Kerry for the middle class?

Originally posted by mcnuss

As for the tax cuts and the middle class, I won't dispute that my Federal tax bill went down at least minimally - by my calculation, we saved a whopping $700. However, it does not nearly make up for the increase in my state and local taxes which are now higher bc of unfunded mandates (eg: NCLB & homeland security initiatives) and cuts to programs that had been funded by the Feds. And don't even get me started on the increases to my health insurance premiums since GWB came to town. I was paying $100 per month in 2000, this year, we're up to over $250 with higher deductibles. And the little issue of the "return" on my investments - or should I say "drain". At this rate, there will be no retirement for me.


Sounds like you need to take some issues up with your governor, state representatives and city council.

As for your healtcare premiums, what did GWB do, or not do, SPECIFICALLY that had a DIRECT impact on your premiums going up? Are you sure you are directing your frustration in the right direction.
 
Originally posted by denisenh
Is that before or after they dodge their taxes?

Monday :: Aug 9, 2004
Bush Confirms That "Really Rich People Figure Out How To Dodge Taxes"
After the Bush embarrassment at the Minority Journalists event Friday, I thought that Bush was showing signs of mental overload. But then this remark escaped his lips today at an event in Virginia, and now I know something is wrong with the man’s microprocessor:

Bush criticized Kerry's plan to eliminate the tax cuts for those making more than $200,000 a year, saying that the "the rich in America happen to be the small business owners" who put people to work.

Bush also said high taxes on the rich are a failed strategy because "the really rich people figure out how to dodge taxes anyway."

You say that as if it were a bad thing
 
Originally posted by minniepumpernickel
Ah yes, well the study of "nudism" sure is an interesting field. I don't know, the term 'conservative nudist' seems to be an oxymoron to me.
I mean, I thought that if she was seriously in that field, than what would the ramifications of having another term with a conservative in office be? Perhaps you can ask your friends for me? :D

Do they fall into the midle class? Wow, what an interesting debate.:p

What ramifications would those be? And why would this be a Presidential issue. Seems to be a local community issue to me
 
As for the tax cuts and the middle class, I won't dispute that my Federal tax bill went down at least minimally - by my calculation, we saved a whopping $700.

If that's all you saved, then you're barely paying federal tax to begin with, so I'm not sure what your complaint is. But I would think that you would be glad to have the $700.

And what does President Bush have to do with your state and local taxes? And your insurance premiums? Surely you don't believe that the President is responsible for those going up?

Kerrys voting and reasons show that HE WAS working for (and will work for) the middle class.

How is voting against middle class tax cuts helping the middle class?
 

As for your healtcare premiums, what did GWB do, or not do, SPECIFICALLY that had a DIRECT impact on your premiums going up? Are you sure you are directing your frustration in the right direction.

He SPECIFICALLY didn't do anything to control the astronomical increases as they continued to climb... stands by and watches private industry gouge regular people on a daily basis. In essence, his passivity is screwing the economy.


Over four years he has done absolutely nothing while costs have increased at record paces, making it harder for middle class families to get by. Health care costs have skyrocketed with American families paying 64 percent more than they did four years ago. The typical health care premium has increased more than $3,500 a year while over 5 million more Americans have no health insurance coverage. George Bush has done nothing to help these families.


HEALTH CARE COSTS RISE:
$3,512 Increase in Health Care Premiums. In the United States, the total family premium for health insurance has increased by $3,512 to $9,950. Out-of-pocket costs and prescription drug prices have also dramatically increased under Bush. [Kaiser Family Foundation]

Families Pay 64 Percent More in Health Care Premiums. Families are now paying 64 percent more for health care than they did four years ago. [Kaiser Family Foundation]

Health Care Premiums Increased Five Times Faster than Workers' Earnings Last Year. Health care premiums increased by 11.2% last year while workers' earnings increased by only 2.2%. During every year Bush has been in office, premiums outpaced earnings. [Kaiser Family Foundation]

Deductibles and Copays Higher Too. Out-of-pocket costs continue to squeeze family budgets. Deductibles have increased by nearly two-thirds and prescription drug copays have increased by more than 50 percent. [Kaiser Family Foundation]

Spending on Prescription Drugs Has More than Doubled Over Five Years. The amount spent on prescription drugs has more than doubled over the past five years, from $87 billion in 1998 to $184 billion in 2003. Americans are spending more on prescription drugs today than ever before. [Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, National Health Expenditure Projections, February, 2004]

Prescription Drug Prices Increased by 22 Percent. Seniors are now paying 22 percent more for prescription drugs than they did four years ago. [Families USA]


BUSH'S FAILURE TO CUT COSTS:
Seniors Will Pay More for Prescription Drugs Under Bush's New Plan. According to Consumers Union, "most beneficiaries will face higher out-of-pocket costs for prescription drugs after full implementation, despite the benefit." In addition, drug manufacturers have been raising prices in anticipation of a Medicare discount plan, negating potential savings from discount cards. [Consumers Union, 11/17/03; AARP, Trends in Manufacturer Prices of Brand Name Prescription Drugs Used By Older Americans - First Quarter 2004 Update, June 2004]

Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) Will Raise Health Care Costs for Many. HSAs will divide Americans between the sick and healthy with affluent workers choosing HSAs while sicker workers will tend to remain in comprehensive coverage. The people remaining in comprehensive coverage are more expensive to insure, driving their premiums higher. Some employers will choose this new option to drop health insurance for their employees while others will reduce their contribution. Independent estimates suggest HSAs will leave more than 1.4 million workers currently insured without coverage. [Journal of the American Medical Association, 6/5/96; Urban Institute, April 1996; American Academy of Actuaries, May 1995; Consumers Union, 8/10/00; Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 5/10/04]

CBO Estimates Associated Health Plans Could Raise Premiums for 4 out of 5 Small Businesses. Studies show that AHPs will increase the cost of insurance for many small businesses and will increase the number of uninsured. The CBO estimated that AHPs could raise premiums for 4 out of 5 small businesses that keep traditional insurance. [CBO, "Increasing Small-Firm Health Insurance Coverage through Association Health Plans and HealthMarts," January 2000.]
 
Originally posted by disneycrazed139
He SPECIFICALLY didn't do anything to control the astronomical increases as they continued to climb... stands by and watches private industry gouge regular people on a daily basis. In essence, his passivity is screwing the economy.


Over four years he has done absolutely nothing while costs have increased at record paces, making it harder for middle class families to get by. Health care costs have skyrocketed with American families paying 64 percent more than they did four years ago. The typical health care premium has increased more than $3,500 a year while over 5 million more Americans have no health insurance coverage. George Bush has done nothing to help these families.


HEALTH CARE COSTS RISE:
$3,512 Increase in Health Care Premiums. In the United States, the total family premium for health insurance has increased by $3,512 to $9,950. Out-of-pocket costs and prescription drug prices have also dramatically increased under Bush. [Kaiser Family Foundation]

Families Pay 64 Percent More in Health Care Premiums. Families are now paying 64 percent more for health care than they did four years ago. [Kaiser Family Foundation]

Health Care Premiums Increased Five Times Faster than Workers' Earnings Last Year. Health care premiums increased by 11.2% last year while workers' earnings increased by only 2.2%. During every year Bush has been in office, premiums outpaced earnings. [Kaiser Family Foundation]

Deductibles and Copays Higher Too. Out-of-pocket costs continue to squeeze family budgets. Deductibles have increased by nearly two-thirds and prescription drug copays have increased by more than 50 percent. [Kaiser Family Foundation]

Spending on Prescription Drugs Has More than Doubled Over Five Years. The amount spent on prescription drugs has more than doubled over the past five years, from $87 billion in 1998 to $184 billion in 2003. Americans are spending more on prescription drugs today than ever before. [Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, National Health Expenditure Projections, February, 2004]

Prescription Drug Prices Increased by 22 Percent. Seniors are now paying 22 percent more for prescription drugs than they did four years ago. [Families USA]


BUSH'S FAILURE TO CUT COSTS:
Seniors Will Pay More for Prescription Drugs Under Bush's New Plan. According to Consumers Union, "most beneficiaries will face higher out-of-pocket costs for prescription drugs after full implementation, despite the benefit." In addition, drug manufacturers have been raising prices in anticipation of a Medicare discount plan, negating potential savings from discount cards. [Consumers Union, 11/17/03; AARP, Trends in Manufacturer Prices of Brand Name Prescription Drugs Used By Older Americans - First Quarter 2004 Update, June 2004]

Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) Will Raise Health Care Costs for Many. HSAs will divide Americans between the sick and healthy with affluent workers choosing HSAs while sicker workers will tend to remain in comprehensive coverage. The people remaining in comprehensive coverage are more expensive to insure, driving their premiums higher. Some employers will choose this new option to drop health insurance for their employees while others will reduce their contribution. Independent estimates suggest HSAs will leave more than 1.4 million workers currently insured without coverage. [Journal of the American Medical Association, 6/5/96; Urban Institute, April 1996; American Academy of Actuaries, May 1995; Consumers Union, 8/10/00; Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 5/10/04]

CBO Estimates Associated Health Plans Could Raise Premiums for 4 out of 5 Small Businesses. Studies show that AHPs will increase the cost of insurance for many small businesses and will increase the number of uninsured. The CBO estimated that AHPs could raise premiums for 4 out of 5 small businesses that keep traditional insurance. [CBO, "Increasing Small-Firm Health Insurance Coverage through Association Health Plans and HealthMarts," January 2000.]

In short, NONE of that, by definition, is ANY President's responsibilty. Why blame the President? This is just silly. Blame your Congressman first.
 
He SPECIFICALLY didn't do anything to control the astronomical increases as they continued to climb...

He's not supposed to control the prices of health care. Health care is a business, and as such the prices are ruled by the market, as they should be. It isn't the President's responsibility to tell doctors what they can and can't charge.

Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) Will Raise Health Care Costs for Many. HSAs will divide Americans between the sick and healthy with affluent workers choosing HSAs while sicker workers will tend to remain in comprehensive coverage. The people remaining in comprehensive coverage are more expensive to insure, driving their premiums higher.

And what's wrong with the sicker workers paying more for their insurance? They're getting more of the benefit, so they should be paying more.

Some employers will choose this new option to drop health insurance for their employees while others will reduce their contribution.

OK...so employers will drop insurance benefits. Companies aren't required to offer insurance so again, I don't see the problem.
 
Isn't the cost of health care (and anything else for that matter in this country) an example of capitalism as opposed to socialism?
 
Originally posted by Crankyshank
Actually what was preventing me from responding to this thread is the enjoyment of watching you guys get all in a tizzy because no one was responding.

You beat me to it.
grinning-smiley-045.gif
 
If that's all you saved, then you're barely paying federal tax to begin with, so I'm not sure what your complaint is. But I would think that you would be glad to have the $700.

Nope, I do quite well, thanks. But that's all we got. I am fortunate, I have no financial complaints, but I did not need a tax cut to fuel my consumer spending, and either frankly did most of the other people who got them. People making far less than me have far greater need, and it is going unmet. Your compassionate conservate, uniter not divider president has engineered programs that have created an gap between rich and poor, the likes of which I never thought I'd see. The avarice and greed that now characterize our nation remind me of the era of the robber barons. We will eventually pay the price for our shortsightness.

And now I am done. The DIS is bad for my blood pressure.
 
Originally posted by christineann
Isn't the cost of health care (and anything else for that matter in this country) an example of capitalism as opposed to socialism?

Yes, and I think that's what some people have a problem with. It's a bit scary to see the way some people want this country to go, i.e., the socialist model of take from those that make money and give it away to those that don't.
 
What is the big deal about coming out of college with loans? And why should the federal government be in the job of paying for your college?

Ever hear the expression - you don't know what it is like until you walk in another man's shoes? You might want to keep that in mind before you ask questions. I have worked very very very hard and given up quite a lot to be in the position that I am in today. I don't mind having student loans, I am actually quite proud of them. But back when I was 19 having to work a full time and a part time job while going to school full time it was NOT a fun experience. Not to mention having to live on my own and trying to pay back the $30,000 and more that I had to borrow was just more to the headache. I survived it - but it took a lot of very hard work and thankfully I had friends that were there to help me pull through the hard times. Not everyone is so fortunate. I did not ask for the federal government to pay for my education in full (although you would love to see the statistic of resident aliens that get fully paid tuition by the government) but I did ask for assitance since I was on my own. DENIED because the previous year my parents claimed me on their taxes. Therefore I was a dependent - therefore there small salaries kept me from being inelligible for any assitance. Therefore I had to do everything the hard way. Yes I made myself better then I was and I am darn proud of it and nothing you can say will take that away from me. But I don't think that everyone should have to go through it this way. The fact of the matter is and any financial aid reps will back me on this. You either have to be in the lower income brackets or have enough money to pay the full tuition to be able to afford college.

If you don't like my answer I really don't care. I can hold my head high.::yes::

Congratulations you just made my ignore list.

~Amanda
 
In short, NONE of that, by definition, is ANY President's responsibilty. Why blame the President? This is just silly. Blame your Congressman first.

Ok, one last post.

You're right, as much as I hate to agree with you. People spend wayyyy too much time thinking about the Presidential candidates, and not nearly enough on the folks who really make the laws in this country. The presidency is a bully pulpit most of the time, but when the executive and legislative branches are run by one party, then the legislature is effectively doing the executive's bidding.

If you REALLY want to clip GWB's wings, vote Democrat in all Congressional races. If he loses the Senate majority, things will change. That's why he was a "uniter" in TX - he had no choice but to play nice!

socialist model of take from those that make money and give it away to those that don't.

I think that's Robin Hood. :D

In the socialist model, the state owns & runs everything. I would not advocate for that. But the German model of health care - which is private with significant gov't oversight - apparently works very well. Personally, I think we need to get off our high horses with respect to health care and quit asserting that our way is best. Maybe it is, maybe it's not, but isn't it time to shake things up? When we are the richest country on earth, and our neighbors can't pay to take their kids to the doctor, or my mom has to decide between heat or medicine, isn't there something wrong with our system? Isn't there?????
 
mcnuss, if you don't want or need your tax cut, then by all means, send it back. But I'm confused as to why you think that you know best how much money other people need.

If you don't like my answer I really don't care. I can hold my head high.

I actually like your answer, and you should hold your head high. You are a good example to others, showing them that they can do it with asking the government to do it for them.

As for putting me on ignore, not sure why, but that's fine. Personally, I enjoy reading the views of people that disagree with me.
 
Originally posted by septbride2002
Tonyswife - if you took my remark as a personal attack then I apologize. That was not my intention.

~Amanda

I didn't. I just thought (from what you posted) you were feeling that others were attacking. I was just reassuring you that I'm just here for friendly discussion, even if we disagree. :D
 
Originally posted by denisenh
Is that before or after they dodge their taxes?



You mean like paying 12% on a multi-million dollar income? ;) Of course, in Teresa's defense, her 12% in 2003 is likely many times more than you and I will ever pay in our life time. It's the same for all very, very rich people, the percentage can be decieving because the actual dollars paid is so high, and we forget that.

Tax deductions reward people for investing in the community (charities, business deductions, etc..) so it's not like they're just pocketing the extra "avoided" tax money.

Anyway, as I said earler, I favor a flat tax.

But, to answer your question, it is AFTER they "dodge" their taxes (legally) :D
 
Originally posted by mcnuss
Nope, I do quite well, thanks. But that's all we got. I am fortunate, I have no financial complaints, but I did not need a tax cut to fuel my consumer spending, and either frankly did most of the other people who got them.

So the govt is now the arbiter of how much of OUR money we get to keep? What makes you determine how much disposable income people should want, or need? This is what drives me nuts about the left. Telling people how much of THEIR money they should really get to keep.
 
Originally posted by tonyswife
You mean like paying 12% on a multi-million dollar income? ;) Of course, in Teresa's defense, her 12% in 2003 is likely many times more than you and I will ever pay in our life time. It's the same for all very, very rich people, the percentage can be decieving because the actual dollars paid is so high, and we forget that.

Tax deductions reward people for investing in the community (charities, business deductions, etc..) so it's not like they're just pocketing the extra "avoided" tax money.

Anyway, as I said earler, I favor a flat tax.

But, to answer your question, it is AFTER they "dodge" their taxes (legally) :D

Or Edwards setting up a tax shelter to avoid paying Medicare taxes?
 
Originally posted by dmadman43
So the govt is now the arbiter of how much of OUR money we get to keep? What makes you determine how much disposable income people should want, or need? This is what drives me nuts about the left. Telling people how much of THEIR money they should really get to keep.

Me too.
 
So, when Greenspan said he believed the tax cuts were good for the economy, which tax cuts was he referring to?
 

New Posts


Disney Vacation Planning. Free. Done for You.
Our Authorized Disney Vacation Planners are here to provide personalized, expert advice, answer every question, and uncover the best discounts. Let Dreams Unlimited Travel take care of all the details, so you can sit back, relax, and enjoy a stress-free vacation.
Start Your Disney Vacation
Disney EarMarked Producer






DIS Facebook DIS youtube DIS Instagram DIS Pinterest DIS Tiktok DIS Twitter

Add as a preferred source on Google

Back
Top Bottom