Reply to ObamaCare ruined primary care medicine

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "ObamaCare ruined primary care medicine "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]it was already going that way. the ACA simply provided a safety net particularly for people with pre-existing conditions who were rejected or exempted coverage in the prior version of health insurance

what we need is single payer/universal- our healthcare system has been horrible since the deregulation of the Reagan era[/quote]

+1.   The ACA is significant but it is not enough.  Single payer already like every other modern developed nation.[/quote]

What is the downside to this, which should be a basic right? That poor people might get healthcare and not suffer because they are poor? Is that it? [/quote]

Take a look at tax rates in all these modern developed countries and ask if you are willing to pay that.[/quote]

And in return for those higher taxes:

Medical care is free. 
Education (including university and trade school) is free.  In fact students get stipends. 
6-8 weeks of vacation a year
People can support themselves on one job

There is less income inequality though, so fewer very rich people. 
[/quote]
DP.. the problem with trying to implement this is in the US is that it's too much too quickly. Americans aren't used to the very high tax rates today. They did pay them pre 1960s.  But, most people today would balk at such high tax rates. Europeans are used to high tax rates, so it doesn't bother them as much.

IMO, we should start raising taxes bit by bit, and at the same time, expand medicare bit by bit.  That is more palatable to most Americans than a quick "rip the band aid" off approach.[/quote]

Gosh, why won't this stupid dem taking point that "BuT But BUt wE PaID >90% TaX oN tHe uPpER BraCkEt iN tHe 50s!" just die already.  What they never tell you when they bring up this stupid talking point is that the tax code was radically different back then too. There were way, wayyyyyy more tax breaks and loopholes back then too that you could drive a truck through.  Hardly anyone at that time was paying 90% tax.  Reagan got rid of all of the tax breaks and made sure more was taxed while simultaneously reducing tax rates.  In the end we got a greatly simplified tax code, which was way better than the 1950s and 60s, but it had no real impacts on total tax revenue as a percent of GDP.  In fact, total taxation revenues relative to GDP has remained remarkably consistent in the US for almost 100 years.

The point being, it's such a dumb talking point when the tax rates in the 50s and 60s are brought up. The tax code was wildly different back then too. We still do pay nearly the same level of taxes now as we did back then. [/quote]  Kennedy lowered rates first.  From 90 to 70.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics