Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[iam416]

Could we be seeing another grand bargain emerge between the Trump administration and the Dems, similar to that which occurred on a smaller scale with regard to raising the debt ceiling to pay for Hurricane Harvey and now Irma relief?

Unequivocally, NO.

[whodean]

Taxes on everyone. That's the problem. The prog agenda just can't be paid for by taxing the high achievers.

Not in their fairytale. Just take from the "rich".

Personally I'd be OK with paying 3% more income tax to fund single payer, especially if what our employers currently pay for our health insurance is added to our salary.

[AlabamAlum]

Single payer would be somewhere around 10% by the time all was said and done.

[THE_WIZARD_]

Horrible. Revise and resubmit.

[hack]

I don't think putting quotes around the word rich is an argument. We have precise statistics on income inequality, and know where American falls in comparison to other countries as well as to its own history.

[SeattleLionsFan]

Taxes on everyone. That's the problem. The prog agenda just can't be paid for by taxing the high achievers.

You exchange premiums for higher taxes. It seems to me that it should more or less be an equal exchange.

[hack]

Froot, did you see that the Cdns fired the engineer heading the Gordie Howe project? http://windsorstar.com/news/local-ne...oved-from-post. I still think the Cdn position is that you can't spend $2bn on land-prep and a highway connecting the 401 to your new bridge's position and then walk away from the whole thing, and that unless Moroun is a lot richer than Forbes thinks, which is $1.5bn, he lacks the cash to finance his bridge himself, even if he can manage the regulatory hurdles, which remain huge. And unless the Gordie Howe is formally killed, nobody's going to finance Moroun anyways. No shortage of infrastructure projects to finance where there's exclusive rights.

[hack]

You exchange premiums for higher taxes. It seems to me that it should more or less be an equal exchange.

Taxes, if they do go up on middle-class payers, would do so less than the extent to which premiums would fall, because you no longer have to build in profit margins for middlemen. I trust America can somehow screw this up, and I trust that the generations of screaming about taxes in this country will lead some people to conclude that they'd rather not pay $1 more in taxes even if it meant saving $2 in out-of-pocket expenses. There are decades of dead dogma here to overcome. But, on paper, it's easy to get this right.

[whodean]

What percentage of what Americans pay to insurance company "middle men" would go away in a single payer system? Wouldn't government bureaucracies replace a healthy chunk of that?

[crashcourse]

quit spending money on hopeless cases

that's the only way this gets fixed

although that would wipe out 1/2 the Nebraska posters

[SeattleLionsFan]

What percentage of what Americans pay to insurance company "middle men" would go away in a single payer system? Wouldn't government bureaucracies replace a healthy chunk of that?

As I understand it, and I'm sure AA has better info than me, Medicare has about half yhrnoverhead of private insurers. Part of this savings is eaten up by marginally more Medicare fraud. I don't know if this includes private insurers product margins though, which could add a few more points on that side of the ledger.

[hack]

Marginal expansion of one more-efficient public-sector bureaucracy, massive massacre of less-efficient commercial bureaucracies whose primary ability and raison d'etre is the artificial inflation of costs in order to book profits.

This isn't hard.

[hack]

I think rather than choosing half our Nebraska posters to wipe out, it would be more fair to wipe out only half of each one of them.

[THE_WIZARD_]

heh

I mean...GFY

[Wild Hoss]

I think rather than choosing half our Nebraska posters to wipe out, it would be more fair to wipe out only half of each one of them.

Diabolical.

Clearly you got that idea elsewhere.

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk