• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Unions’ Health Benefits May Avoid Tax Under Proposal

Renae

Banned
Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
50,241
Reaction score
19,243
Location
San Antonio Texas
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
June 26 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. Senate proposal to impose taxes for the first time on “gold-plated” health plans may bypass generous employee benefits negotiated by unions.

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, the chief congressional advocate of taxing some employer-provided benefits to help pay for an overhaul of the U.S. health system, says any change should exempt perks secured in existing collective- bargaining agreements, which can be in place for as long as five years.
Unions? Health Benefits May Avoid Tax Under Proposal (Update1) - Bloomberg.com

Democrats as Union tools? Who'd of thunk it??

Baucus, a Montana Democrat, is proposing to tax Americans whose health insurance is valued at a higher rate than what is offered to federal employees. About 40 percent of insured Americans have costlier benefits, and Baucus has said he is trying to set the level at which taxes would be imposed high enough so fewer people are affected.

Oh look, More punishment for those evil rich folks!
 
Nowhere in the article does it say that the exemptions are anything but a possible idea by one guy. Let's no go overreacting to things.
 
Nowhere in the article does it say that the exemptions are anything but a possible idea by one guy. Let's no go overreacting to things.

If that one guy is Max Baucus, I think it's pretty important.
 
If that one guy is Max Baucus, I think it's pretty important.

I would not even go that far. Let's see what gets out of committee, or ore importantly, what passes.
 
I would not even go that far. Let's see what gets out of committee, or ore importantly, what passes.
What passes, once it passes, is a done deal. Complaints then will be too late.

The time to stop a bad idea like taxing everyone but unions on health benefits is when it is just an idea.

The time to stop this bad idea is NOW.

Wait + see == dead more often than not.
 
What passes, once it passes, is a done deal. Complaints then will be too late.

The time to stop a bad idea like taxing everyone but unions on health benefits is when it is just an idea.

The time to stop this bad idea is NOW.

Wait + see == dead more often than not.

Neither you nor I is going to stop anything. Further, note that this is not "taxing everyone but unions", this is grandfathering existing contracts, which are max five years, and according to a quote in the article, normal operating procedure.
 
Neither you nor I is going to stop anything. Further, note that this is not "taxing everyone but unions", this is grandfathering existing contracts, which are max five years, and according to a quote in the article, normal operating procedure.

The two people who claimed it's normal operating procedure are an AFL-CIO lobbyist and an SEIU official. If they mouth movin', they lyin'.
 
The two people who claimed it's normal operating procedure are an AFL-CIO lobbyist and an SEIU official. If they mouth movin', they lyin'.

It could be, I doubt I would have any luck finding out one way or the other. I am however, as I said, waiting to see what comes out of committee.
 
Neither you nor I is going to stop anything. Further, note that this is not "taxing everyone but unions", this is grandfathering existing contracts, which are max five years, and according to a quote in the article, normal operating procedure.
If you don't write/call/email your congressman and Senator daily, no, you won't.

If you don't speak out, no you won't.

But just because you won't, don't assume no one else will--or that no one else can.

And it matters not how the union apologists dress up the language. It is "taxing everyone but unions." Grandfathering is BS in this case--what about non-union employees with existing health plans through their employers. Should they not also be grandfathered?

Of course, grandfathering all health plans would pretty much kill the idea--so of course the fair and equitable solution is to just grandfather the unions.:roll:

No, the fair and equitable solution is to kill this turkey of an idea NOW. While it is still just an idea.

Or perhaps you want everyone but unions to be taxed on their health insurance? Perhaps you think it is a good idea?
 
If you don't write/call/email your congressman and Senator daily, no, you won't.

If you don't speak out, no you won't.

But just because you won't, don't assume no one else will--or that no one else can.

And it matters not how the union apologists dress up the language. It is "taxing everyone but unions." Grandfathering is BS in this case--what about non-union employees with existing health plans through their employers. Should they not also be grandfathered?

Of course, grandfathering all health plans would pretty much kill the idea--so of course the fair and equitable solution is to just grandfather the unions.:roll:

No, the fair and equitable solution is to kill this turkey of an idea NOW. While it is still just an idea.

Or perhaps you want everyone but unions to be taxed on their health insurance? Perhaps you think it is a good idea?

I believe I have commented on my communication with my senators and congressmen. Let's not even try and suggest I am not active.

Nor have I defended the idea of grandfathering in the unions. I am simply correcting your mistake.

Finally, I am waiting to see what comes out of committee. That will be the right time to express agreement or disagreement with the plan. I don't do as you do and jump on the partisan bandwagon and jump to conclusions.
 
Nor have I defended the idea of grandfathering in the unions. I am simply correcting your mistake.

What's your preferred method of excluding labor from the workforce?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom