Jump to content

MPI Health Plan - Premiums for Dependents!


DFL

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 164
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

That's also known as negotiating with your supplier, you know, buy in bulk and save.

Hey, blame the Bush administration for that nonsense. So you're willing to screw future generations even more because of W's mistakes?

Then it should have been in quotes, shouldn't it?

Of course, to make things completely fair, everyone, including you, should also get no more than minimum wage, but you're okay with that, right?

They rich paid 91% during the Eisenhower years and things seemed to go along okay. But let's knock that down to 50% just to be nice, okay?

The people that don't pay "income tax" pay a boatload in payroll taxes, remember?

Do you realize that you're sounding like a Socialist?

We are talking about saving money in the PUBLIC sector, not the private sector. Public sector workers work for us, not the other way around. It used to be that public sectors workers got very little pay, but the benefits were good. Well, now their benefits are really good and their pay is about double of their private sector counter parts. That makes no sense. The idea of government workers was to serve your country for a bit in congress or whatever, and go back to the private sector. The founding fathers did not want career politicians. If they want to be career politicians, they can get paid minimum wage. That's what we, the tax payers, can really afford.

Everyone pays payroll tax. But for some reason it's ok to only go after the rich for income tax. Why is this? Why can't everyone pay income tax? Why must we punish only the rich. With the new taxes that have just passed in California I will be actually bringing home less money even though I made more money this year than last year. I'm just past the threshold to get knocked into a higher tax bracket. So, I am de-incentivized (I think I just made up a word) to work harder and make more money because the more I make the more will get taken from me. Who decides what percentage is fair. How about we not tax people so heavily and we make the government live within its means. You give the government more money, they will just want to spend it like crazy. They've already proven that.

Some things I've said sound socialist, and that's fine. You know what, if we are going to have draconian laws, let's have draconian laws against the government, and not us. That makes more sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The idea of a flat tax on income is designed to pander to the wealthy among us. I prefer a progressive income tax in which the wealthy, who benefit the most from what this country provides in terms of legal systems, financial regulations, etc., pay somewhat more than their poorer brethren.

Please explain how the wealthy use more of what taxes pay for. They use the roads more? The fire dept more? The military more? Library more? Parks more? CIA, FBI more?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We are talking about saving money in the PUBLIC sector, not the private sector. Public sector workers work for us, not the other way around.

So it's okay for THEM to forced to live on minimum wage but not okay for YOU to be treated in the same way.

Everyone pays payroll tax.

Nope. The very rich can get away with paying none at all if their income derives from dividends, interest and capital gains.

...for some reason it's ok to only go after the rich for income tax.

It's called a progressive tax system. Those that benefit the most from society pay the most towards its upkeep and survival.

I am de-incentivized to work harder and make more money because the more I make the more will get taken from me.

Nope again. The more you make the more you make. You pay the same percentage on the first $50,000 you earn as someone making $50,000. The tax on your next $50,000 is the same as the tax paid by someone earning $100,000. It goes on from there. The fact that you're paying more taxes this year is because your state has decided to raise taxes. DOn't blame that situation on the idea of a progressive tax system.

...if we are going to have draconian laws, let's have draconian laws against the government...

Now you're starting to sound like a Bolshevik.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please explain how the wealthy use more of what taxes pay for. They use the roads more? The fire dept more? The military more? Library more? Parks more? CIA, FBI more?

As a matter of fact they do. A few of the reasons Mitt Romney can make so much money in the stock market is because the US has a very stable legal system, a superior military and a well regulated financial system.

How can the Waltons can make billions from Wal-Mart? Because, in part, of a superior interstate highway system and a safe (i.e. regulated) rail transport system. The fire insurance rates that they pay on their stores is lower because of good fire departments. They can reply on the money that they receive because there's a system in place (including the Secret Service) to make sure that most of the money in circulation is real. They can transfer money quickly and efficiently from store to HQ and from HQ to suppliers because the Federal Reserve has a system in place to make those transfers possible. They can pay for the many things that they buy in China because the dollar is a respected currency, in large part because of the systems I mentioned above. You can call it the Great Circle Of Life - Financial Division.

The things that enable the wealthy to become wealthy and stay wealthy are, in the main, taxpayer funded institutions. It seems fair to me that those that gain the most from the systems in place deserve to pay more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a matter of fact they do. A few of the reasons Mitt Romney can make so much money in the stock market is because the US has a very stable legal system, a superior military and a well regulated financial system.

How can the Waltons can make billions from Wal-Mart? Because, in part, of a superior interstate highway system and a safe (i.e. regulated) rail transport system. The fire insurance rates that they pay on their stores is lower because of good fire departments. They can reply on the money that they receive because there's a system in place (including the Secret Service) to make sure that most of the money in circulation is real. They can transfer money quickly and efficiently from store to HQ and from HQ to suppliers because the Federal Reserve has a system in place to make those transfers possible. They can pay for the many things that they buy in China because the dollar is a respected currency, in large part because of the systems I mentioned above. You can call it the Great Circle Of Life - Financial Division.

The things that enable the wealthy to become wealthy and stay wealthy are, in the main, taxpayer funded institutions. It seems fair to me that those that gain the most from the systems in place deserve to pay more.

That is a weak, weak argument. Fire insurance is less because of the fire dept that what? They use more of or is it less of? You don't benefit from that? I'm pretty sure Walmart pays more for fire insurance then you do.

They benefit because the dollar is stable? Don't you benefit also if the dollar is stable?

The money transfers? They pay for those money transfers.

They pay for things from China because of the dollar - YOU pay for things from china because of the dollar.

They can rely on the dollar because of the system in place - YOU can rely on the dollar because of the system in place.

Not only do the wealthy pay more than you in taxes dollar for dollar, they provide jobs so that others can pay taxes.

You said in the healthcare thread that the government deserves a break in cost when it pays healthcare bills because of bulk, shouldn't the wealthy get a break in taxes for bringing in more tax payers into the system? Well, I don't think so either but I also don't think they should pay MORE than me. I'm a proponent of the Fair Tax actually.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So it's okay for THEM to forced to live on minimum wage but not okay for YOU to be treated in the same way.

Absolutely it is ok for government employees to only be paid minimum wage. Again, the idea here is we don't want career politicians. The whole idea of serving in government was that you would take some time off from your real private sector gig and get paid a modest amount to have a voice in government. That's the way it is supposed to work. Politicians and government workers are not supposed to be living high on the hog while the rest of us in the private sector are struggling.

It's called a progressive tax system. Those that benefit the most from society pay the most towards its upkeep and survival.

I should get taxed more for making more money because I worked harder? The road I drove on didn't make me work harder. The library didn't make me work harder. The police and fire departments didn't make me work harder. The DMV workers didn't make me work harder. The incentive for more pay made me work harder, and the government had nothing to do with that. l am benefitting from my toil and the products and services I provide. I haven't benefitted more over the past two years from the government, and in fact I'm being punished more for being more productive.

Nope again. The more you make the more you make. You pay the same percentage on the first $50,000 you earn as someone making $50,000. The tax on your next $50,000 is the same as the tax paid by someone earning $100,000. It goes on from there. The fact that you're paying more taxes this year is because your state has decided to raise taxes. DOn't blame that situation on the idea of a progressive tax system.

If California didn't raise taxes I'd still be paying more in taxes because I am in a higher tax bracket, it's just now that percentage is higher than it would have been if prop 30 did not pass. So the progressive tax system is actually hurting me, since, again, it's not like I'm swimming in piles of money, I've made just enough to kick me into the higher tax bracket so the extra money taken from me basically negates the extra money earned, and therefore my after tax take home pay is less. You see what I mean? Trust me, I'm the one seeing my paychecks, not you.

A progressive tax system over-complicates the whole thing, and unless you are making so much money that you can't even keep track of it, it's really a pain. And besides...like I've said several times now. You could tax everyone at 100% and that still won't solve anything. We are also failing to mention that the top wager earners are paying most if the income taxes in this country anyway. How much more do you want to take from them? When does it stop becoming a tax issue and turn into a spending issue? Why is it not ok to tell the government "hey, we've given you guys enough money. You need to make due with what you are getting because we don't have any more to give"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm so happy I live in the United States of America, where there is a Constitution that enshrines the freedom of speech. That means you are able to wish that people who say things you do not agree with, you could arrest and put in jail.

Richard, assuming this sentiment applies to comments Dave Fisk made about Rush Limbaugh and others, I think you're being a bit harsh. As a naturalized citizen, I expect you are just a bit overprotective of the privileges and responsibilities of citizenship.

In context, I think Dave was speaking in "If I ran the zoo" mode. I don't think he seriously meant that Limbaugh should be tossed in the clink.

(Not that he would be missed. LIke Clarence Darrow, "I have never killed a man, but I have read many obituaries with great pleasure.")

David

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How can the Waltons can make billions from Wal-Mart? Because, in part, of a superior interstate highway system and a safe (i.e. regulated) rail transport system.

I'd like to add my voice in support of the explanation Jim makes in this post.

It seems self-evident to me that everyone benefits from efficient roads and other infrastructure. But businesses that move tons of merchandise derive greater benefit than most individuals. And, investors in those businesses share in that benefit.

It's no surprise that there are few large business enterprises in Somalia, for instance.

The issue of taxes is complex. Many countries have found to their sorrow that one can't expect wealthy citizens to bear all the costs of government programs. Wealthy individuals will move their assets out of the reach of the tax collectors in states that make unreasonable demands.

But how much is an unreasonable demand? As I understand it, taxes for high income people are lower today than they have been in a very long time. In that context, I don't think that asking the people who benefit so much from stable banking and transit systems to pay a little more, at least temporarily, to help support the enterprise is unreasonable. I don't believe it to be excessive or class warfare. But I don't expect to persuade those who have entrenched opinions.

David

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you're being a bit harsh. As a naturalized citizen, I expect you are just a bit overprotective of the privileges and responsibilities of citizenship.

So therefor, natural born citizens have no need to care about the responsibilities of citizenship - now I understand what's happening to the U.S.A.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm so happy I live in the United States of America, where there is a Constitution that enshrines the freedom of speech. That means you are able to wish that people who say things you do not agree with, you could arrest and put in jail.

Luckily, that is not the way it works here, but it does in Syria, Egypt, Iran, Pakistan, North Korea and China. If you lived there, your wishes could come true.

I like how some people will compare apples to oranges to put America in a good light.

It never fails.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is a weak, weak argument.

Only to weak, weak mind.

Fire insurance is less because of the fire dept that what?

Because the US has, in general, excellent publicly funded fire departments the price that businesses have to pay for insurance is lower than it would be if they didn't exist.

They benefit because the dollar is stable?

To a considerable degree. As the dollar is the world's reserve currency businesses here have a huge advantage over those in other countries, not to mention being able to borrow money at reduced rates of interest.

The money transfers? They pay for those money transfers.

They pay for money transfers, and currency conversions, at a much lower rate than in other countries.

Not only do the wealthy pay more than you in taxes dollar for dollar, they provide jobs so that others can pay taxes.

They don't "provide jobs". They invest in companies that need employees to operate. If and when they can avoid employing people they do, hence the rise of robots in manufacturing.

I'm a proponent of the Fair Tax actually.

Your "Fair Tax" plan is anything but. It's presented by Americans For Fair Taxation, a group funded by conservative Texas businessmen who have hired a group of conservative economists (thing Cato Institute and Heritage Foundation) to pimp their regressive sales tax ideas that would, surprise, benefit the wealthy at the expense of the poor, the working class and the middle class.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really it comes down to people believing we CAN'T offer everyone in this country equal, quality, affordable healthcare. Which is of course, complete nonsense.

Can't is just another word for "don't want to".

Can't never existed in my vocabulary. If it did, I'd still be working in a paint factory in Holland instead of being a dialog mixer on shows like "sons of Anarchy".

Can't is an excuse for lazy people, scared of taking on real challenges.and therefore stick with what they know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And completely regressive in that it hurts the people at the bottom of the ladder most.

Actually:

"While permitting no exemptions, the FairTax (HR25/S13) provides a monthly, universal prebate to ensure that each family unit can consume tax-free at or beyond the poverty level, with the overall effect of making the FairTax progressive in application. This is not an entitlement, but a rebate (in advance) of taxes paid thus the term prebate. Everyone pays taxes at the cash register. "

http://www.fairtax.org/PDF/PrebateExplained2012.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolutely it is ok for government employees to only be paid minimum wage.

Government employees include the people that shelve books at the Library of Congress, the people that inspect the contents of containers entering our ports, the members of our Armed Forces and the people that fight forest fires. So you're going to give all of them minimum wage?

The road I drove on didn't make me work harder. The library didn't make me work harder. The police and fire departments didn't make me work harder. The DMV workers didn't make me work harder. The incentive for more pay made me work harder, and the government had nothing to do with that.

The road you drove on got you to work and home again. The police and fire departments protect your ass, your family and your possessions. The DMV workers do what they can to keep dangerous idiots off of the road so that there's less chance of someone plowing their car into a school bus filled with kids. The things that the "government" provides (and, after all, you and everyone else are really the government) let you do things faster, safer and with less worry.

If California didn't raise taxes I'd still be paying more in taxes because I am in a higher tax bracket.

If California is so bad why move there? Could it be that there's more opportunity for employment there? A better life style? Nicer weather? You could always move to a low tax state like Mississippi or Alabama.

A progressive tax system over-complicates the whole thing, and unless you are making so much money that you can't even keep track of it, it's really a pain.

A progressive tax system is easy enough. Most people in the US can use a 1040-EZ which is a simple one page form.

We are also failing to mention that the top wager earners are paying most if the income taxes in this country anyway.

"Wager earners"? A typo perhaps but a telling one. Most of the really wealthy people in this country don't get most of their money from wages. Their income comes from interest, dividends and capital gains, i.e. passive money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually:

"While permitting no exemptions, the FairTax (HR25/S13) provides a monthly, universal prebate to ensure that each family unit can consume tax-free at or beyond the poverty level, with the overall effect of making the FairTax progressive in application. This is not an entitlement, but a rebate (in advance) of taxes paid thus the term prebate. Everyone pays taxes at the cash register. "

http://www.fairtax.o...plained2012.pdf

To repeat:

Your "Fair Tax" plan is anything but. It's presented by Americans For Fair Taxation, a group funded by conservative Texas businessmen who have hired a group of conservative economists (thing Cato Institute and Heritage Foundation) to pimp their regressive sales tax ideas that would, surprise, benefit the wealthy at the expense of the poor, the working class and the middle class.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Government employees include the people that shelve books at the Library of Congress, the people that inspect the contents of containers entering our ports, the members of our Armed Forces and the people that fight forest fires. So you're going to give all of them minimum wage?

Yup. Is that harsh? Yup. Government workers have been living high on the hog for too long and the fact of the matter is we cannot afford them any more at the rate they are getting paid with their current benefits.

The road you drove on got you to work and home again. The police and fire departments protect your ass, your family and your possessions. The DMV workers do what they can to keep dangerous idiots off of the road so that there's less chance of someone plowing their car into a school bus filled with kids. The things that the "government" provides (and, after all, you and everyone else are really the government) let you do things faster, safer and with less worry.

Actually, the supreme court has ruled that the police are not obligated to protect anyone. The DMV is keeping dangerous people off the road? I spend most of my time trying not to get hit, and it was worse when I was on a motortcycle. When a cop car is behind you while you are driving, do you think "oh man, I'm certainly feel safer", or "oh crap. did I do something? am I gonna get a ticket?".

If California is so bad why move there? Could it be that there's more opportunity for employment there? A better life style? Nicer weather? You could always move to a low tax state like Mississippi or Alabama.

Funny story, actually. After I left California, I swore up and down I'd never ever come back to this state. When I left LA and moved to Vegas, I was making the same annual salary, but was actually taking home much more money because Nevada has no state income tax. After the game studio I was at did a huge round of layoffs I decided not to work in video games anymore because I was tired of the getting hired and then laid off cycle that is all too common. I did have a few solid offers from game companies, the best one being in Sweden, but I didn't want to move half way around the world to a place where I didn't know anybody only to get laid off again and be stranded. I had some offers to do television audio post, but that required me moving back to LA, which I wouldn't do unless the pay was really really good, which in all honesty, would be unreasonable for the gig. Brenda heard I had been laid off, and after I left Coffey Sound way back in the day, she and Manfred looked into hiring me then, but I was too busy working in sound design. After I got laid off in Vegas, she contacted me again. I thought about it long and hard, and made the decision to take the gig. Better job stability, and come on, I get to work with one of the coolest people ever. Plus, I like being on the manufacturing side of things now. Anyway...I knew I was going to take it in the shorts in terms of cost of living and taxes, but I was willing to do that for a better gig with cool people.

