Pleas 2 'splain 2 dumm peepole...
 

"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.

Pleas 2 'splain 2 dumm peepole...
 

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.


You are misreading it.

Pleas 2 'splain 2 dumm peepole...
 

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.

Obama now wants to do the same thing he came down on McCain for during
the campaign.

If your employer is contributing towards your health insurance, then
that contribution should (according to Obama and McCain) be taxed as
income.

Of course, the major media, which ate McCain alive (paid for by the
Obama campaign, of course) will make no mention of the fact that Obama
is doing what McCain proposed.
--
John H

"The problem with Socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money." --Margaret Thatcher

Pleas 2 'splain 2 dumm peepole...
 

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?

Pleas 2 'splain 2 dumm peepole...
 

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.

Pleas 2 'splain 2 dumm peepole...
 

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.)

Pleas 2 'splain 2 dumm peepole...
 

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


Of course you would know, Herr Krause. You make trolling a daily
practice here.

Pleas 2 'splain 2 dumm peepole...
 

"HK" wrote in message
m...

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.

If I recall correctly employers match dollar for dollar the social security
tax paid by employees.
Does your plan also include having the employer match the new, uncapped tax?

Did I really have to ask?

My point is that although your idea has merit, there is a downside. Small
businesses may not be able to absorb even more taxes without having a
negative impact on their business, ability to grow or even maintain their
current employee levels.

Eisboch

Pleas 2 'splain 2 dumm peepole...
 

Eisboch wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
m...

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.

If I recall correctly employers match dollar for dollar the social
security tax paid by employees.
Does your plan also include having the employer match the new, uncapped
tax?

Did I really have to ask?

My point is that although your idea has merit, there is a downside.
Small businesses may not be able to absorb even more taxes without
having a negative impact on their business, ability to grow or even
maintain their current employee levels.

Eisboch


I did say "remove the employee caps," right? That does not mean removing
the employer caps.

Pleas 2 'splain 2 dumm peepole...
 

On Jun 4, 5:42*am, Wizard of Woodstock wrote:


"Pleas 2 'splain 2 dumm peepole..."

tom, your typing is gretting abotu as bad as mine.

I feel complamented


?;^ )