Healthcare based on income

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

I really like the idea at the bottom of this article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/19/opinion/19douthat.html

If you look into the polls section of VJ, RebeccaJo has posted a poll that highlights what people pay as a percentage of their income. It would be brilliant if we had a system that works on that basis. IE. you must pay X% of your income before full coverage kicks in. As long as that percentage isn't something like 20%+ of course. That way we could require healthcare insurance and it would be a fair burden on all (assuming there was no staggering like with tax code).

[_Simpson_ 250]

I really like the idea at the bottom of this article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/19/opinion/19douthat.html

If you look into the polls section of VJ, RebeccaJo has posted a poll that highlights what people pay as a percentage of their income. It would be brilliant if we had a system that works on that basis. IE. you must pay X% of your income before full coverage kicks in. As long as that percentage isn't something like 20%+ of course. That way we could require healthcare insurance and it would be a fair burden on all (assuming there was no staggering like with tax code).

Not a fan of the idea but does everyone pay the same percentage and how would we address the slackers in society so as to make sure there carrying there weight.

[mawilson 2,133]

Democrats would never accept any "fair tax" system, arguing it's regressive and hits lower income folks harder.

[_Simpson_ 250]

Democrats would never accept any "fair tax" system, arguing it's regressive and hits lower income folks harder.

yes very true

[Darnell 8,478]

I'd be happy with a 7 percent 'across the board' wage-capture, you betcha.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

For those without incomes I would see them getting a waiver that means they are outside the system (with the exception of a parent with minors). If you become unemployed then its take from your UI (which is 10 times better then cobra). Its not perfect, I don't think it can cover everyone but it would cover alot more people then the system currently does.

[GabiandVi 34]

I really like the idea at the bottom of this article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/19/opinion/19douthat.html

If you look into the polls section of VJ, RebeccaJo has posted a poll that highlights what people pay as a percentage of their income. It would be brilliant if we had a system that works on that basis. IE. you must pay X% of your income before full coverage kicks in. As long as that percentage isn't something like 20%+ of course. That way we could require healthcare insurance and it would be a fair burden on all (assuming there was no staggering like with tax code).

I don't know if I'm exactly against this, but I find it interesting that people think it is fair that people who make more money should pay more for the same service, or perhaps pay more for less service. Somehow the meaning of the word fair and that situation doesn't really match. It seems to be the opposite of fair. Should everyone be charged a percentage of their pay for what they eat? Or for the gas they put in their cars? Or for electricity, no matter how much they use. Etc.?

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

And is it fair that a person makes more money based on the fact that his/her parents could afford school then another kid who's parents could not? Life isn't fair, we don't all start on equal planes.

Edited October 19, 2009 by Sousuke

[GabiandVi 34]

And is it fair that a person makes more money based on the fact that his/her parents could afford school then another kid who's parents could not? Life isn't fair, we don't all start on equal planes.

This is a false argument. There are plenty of people who have done well whose parents could not afford to pay for school. But that's not the point either. The wealthy already pay for the poor to go to school through property taxes and donations to scholarship programs. But that's not the point either.

I just find it interesting that fair has taken on such an unfair definition. You are right. Life is not fair. Isn't that the point?

By the way, I grew up in a situation where I had every opportunity. I decided to become a teacher. My daughter will not have the privileges I had. But I'm not going to expect my brothers and sisters who decided to become doctors, lawyers, engineers, and business people and who make a LOT more than I do to make things "even" for my daughter. Why should I expect you to?

Edited October 19, 2009 by GabiandVi

[Darnell 8,478]

I'd be happy with a 7 percent 'across the board' wage-capture, you betcha.

Whoops - sorry - my bad - i left out 'tax-deductible'

It seems fair to me if the wage-capture percentage is tax-deductible.

Perhaps the 'medical savings accounts' will resurface, as well?

I'm not suggesting that SERVICES have a sliding scale, not at all - but a 'wage-capture system' that puts 7 percent of taxable income , away, to be used solely for medical bills .. lipo ok if fattish, breast enhancements not covered.

Edited October 19, 2009 by Darnell

[GabiandVi 34]

I'd be happy with a 7 percent 'across the board' wage-capture, you betcha.

Whoops - sorry - my bad - i left out 'tax-deductible'

It seems fair to me if the wage-capture percentage is tax-deductible.

Perhaps the 'medical savings accounts' will resurface, as well?

I think I could live with that compromise. But there still are medical savings accounts. I'm about to enroll in one. There are also daycare savings accounts. I'm going to have to investigate that some more.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

I would be fine with it being tax deductible...but of course then your going to need a tax hike at least at the top tiers to make up for the lost tax revenue.

Edited October 19, 2009 by Sousuke

[_Simpson_ 250]

And is it fair that a person makes more money based on the fact that his/her parents could afford school then another kid who's parents could not? Life isn't fair, we don't all start on equal planes.

We may not all start on the same plane but we should all have the opportunity to visit whatever plane we want to, different tax percentages makes that pretty tough.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Why is that? By the way if things were truly fair then your pay would equal your training*your productivity but that is not how pay works. Its based on supply and demand.

Edited October 19, 2009 by Sousuke

[_Simpson_ 250]

Why is that?

because when you reach the next tax bracket your taxes jump up significantly and to move past that tax bracket and into the next is nearly impossible unless you switch careers.