House Health Bill Slaps 5.4% Tax on Top Earners

At least they don't consider $250k the "top earner" threshold for this, like they do everything else!

Yeah, I'm not optimistic that this is going to pass in its current incarnation, or at least what we know of it so far. Too risky politically for House Dems to pass it, since it is more likely that it won't get past the Senate and that would leave them dangling in the wind. They should take a little more time and find a way to make this work better and to have a chance to actually get the Dems and even a few Republicans to vote on it. They may want to work backwards on this and find out what the Senate would pass and then put that to a vote in the House so the Senate can have a better shot at passing it.

"Too risky politically for House Dems to pass it,"

It would be too risky for House Dems to NOT pass it. 72% of Americans want a public option in health care. And why do they need Republican votes? The Senate Dems have a 60 seat fillerbuster proof super-majority.

Single payer. That's where we're headed, like every other industrialized country in the world.

Good. I like single payer. I want the same health insurance as the Republican Congressmen and Senators who will vote against the bill have.

Alpo is a communist, too?

since when is single payer communist? Europe has it. Canada has it. Are they communist?

"It would be too risky for House Dems to NOT pass it. 72% of Americans want a public option in health care. And why do they need Republican votes? The Senate Dems have a 60 seat fillerbuster proof super-majority."

Yes, people WANT healthcare reform, but they don't want to pay for it and they don't want any more tacked on to the deficit. The don't NEED republican votes, but it is always better when you have some members of the other party vote for legislation. Everybody in the House has to run in 2010 and the unemployment numbers are not going to be great by that point (although I believe they will be improving) and the last thing the Dems want to do is give the Republicans any wiggle room. Left to their own devices they are a party without any ideas, that onaly likes straight white people and who can only say, "No taxes, No gay marriage, no abortion, guns for everyone and drill baby, drill." They cannot win for a long, long time, unless the Dems screw this bill up.

> since when is single payer communist? Europe has it. Canada has it. Are they communist?

No, they're just socialist.

You're a communist because of your rationale.

> they are a party without any ideas

And what, do tell, are all the ideas coming from the Democrats?

"And what, do tell, are all the ideas coming from the Democrats?"

Everything that makes sense and is getting us out of this recession (nice job W). Other than that, not getting into it with you.

> Everything that makes sense

Yes, I didn't think you really believed they had ideas either.

Its a good thing Barney Frank and friends aren't democrats, because they you'd REALLY lose your case.

oh, whoops.

"And what, do tell, are all the ideas coming from the Democrats?"

ummm, the bill that you linked to?

LICCOmment, not to worry: you have to pay taxes to be subject to a surcharge.

nyc10022, why do you care? You're not a top earner sweetie.

This country needs socialism.

The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other peoples money.

> ummm, the bill that you linked to?

Tally: 1 bad idea

Keep it coming.

> nyc10022, why do you care? You're not a top earner sweetie.

Correct, I don't have to earn anymore, my wealth takes care of it for me. But thanks for asking, guy who lost all his money in the crash!

> The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other peoples money.

Well, Europe was able to get our money for a while. But then that ended, so they're now going "we weren't really serious about this socialism thing, were we?".

Even the socialists know its a failure.

"Correct, I don't have to earn anymore, my wealth takes care of it for me. But thanks for asking, guy who lost all his money in the crash!"

You only wish.

"Single payer. That's where we're headed, like every other industrialized country in the world."

Steve, I don't think you know what you're talking about here. France does not really have a single-payer system (it's a mix of public-private), nor do the Netherlands or Switzerland. In fact, it's the latter system we're most likely to emulate - universal mandate, with a balance of public and private funding.

"They cannot win for a long, long time, unless the Dems screw this bill up."

waverly, I think you're right, and it's not even so much a question of ideas (who has "more" is a fruitless and silly debate) but more of demographics. If they stick to the conservative, anti-gay, anti-smart foreign policy approach, they'll continue to lose votes. The party needs to get younger and more socially aware before anything changes. Could be a while.

bjw, agreed on both fronts. Universal mandate has its own problems, but it looks like what's happening.

On the dem front, absolutely, Reps are not playing this well right now, and going to right is not hte answer.

Of course, that doesn't excuse the Dems from being a bunch of idiots either.

> You only wish.

Alpo, come talk to me when you can afford Manhattan.

you rent. You can't afford to buy in Manhattan.

The poll also found that adults over 40 strongly favored capitalism, with just 13% of this age group believing that socialism is the superior system. Meanwhile, adults under 30 are about evenly divided (37% capitalism, 33% socialism, 30% undecided).

Youth wants socialism..

youth typically make less moneys, so Socialism would benefit them the most. Older peopel who make more benefit under Capitalism.

"But thanks for asking, guy who lost all his money in the crash!"

LOL - you are a joke.

Older peopel who make more benefit under Capitalism. '

Most adults in the United States are poor. What is the median salary? $50,000?

Capitalism is what provides the youth the opportunity to think they like socialism. The youth has every right to go to another socialist regime and see if they like it.

This is where gays have it right. No children = no one to vote for socialism.

"Tally: 1 bad idea Keep it coming."

having a bad idea != having no ideas.

you fail at making sense.

"Alpo, come talk to me when you can afford Manhattan."

nyc10022, your douche is showing.

All this is moot cause when the revised GDP projected numbers for 2010 and 2011 come out in the next two weeks its going to throw everything for a loop (could possibly tack on another $500 billion on to the deficit) and anything that smells like spending will be put on hold (even if its paid for)....cause guess what, you going to need the rich to pay more taxes to bring the deficit down forget about Health Care, Cap and Tax, etc....

Get ready to load up on TBT the day before

all these new taxes will be very positive for real estate values

Not every industrialized nation, or every country in Europe, has a single-payer system.

Wow, steve makes another blatantly incorrect statement - shocking . . .

By the way, I hadn't posted on this thread yet, so steve must have visions of my comments in his head.

If the Democrats push this and cap and trade through, they will hand back seats to Republicans in the next election.
I was supporting Obama's goals on the economy and health care reform, but the execution has been terrible. He lost me on health care when he said the malpractice reform was "off the table". He is totally beholden to trial lawyers and the unions. The stimulus has been a disaster. The use of a stimulus to fight the recession is valid and useful if done properly, but he let the Congress control it and instead of a stimulus we got a political spending mess that will do more harm than good.
I really want Obama to do well, and I think he has done some good things like lifting the ban on stem-cell research and engaging the Muslim community, but if he keeps going about things like he has with the economy, cap and trade, and health care, he will lose his luster with the public pretty quickly.

I find it reprehensible that wealthy, successful families will be subsidizing the cost of insurance for fat hillbillies in West Virginia who smoke cigarettes costing a dollar a pack. Healthcare reform should be financed with taxes imposed on the purchase of soft drinks and alcohol, and--most importantly-- cigarettes, which should cost at least $10-20 a pack in EVERY state.

@LICComment
I agree with you on the malpractice reform.
Together with the "for profit" and "share price above all" mentality of pharmaceutical and insurance companies, malpractice has done the most to damage health care, both financially and functionally.

You would not believe how much completely useless paperwork doctors and other health care professionals have to complete in order to cover themselves against malpractice (not to mention the ridiculous insurance premiums which add to the cost of health care without adding ANY benefit in terms of coverage or well-being for patients). They spend so much time and money (filing, reviewing, storing all this paperwork) that there is no time left to actually provide health care.

It is ridiculous and it has to stop!

> you rent. You can't afford to buy in Manhattan.

Alpo, I can afford to rent or buy in Manhattan. And now I can rent or buy considerably more for the same dollar, which is nice. In any case, I'm here, and you are in a crapbox in New Jersey, which is sinking fast.

So, stay on your Jersey board until you can finally afford Manhattan.

"Not every industrialized nation, or every country in Europe, has a single-payer system."

Which one doesn't?

UK - single payer
Ireland - ditto
Denmark - ditto
France - ditto
Germany - ditto
Spain - ditto
Portugal - ditto
Italy - ditto
Netherlands - ditto
Belgium - ditto
Luxembourg - ditto
Switzerland - ditto
Canada - ditto
Japan - ditto
Greece - ditto

"Wow, steve makes another blatantly incorrect statement - shocking . . ."

Did I miss a country?

Tyranny of the majority

Steve, you're wrong - France, Netherlands, Switzerland don't have a real single-payer. UK, Canada, Sweden do. See my note above.

steve follows up his incorrect statement with a detailed repeat of the same incorrect statement. That's good for a laugh.

steve is confusing concepts, as usual. Universal health care is not synonymous with single payer healthcare. Australia, Canada, the UK and Sweden have single payer systems. France, Switzerland, etc. have universal health care, but they do not use single-payer systems.

Seldom right and wrong again steve!

Otto - If you live in NY than a lot of your tax dollars are already flowing towards West Virginia. The knuckleheads who were holding their "tea parties" were primarily in "Red" states that suck the tax money from the "Blue" states.

"but they do not use single-payer systems"

Wrong again, LICC. The principal system in all of those countries is single-payer. It is possible to purchase optional insurance on top of the single payer system, but it is not mandatory. Recently the Canadian supreme court determined that Canadians had that right, as well. The right also exists in Spain and in the UK.

steve must love being wrong and losing arguments to me all the time:

The Swiss healthcare system is a combination of public, subsidised private and totally private systems:

public: e. g. the University of Geneva Hospital (HUG) with 2,350 beds, 8,300 staff and 50,000 patients per year;
subsidised private: the home care services to which one may have recourse in case of a difficult pregnancy, after childbirth, illness, accident, handicap or old age;
totally private: doctors in private practice and in private clinics.
The insured person has full freedom of choice among the recognised healthcare providers competent to treat their condition (in his region) on the understanding that the costs are covered by the insurance up to the level of the official tariff. There is freedom of choice when selecting an insurance company (provided it is an officially registered caisse-maladie or a private insurance company authorised by the Federal Act) to which one pays a premium, usually on a monthly basis.

The list of officially-approved insurance companies can be obtained from the cantonal authority.

"Wrong again, LICC. The principal system in all of those countries is single-payer. It is possible to purchase optional insurance on top of the single payer system, but it is not mandatory. Recently the Canadian supreme court determined that Canadians had that right, as well. The right also exists in Spain and in the UK."

Steve, you're just plain wrong and stubborn. Just look at the Netherlands - primary care is mandatory but privately covered.

And if you're intending to say that the "principal" system is single-payer (which I really doubt it what you intended to say), then the US is on the cusp (if it isn't already) of being there as well - the government does pay for Medicare and Medicaid, which is roughly half of health spending in the US.