• 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!

AP POLL: Tax the rich to pay for health bill

Phoenix

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 5, 2008
Messages
1,808
Reaction score
622
Location
South Carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
WASHINGTON — When it comes to paying for a health care overhaul, Americans see just one way to go: Tax the rich.

That finding from a new Associated Press poll will be welcome news for House Democrats, who proposed doing just that in their sweeping remake of the U.S. medical system, which passed earlier this month and would extend coverage to millions of uninsured Americans.
The House bill would impose a 5.4 percent income tax surcharge on individuals making more than $500,000 a year and households making more than $1 million.

The poll tested views on an even more punitive taxation scheme that was under consideration earlier, when the tax would have hit people making more than $250,000 a year. Even at that level the poll showed majority support, with 57 percent in favor and 36 percent opposed.

Link Here

Seems this poll finds that a majority no longer believe in equality. Or don't care as long as they get their way.
 
"Hey, who cares about the other guy so long as I get mine free."

The mantra for the 22nd century.:(
 
Tax the rich... Kill the economy...

Sounds like a democratic plan to me.

.
 
Looks like the AP forgot a few details in their story.

From the JammieWearingFool blog:

Of course what the Associated Press does not even mention in their story is probably the most relevant part: "In general, do you support, oppose or neither support nor oppose the health care reform plans being discussed in Congress? (IF SUPPORT/OPPOSE Is that strongly support/oppose or somewhat support/oppose?" To no surprise that's opposed by 43-41%. Eleven percent neither support or oppose and 4% "don't know."

Also conveniently left out of their story is the response to whether people should be penalized if they do not buy the government-run health care: Sixty-four percent oppose. Why do you suppose that was left out?

Also left out was of the respondents, 37% are unemployed or retired. No wonder they want someone to pick up the tab.

Forty-two percent think the economy will get worse if this scam is shoved down our throats, while 28% think it will improve. Again, this is left out of the story.

..... Another question left out: "How much of the time do you think you can trust the government in Washington to do what is right – just about always, most of the time, or only some of the time?" A total of 24% said all or most of the time. And we're going to trust them?​

Amazing how a little context can change a story... Isn't it?

.
 
Last edited:
Looks like the AP forgot a few details in their poll.

From the JammieWearingFool blog:

Of course what the Associated Press does not even mention in their story is probably the most relevant part: "In general, do you support, oppose or neither support nor oppose the health care reform plans being discussed in Congress? (IF SUPPORT/OPPOSE Is that strongly support/oppose or somewhat support/oppose?" To no surprise that's opposed by 43-41%. Eleven percent neither support or oppose and 4% "don't know."

Also conveniently left out of their story is the response to whether people should be penalized if they do not buy the government-run health care: Sixty-four percent oppose. Why do you suppose that was left out?

Also left out was of the respondents, 37% are unemployed or retired. No wonder they want someone to pick up the tab.

Forty-two percent think the economy will get worse if this scam is shoved down our throats, while 28% think it will improve. Again, this is left out of the story.

..... Another question left out: "How much of the time do you think you can trust the government in Washington to do what is right – just about always, most of the time, or only some of the time?" A total of 24% said all or most of the time. And we're going to trust them?​

Amazing how a little context can change a story... Isn't it?

.

How does that change a story about taxing the rich to pay for health care?
 
"Support this plan, and we'll stick it to the rich guy, so that -you- can have something for free!"

Class warfare anyone?

Can anyone tell me how someone that cannot buy their own health care has the right to have someone else be forced to provide it to him?
 
I think they should pay for it with a consumption tax. Make the poor pay.
 
"Hey, who cares about the other guy so long as I get mine free."

The mantra for the 22nd century.:(

The rich should already be paying for the health care of the poor. For the last three years, I've spent 10% of my adjusted gross income over a million dollars to buy health care for poor folk.
 
I won't mind at all if the tax on the rich goes through. I already have more money than I can keep track of.
i don't know if you're serious or not.....but i would pay additional tax to ensure basic healthcare for everyone.
 
i don't know if you're serious or not.....but i would pay additional tax to ensure basic healthcare for everyone.

