The 47% have no idea how much healthcare reform will cost them

MedCity News ^ | November 5, 2012 | Jane Orient

[plain talk]

It may be unpopular to say so, but it is true: the U.S. is very close to, if not past, the tipping point at which the majority of the people are net beneficiaries of big government — or so they think. People who receive a check from the government may see voting for a smaller government as contrary to their best interest. If they don’t pay taxes, why should they care about a tax increase?

Perceptions are, however, deceiving.”Healthcare reform,” as the (Un)Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare) is billed, probably shows more clearly than anything else how most Americans, including Romney’s notorious 47%, are harmed by government “benefits.”

Lower wage earners, who produce real goods or provide a service their fellow Americans value, pay for those benefits even if they’re not liable for federal income tax. Fifteen percent is taken right off the top of their earnings for the Social Security/Medicare tax. This is 100% a tax, and 0% an investment. It is 100% spent, immediately, on other people’s entitlements, with a politician’s promise that the workers may get an entitlement someday, paid for by future workers — if they and the program survive long enough.

All Americans, including the working poor, will, as early as 2013, be hit with the medical device tax and the rest of some 18 ObamaCare-related tax hikes amounting to perhaps $500 billion. Starting in 2014 is the ObamaTax proper, the individual and employer mandate.

[muawiyah]

hmm ~ no, your definition is wrong. it's a forced loan made to the government ~ it pays no interest. if you die before you are eligible for payments, you lose it all.

Most of the analyses that argue that recipients receive much more than they paid usually ignore the employer's payments AND the fact that payments only go to those who live. They also fail to account for potential earnings should that money be invested in private equities!

I personally don't agree with the concept, but that's the way it was designed and that's what it does.

it's not an entitlement. You have to pay to qualify.

Many other government programs are deferred compensation ~ e.g. VA loans. I see them regularly identified as 'entitlements' ~ which is just total BS.

[fr_freak]

January 2014 is going to be greatly entertaining when everybody who thinks that Obamacare means free health care gets their fines from the IRS for not buying insurance.

Someone with a legal mind pointed out a while back that there are a number of exemptions from the healthcare fee based on income. In other words, low or no income families won't have to pay the fee, nor the penalty. Since those families are the Democrats main constituency, there will be no problem for the Dems there.

[dinodino]

You aren’t paying attention. Social Security is not a loan. Recipients receive far more than they paid in:

http://www.humanevents.com/2012/02/18/raiding-social-security/

SS is an entitlement program, and it’s bankrupt. Not sure why you are having difficulty understanding this.

[dinodino]

You aren’t paying attention. Social Security is not a loan. Recipients receive far more than they paid in:

http://www.humanevents.com/2012/02/18/raiding-social-security/

Whose potential earnings are you referring to with your stock comment? Certainly not the government’s—the courts have ruled that there is no lockbox, and you are not entitled to the money you paid in.

SS is an entitlement program, and it’s bankrupt. Not sure why you are having difficulty understanding this.

[muawiyah]

human events has published several dozen too many propaganda pieces over the years for me to think of them as a trusted source.

I simply don't have time to go through all their numbers ~ but you really have to do that because they'll pull stuff out of the air to persuade you they are correct in their judgment made before any analysis has taken place.

[dinodino]

Actually, this program is not authorized by the Constitution, so it should properly be left to the States, or not done at all.

[muawiyah]

just to humor you ~ i went to the piece you pointed to and right there in the lead paragraph it says "on average, Social Security recipients receive more in benefits over their lifetimes than they and their employers contributed in taxes during their working years," ~ ON average starting with the recipients receiving benefits, and how much they and their employers contributed ~ but says nothing about the poor batardes who DIED, or paid too little to qualify ~ 39 quarters rather than 40 for example, or who paid and aren't eligible ~ e.g. Mexican illegals returning to Mexico to retire ~ that money is contributed, and paid to those who survive to get it, but they or their heirs receive none of it!

As i said about most such arguments, they start with a thesis and then carve the numbers (or initial conditions in this case) to fit the thesis ~ that is propaganda!

[muawiyah]

The USSC disagrees with you of course, but we should have disposed of the USSC long ago ~ it’s another failed government program, rather like the income tax!

