Posted on 03/28/2017 8:09:20 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
You you also want the government to give out subsidies for home and car insurance?
Please think about your position.
First, let's agree that a tax deduction for an expense that is not for the purpose of earning income is a disguised subsidy which has greater or less value depending upon the marginal tax bracket of the taxpayer. So the employer deduction for its picking up one-half of its employee's health care 'expense' is effectively a subsidy of high value, assuming that the employer and its shareholders have taxable income.
What I described is a way to get back to the pre-ObamaCare world on a revenue-neutral basis by converting the employer deduction to an individual subsidy, thereby (a) facilitating portability by severing the relationship with a particular employer, and (b)levelling the playing field by turning the deduction, which has different values in the hands of different taxpayers, to a subsidy, which has the same value to everyone. We could call it a "tax credit" if the word "subsidy" concerns you.
In an ideal world, we should go back even further in time and just remove the employer deduction without replacing it with anything. I would be onboard with that, but don't think it would fly politically.
In other words, this could be handled any number of ways. I was demonstrating a method to remove the troublesome employer deduction, which has hamstrung health policy wonks for decades.
Large companies get discounts, because they buy insurance for very large numbers of people. A self employed, small business NEVER gets that kind of price and neither can they write off for buying their employees health insurance.
As I said, you really DO need to rethink your position ( there ARE other answers/solutions out there, which either you don't know about, or have ignored ) since your stance is badly flawed and ridiculous.
No. He’s proven himself to be untrustworthy and vengeful.
RE: No. He’s proven himself to be untrustworthy and vengeful.
1) Oh you mean the guy who accused his father of being party to the assassination of JFK is not vengeful?
2) You’re going to just trash his proposal without even giving it a look because you don’t like him?
1) Oh you mean the guy who accused his father of being party to the assassination of JFK is not vengeful?
2) You’re going to just trash his proposal without even giving it a look because you don’t like him?
*********************
I didn't say I didn't like him. I said that he is untrustworthy and vengeful.
I also didn't "trash" his proposal.
Perhaps you meant to respond to a different post?
How would you do it?
RE: I said that he is untrustworthy and vengeful.
This thread is ABOUT HIS PROPOSAL regardless of whether or not you find him untrustworthy or vengeful. Let’s stick to his proposal.
A response like yours would be like me telling my classmate to ignore our high school health teacher who teaches the class about the dangers of smoking, because he personally smokes like a chimney.
His personal actions should be separated from the merits of what he teaches.
You want FREE HANDOUTS, from the government; that's worse than creepy, on this site.
I don’t agree.
RE: I don’t agree.
Which part? You could edify this thread by telling us which and why?
I’m glad we’re getting to the issues and not into the personalities now.
Would you keep the tax deduction for employers who pay for half of an employee's medical premium?
If so, then you favor a subsidy.
If not, then you want to go way back, not just pre-ObamaCare, but to World War II.
Which is it?
Would I like to go back to when doctors still made house calls ( which still existed, to some extent, in Chicago, through the 1980s )and the government was less intrusive? WHO WOULDN'T ?
I'd REALLY like to go back to a time when the unemployed didn't get 99 weeks or more, of unemployment benefits, people accepted the fact that when they reached the age of 21, they were ADULTS, there was no MUSLIM THREAT ( and IF there were any here, they didn't walk around in idiotic clothing nor make outrageous demands ), this nation was more or less united, and being on THE DOLE/WELFARE was an embarrassment.
Since large companies have gotten health insurance perks and government subsidies, in the form of tax breaks, for almost 80 years, that's not going away. Adding on to that, is preposterous!
Then you and I oppose legislation that keeps subsidies in place, even if supported by President Trump. Glad to hear it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.