That being said, the latest tax increase has really hurt small businesses like K-Tek. There are lots of things we wanted to do but can't now because of it. We were going to hire a new person. Now we can't because that money is going to the state. We were going to buy new equipment to help us make stuff, but now we can't because that money is going to the state. We are limited in the amount of products we want to R&D because instead of paying for that, the money is going to the state.

I would love to move K-Tek to a more business friendly state, but that's not so easy. Because we actually make stuff in the US, we have a bunch of big heavy machines in our machine shop. Those aren't easy to move. It would cost us a ton of money to move all the equipment and all the people, and we can't afford to do that.

A progressive tax system is easy enough. Most people in the US can use a 1040-EZ which is a simple one page form.

That's because most people don't pay any taxes.

"Wager earners"? A typo perhaps but a telling one. Most of the really wealthy people in this country don't get most of their money from wages. Their income comes from interest, dividends and capital gains, i.e. passive money.

What are the statistics on this? Most people that I know that make a lot of money actually work for it, like medical professionals, small business CEOs, high level sales people...and especially in California you have all the tech industry, wealthy actors, directors, producers and movie studios...and we're broke. The top wager earners pay a majority of the taxes. That's a fact. The question, as Dave Waelder already asked, is where do you draw the line? Who decides which tax rate is fair? Ask 5 people and you'll get 10 answers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Government workers have been living high on the hog for too long and the fact of the matter is we cannot afford them any more at the rate they are getting paid with their current benefits.

The next time you're at an airport waiting for a connecting flight and you spot an infantryman (or woman) returning from a year's posting in Afghanistan I suggest that you walk up to them and tell them, loudly enough for people to hear, that you feel that they don't deserve to be paid more than $7.25 an hour for the work that they've been doing. Then report back here and tell us the general reaction.

Actually, the supreme court has ruled that the police are not obligated to protect anyone.

But darn it they just keep on protecting and serving, don't they? What's up with those people?

The DMV is keeping dangerous people off the road?

That's because most people don't pay any taxes.

Payroll taxes, sales taxes, property taxes, license fees, tolls, etc. are real and many (perhaps most) people pay them.

Who decides which tax rate is fair?

Your elected representatives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The next time you're at an airport waiting for a connecting flight and you spot an infantryman (or woman) returning from a year's posting in Afghanistan I suggest that you walk up to them and tell them, loudly enough for people to hear, that you feel that they don't deserve to be paid more than $7.25 an hour for the work that they've been doing. Then report back here and tell us the general reaction.

Nobody forces anyone to do any job in America. We all have a choice.

But darn it they just keep on protecting and serving, don't they? What's up with those people?

depends on who you ask. I see a new story every day of police abuse.

Payroll taxes, sales taxes, property taxes, license fees, tolls, etc. are real and many (perhaps most) people pay them.

I'm talking about income taxes.

Your elected representatives.

Well then maybe we should stop complaining? They set the tax rates, right? But I guess it's only fair when your elected representative believes the same thing you do, then it isn't fair?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The top wager earners pay a majority of the taxes. That's a fact. The question, as Dave Waelder already asked, is where do you draw the line?

Not exactly wrong but not what I meant.

Rather, I posited that effective government provides good roads, deep harbors, reasonably effective police and courts, supervised banking practices and other benefits. These circumstances, supported by taxes, make a good environment for business. Businessmen and investors are obvious beneficiaries of this stable environment.

Since they so conspicuously benefit from these services, I thought it proper, in a time of economic need, to ask for a bit larger contribution. But I acknowledged that it is possible to strangle the golden goose with excessive taxation and that restraint is needed.

David

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The top wager earners pay a majority of the taxes. That's a fact. The question, as Dave Waelder already asked, is where do you draw the line?

But I acknowledged that it is possible to strangle the golden goose with excessive taxation and that restraint is needed.

David

I think this was kind of what I was getting at. I'm not against taxes, but I'm seeing people advocate (not necessarily here, but other places) that we go back to taxing the wealthy at 91%. To those people, that rate isn't excessive, but to other people it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...