[muawiyah]

Regarding the ‘loan’ aspects ~ 100% of everything you pay in FICA is put in a fund where it is then borrowed by the US government. Looking at it from the two tails ~ where it starts and where it ends, it is a forced loan to the government!

[vette6387]

“In Oakland, California, the 113th person murdered this year, happened this weekend. There were 9 shootings in three days. Again, blue state making getting a CCW, for a legally qualified person, virtually impossible. “

They either plan to ride the “free stuff” roller coaster to the bottom of the hill knowing full well that the end will come, or they are patiently stupid enough not to see what is absolutely going to happen. Either way, they will be like the Greeks when the well runs dry.

[dinodino]

You do understand the phrase, “on average,” right? I guess math is not your strong point.

Maybe this will simplify it for you. For two years now we have spent more money on Social Security than we’ve taken in:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444138104578033282095368120.html

You don’t need to worry about averages to understand this. We paid out more in benefits than we collected in the same year. Get it now? It’s broken, bankrupt.

[muawiyah]

Do you understand how people get tricked by sneaky propagandists. The piece said: "on average, Social Security recipients" ~ referring directly to recipients and then following with what they may have paid. That's simply not all the folks who pay, nor the payments made by employers for employees who never collected, nor for interest paid, or that should have been paid, on the money borrowed from Social Security for use in the General Fund.

If you start the equation by referring to those who pay FICA it's a different picture that doesn't make the same impact.

It's propaganda.

I'm not saying this to defend Social Security, but rather to point out to you that your reference was to an untrustworthy and dishonest source.

This should also show you how Karl Rove and his crowd in the GOP-e have slowly undermined Conservative institutions and voices.

[Dutch Boy]

I believe you are correct.

Today I drove through Brighton NY. It’s a very well to do suburb of Rochester. It’s filled with some of the the upper wage earners of the area. I saw a law sign that said “Tax the 1%.”

Ron White is correct when he said that you can’t fix stupid.

[wrench]

Averages and total contribution are not accurate when dealing with regular contributions over a period of years. Look into how money works in an Annuity, and what that annuity is worth after 40 years of regular contributions. (Hint, the value FAR surpasses the sum of contributions).

[ully2]

To dem it is free because dey dont pay nuttin.

[mike_9958]

“Yep, if it’s Hill vs. Jeb I’m not voting”

Did you vote the last time - or do I get thank you for helping the dems to win 4 more years of Obama ?

I love these “protests” non-votes, which actually help the other side win.

If you were a soldier we’d call that a deserter wouldn’t we?

[danielmryan]

Calling Social Security an "entitlement" is pesky and impolitic, but that's the basis behind the Supreme Court declaring it Constitutional. They decided it was a two-in-one program: a tax (Constitutional) and a "general welfare" program (now held to be Constitutional.)

This decision was reaffirmed in an interesting 1960 case: Flemming v. Nestor. Ephraim Nestor was booted out of the country because he was a Communist, and he sued for his Social Security benefits on the grounds that he paid the taxes. The Supreme Court ruled against him, deciding that Social Security payments are not a guaranteed annuity that can be treated as a property right.

It's an interesting case on its own. It gives Congress the explicit legal authority to deny Social Security payments to deported aliens. If you read it in a certain way, it says that Congress has the right to deny Social Security payments to subversives.

[Graewoulf]

” - - - Even if the employer continues to offer insurance, the employee has to earn all the money that the employer uses to pay for it. - - - “

Great Economics 101 point.

Read more: http://medcitynews.com/2012/11/the-47-have-no-idea-how-much-healthcare-reform-will-cost-them/#ixzz2DITpnVvY

[Anti-Hillary]

Told them they should all own a business first before they open their mouth!!! Then, told them if they keep asking for more crap, then their employer will close their doors and they will be out of a job, and they will have no one to blame but themselves!!! Also, mumbled under my breath as I walked off, “Geez, what's next?? You want your employer to pay your mortgage??? When does it end?” To which, their mother, my lib SIL shot me a dirty look.

It was so sad! My other SIL and I just shook our heads and agreed that they just DO NOT get it! They have NO concept of basic economics. After that, I ignored the whole lot and hung out with my other relatives of like mind.

[Graybeard58]

For one I believe her. The EIC is a nightmare

Ah, the good ol' Earned Income Tax Credit! First proposed by Nixon, signed into law by Ford and increased under every administration since, without exception.