Feel free, but you have no right to force that decision on anyone else.
 
i don't know if you're serious or not.....but i would pay additional tax to ensure basic healthcare for everyone.

Me too.

10chars
 
How does that change a story about taxing the rich to pay for health care?

It's not a story about taxing the rich, it's a story about a public opinion poll. They chose to cherry pick one obscure question, and ignore the most important ones.

See if this makes sense to you...

Why in the hell would someone write a story about how people think the government should pay for their health care plan, and leave out the fact that the majority of the people don't approve of that plan in the first place? If the majority don't want it, then isn't kind of silly to make how people want it payed for, the centerpiece of the story?

This story smells more like someones political agenda, than it does news.

.
 
Last edited:
The rich should already be paying for the health care of the poor. For the last three years, I've spent 10% of my adjusted gross income over a million dollars to buy health care for poor folk.

bsflag.gif
 
Can anyone tell me how someone that cannot buy their own health care has the right to have someone else be forced to provide it to him?
Can anyone tell me how someone who cannot buy their own defense from other nations and groups of people has the right to have someone else be forced to provide it to him?
 
Last edited:
I do if it's what the majority wants, boo dog.

That's just it dumb dumb..... the majority don't want it, just look at the polls.

It's the stupid democrats that want to shove this crap down our throats, just wait until the next election.
 
Can anyone tell me how someone that cannot buy their own aircraft carriers has the right to have someone else be forced to provide it to him?
Can you tell any of us why anyone should waste their time talking to you? Don't you have some Media Matters diatribe about Fox News to post? That someone will post a correction to, debunking your point and causing you to flee from the same, only to post more Media Matters anti Fox News and bravely flee from that as well? Or some of your I was in the military but now I am a millionaire drek to post? Here let me do this in your style. Yo 'bro, you done outed yourself as an internet crackpot so your weak act is wearing thin here and the dizzy sensation you notice is actually caused as you circle the virtual drain.
 
Last edited:
Ask yourselves, "How would the other side (Republicans) pay for health care reform?"

Some have proposed getting rid of social program such as Medicaid, Medicare and CHIP. I suppose if you could show there's a better, more economical way to insurer the poor, senior citizens or children, I'd be all for it. As it stands, even the leading House bill on health care reform would lower the FPL standard for Medicaid eligibility and eliminate CHIP while implimenting cost-cutting (savings) measure in Medicare. So, all three social health care programs would be affected by health care legistlation. But what Republicans are not saying is they'd take a backdoor approach to funding their health care reform legistlation.

Simply put, instead of imposing a tax on any one individual, company or industry, they'd instead tax the "cadillac policy" people would purchase...those so-called "premium policies".
The Senate Finance Committee bill would tax health insurance plans costing more than $8,000 annually for individuals and $21,000 for families, although those numbers could rise.

And who can afford such policies? The rich, the wealthy, the financially afluent.

And yet they'd have us all believe there's class warfare taking place in the health care reform debate. Republicans won't impose a tax on the middle-class because they need their anger to help put down any form of health care legistlation proposed by the Democrats no matter how comprehensive it might be, but most important they need the middle-class vote to take power back from the Democrats. And certainly one way to do that is to continue to through these wild ideas out there of "redistribution of wealth" and "class warfare" when the truth is they intend to tax the rich just as the Democrats. Only they'll do it indirectly.

I've made mention of this intentional "slight of hand" economics before in recent posts. If you step back, take off the partisian blinders for just a moment and read what's really being proposed by both sides you'll see they're both doing it - using the rich to pay for health care reform. Only one side is being direct about it while the other side is not. Republicans won't tax you, the wealthy, directly based on your income because they can then get away with saying, "We're not going after your money." But what they will do instead is go after the things rich people buy - in this case high-end insurance policies - so they can still say, "We didn't go after your money, but they (the Democrats) did."

So, no. Republicans may not be proposing to tax the profits of the rich directly, but they will dip into their pocketbooks and go after the things they buy instead.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom