, face something like a fine in the form of a tax provision. It may not be a pound of flesh, but for skinny people even a few ounces of flesh is a lot.

By: Obi Jo

Obi Jo — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 06:39:49 +0000

Well, I hear you. But do remember that those who talk about 92% tax rates during the Eisenhower years forget about the myriad loopholes, deductions and the like that existed. It was the Reagan years that saw taxes cut, along with most of the tax shelters and other major loopholes that allowed many of the “rich” to avoid paying any taxes for years. That is not now the case. When marginal rates are raised, there are few if any tax shelters to shield income from the government. So while tax rates may be lower, any increase is likely to have a much greater effect in terms of both monies raised and impact.

The real issue relates to the fact that all citizens should participate in a national plan of this type. Selective taxation for specific programs that effect all is bad policy and sets a bad precedent. It sends the wrong message to the country as a whole. The fact is that many millions of working citizens do pay nothing in federal or state income taxes (they may pay property taxes and certainly pay sales taxes, to be sure). It is also a fact that many of those are on the lower end of the wage scale and have been removed from the tax rolls by both Democrats and Republicans. In my view, not a good way to promote citizen involvement and investment in their nation.

By: John Ballard

John Ballard — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 11:11:32 +0000

You know what they say about statistics. Lies, damn lies, etc.

Well I came across a statistic lately that affirms my lifelong standing as a yellow dog Democrat. Depending on which source you check, one percent of the population controls from one fifth to over a third of the national wealth and/or income. Moreover, about a fifth of the country is living on about one percent of the combined national income.

I accept the fact that payroll taxes are levied from the first dollar for all who work. That is regressive, not progressive taxation, and those taxes are not subject to deductions for those of us who itemize. But it galls me to hear people say that poor people pay no taxes simply because after the “standard deduction” they are not subject to tax on earned income.

I don’t need to hear any more complaining about rich people paying too much in taxes.

Here’s a link for you.
http://www.newshoggers.com/blog/2009/07/wendell-potter-on-bill-moyers.html
Don’t miss the Tennessee health fair report. I think it’s in the second video.