Congress: Labor vs. Baucus/Conrad

GP NW Indiana — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 13:26:03 GMT

With the competition that the public plan will put in place, those taxes would be recouped with competetive premiums.

We pay much less now in taxes then we did under reagan, and yet people get up in arms when somebody asks to pay for services that will help our country progress.

Back in the day, americans willingly bought war bonds in times of crisis. They wanted to make this county better. N

Now if your taxes come down 30 bucks a month its like "big deal, that's hardly a fillup at a gas station!" But add 30 bucks a month?...watch out! "we're being taxed to death!!!!"

Congress: Labor vs. Baucus/Conrad

no joe, no bo, nj — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 13:45:06 GMT

Congress: Labor vs. Baucus/Conrad

Tim Stocken, Highland Lakes, NJ — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 14:02:01 GMT

Taxing health care benefits would be political suicide for the Democrats considering Obama's criticism during the election of the McCain plan to do the same. The only possible path would be to tax the excess of luxury health plans that are worth more than $10,000 per year.

The thing I don't understand in this health care discussion is the general population's acceptance of the obscene profits the health doesn't care industry has been raking in for the past 20 years. The recession at least demonstrated that corporate America was vastly overcompensated. Why should the health doesn't care industry be exempt from this thinking? Also there is waste generated by authorizing unnecessary tests and procedures that increase the provider group's bottom line. Add that to the fraud we need to find and eliminate in medicare and we should actually lower costs over the next decade, so why would tax increases be necessary when we already pay the highest premiums in the world?

Excess profits, too many middlemen, tort reform limits on awards, fraud, overly ambitious treatment, mal-practice insurance, the list is unending on where cuts can be made and still the AMA and health don't care providers preach the status quo.

Congress: Labor vs. Baucus/Conrad

Mo — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 14:25:42 GMT

GP NW Indiana-I bet a cupcake that you are one of the 50% of Americans who not only do not pay taxes, but get a welfare check in the form of a 'refundable tax credit' from those who do.

Of course you don't think you are being 'taxed to death'-you live off the labor of others.

no joe, no bo, nj (Sent Tuesday, June 30, 2009 9:45 AM)

It's apparent you don't work at all, or you wouldn't be on here all day long. So you must be on welfare your self. Been to get your food stamps yet?

Congress: Labor vs. Baucus/Conrad

Paul Taylor, VA — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 14:30:36 GMT

Tim Stocken, Highland Lakes, NJ - Taxing health care benefits would be political suicide for the Democrats considering Obama's criticism during the election of the McCain plan to do the same. The only possible path would be to tax the excess of luxury health plans that are worth more than $10,000 per year.

Both good points. But, the money to pay for health care has to come from somewhere, and there are really limited funding streams available for it. Obama and Congress have really backed themselves into a corner on this one, and there may not be any solution on how to fund health care without taxing everyone, and taxing them a lot.

Congress: Labor vs. Baucus/Conrad

mexed, san antonio, texas — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 15:09:26 GMT

Taxes, what are the good for? Roads and bridges that don't fall apart, cities that are not trashy, police that are well paid and don't look for bribes, snow clearing, rivers that are clean, drinking water that is healthy, city and country parks where I can run, walk, picnic, play with the kids, simply enjoy seeing from the car window, sidewalks the are not broken (and actually might be more than virtual in my neighborhood), a good library system, well trained well paid teachers, educational services for handicapped, school bus service, well taught classes for the kids, schools without leaky roofs, outdated books, good supervision. Obviously the list is short. Health care does cost, will cost. We can afford trips, vacations, cars, meals out, bingo, lottery, vegas trips, sweet sixteen parties, and more. How about health care? I'm a basics person and health care is a basic. I don't need to go on a cruise to feel good - I can walk in the park. Health care I want and want now.

Congress: Labor vs. Baucus/Conrad

MO Attorney — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 15:10:12 GMT

Now we know why Obama refuses to consider tort reform as a means of reducing healthcare costs. I used to think it was because no true attorney would dispense with the bread and butter of millions of his colleagues, but now I realize it's because Obama can't afford to. He's already losing union support over healthcare. If he lost the support of both the trial attorneys AND the unions over healthcare, even Palin could beat him in 2012.

Congress: Labor vs. Baucus/Conrad

katiec — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 15:13:55 GMT

Baucus amd Conrad are not supporting what the American people want. Are they weighing campaign contributions over us?? 72% of Americans and 87% of Democrats demand public option. They are not listening.
There are numerous cost cuts that should be demanded from the insurance, drug companies, doctors, hospitals etc that could decrease costs dramatically.
(the hospitals in our area seem to have no limit on spending for new parking lots, clinics, expansions, competing with and trying to outdo one another)
Contact the politicians on ussenators.com and let them know their job is to respresent us. Have not been able to find a web site the allows us to do this with the house.
We must speak out loud and clear.

Congress: Labor vs. Baucus/Conrad

Cub Reporter, Portland, ME — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 15:37:51 GMT

Baucus and Conrad both are trying to tax health care benefits AND gut Health reform by removing a public option for obtaining health care. They're no different really from Sen.'s Snowe and Collins of Maine, the only moderate Republicans left.

I think the president will accept taxes on health benefits if and only if a full-blooded public option moves forward.

Sidebar to 'no joe, no bo': you not only speculate wildly and frankly in ways you can't possibly know about GP Indiana, you attack him personally rather than forward reasoned statements that describe your position. This is the type of politics of destruction that Americans are more often rejecting now. I'd ask you to participate 'positively' in the discussion since the new administration seems authentically committed to multiple dialogues across many segments on the political spectrum.

Congress: Labor vs. Baucus/Conrad

Katty K — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 15:38:04 GMT

The uproar about taxes only happens when people who make 2m or more about to be taxed - and the gap is about that wide - 250,000 and below and the next group is 2m and up. This President has to be willing to let those go on their way if they don't want to pay their fair share - let them all go to the Middle East - I think the remaining 350m Americans - would rise up and fill the vacuum. They would finally be able to put their inventions forward that have been suppressed for long that people almost forgot how to invent anything but household and exercise gadgets. I think we need to flush out that old blood that is holding the country back. They let in the foreign inventions and hold back American inventions - this is not right - this is what the new President sees as having to change. And for the first time an American President is will to stand with the American PEOPLE. Americans who deride President Obama should be ashamed because I doubt that they will ever again have another President who is so much in their corner.

Congress: Labor vs. Baucus/Conrad

Kelly (from Pittsburgh) — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 16:16:45 GMT

Tim - I concur on many I of your points. The problem with needing funding for the bill is that many of the cost savings will be passed on to the people buying health insurance not the government. The government will see some cost savings for Medicare (which is desperately needed). But most of the excess will come out of the pricate sectors profit pockets and go to companies and the insured. So those savings can not be used to pay for the uninsured (which is going to be subsized by the government). In reality this is going to save a lot of money (not cost a trillion), but thats not how the Congressional Budget Office works.

As for a tax on health benefits, I too fear its unpopularity. I wish they would enact Obama's funding plans instead. But I fear that some kind of tax is a foregone conclusion. And that despite its unpopularity, is a fair and good long-term option.