On Thu, 04 Jun 2009 12:39:11 -0400, HK wrote:

jps wrote:
On Thu, 04 Jun 2009 06:42:03 -0400, Wizard of Woodstock
wrote:

"President Obama, in a pivot from some of his harshest campaign
rhetoric, told Democratic senators yesterday that he is willing to
consider taxing employer-sponsored health benefits to help pay for a
broad expansion of coverage."

http://tinyurl.com/kvkndy

Is this a tax aimed at those who don’t need or use government health
insurance? If you’re already getting benefits from your employer,
you’re opting out of ObamaCare, no?

Is this a case of forcing the private insurance by employeers to be
canceled and forcing employees into a national care system?

If that's the case where’s all the revenue from taxing health benefits
coming from?

I’m missing something. The way I read it, private plans will be taxed
to pay for national health care thus, in practice, forcing people to
move to the national system which is being paid for by taxes on
insurance benefits that no longer exist.

How much is the tax, Tom?

Do you have a percentage figure upon which you're basing your
assumption that it'll so punitive as to "force" people onto Obamacare?


Of course he doesn't. His purpose was to troll, not illuminate.

I prefer removing the employee "caps" on all income for social security,
and using the proceeds to help fund social security, medicare and health
insurance.

Excellent idea. It'd also help address the disparity between what low
and medium income families pay in percentage-of-income in tax with
their wealthier counterparts.

(Now watch while the "Conservatives" misread and misinterpret my
statement as income taxes.)