By combining Obamacare with taxes, GOP goes for it all[W:116]

Moderate Right said:

It's not a left right thing. But, the left want the poor to get free healthcare charged to the richer.....

Click to expand...

As stated, subsidies depend on income and age.

And the rich being "charged" is a matter of taxes. They are going to be "charged" no matter what. And taking this route to argue for the rich abandons the fact that the poor also pay taxes.

Don't see what the problem is. The mandate is a tax, it should be removed.

Lerxst said:

I'm considered part of the upper middle class based upon my income. As part of my comp package my employer pays 100% of my insurance. I do not need any help my elected officials.

I live in the mid-west so my income is considered by many to be very well off. I won't go that far, but compared to the average family in my area I can understand why they say that. They need help with medical coverage more than I need a tax break. I do just fine. Do I like seeing around 30% of my earnings go to the government? No, but I do like having police, fire, paved roads, and social programs that help the poor.

They can stop allowing the wealthy so many tax breaks and lower military spending.

Click to expand...

The US Tax Code is often referred to as "The Book of Favors". Nearly every deduction, carve out, tax credit is a favor to someone or another. Both house and senate tax plans seek to get rid of many of these exemptions (I get an exemption, you get a loophole)! We really need a complete overhaul of tax code, but that is a bridge too far unless it's done piecemeal.

I get what you are saying, but the way Obamacare is structured now is the middle class that is subsidizing the lower classes, not the rich - or so it seems.

You did hit on a point that has been lost. Obamacare was to help the poor. And it did that by hurting the middle class.

FYI, one the House is done, and the Senate is done, it will go to joint committees to create a unified bill that the Prez will sign. It's just getting warmed up.

MSgt said:

As stated, subsidies depend on income and age.

And the rich being "charged" is a matter of taxes. They are going to be "charged" no matter what. And taking this route to argue for the rich abandons the fact that the poor also pay taxes.

Click to expand...

But we're talking about poor people. Poor people get free healthcare, paid by the richer.

As far as taxes go, the poor pay zero federal income taxes and the rich pay the lion's share, exactly what the left wants. If you want to talk about "other" taxes, then the rich still pay the lion's share, exactly what the left wants. And yet the left still complain that the rich don't pay their fair share.

chuckiechan said:

I get what you are saying, but the way Obamacare is structured now is the middle class that is subsidizing the lower classes, not the rich - or so it seems.

Click to expand...

As was covered back in May when the GOP tried to repeal the ACA, not really:

The health care bill passed by the House on Thursday is a win for the wealthy, in terms of taxes.

While the Affordable Care Act raised taxes on the rich to subsidize health insurance for the poor, the repeal-and-replace bill passed by House Republicans would redistribute hundreds of billions of dollars in the opposite direction. It would deliver a sizable tax cut to the rich, while reducing government subsidies for Medicaid recipients and those buying coverage on the individual market.

The Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, is funded in part through higher taxes on the rich, including a 3.8 percent tax on investment income and a 0.9 percent payroll tax. Both of these taxes apply only to people earning more than $200,000 (or couples making more than $250,000). The GOP replacement bill would eliminate these taxes, although the latest version leaves the payroll tax in place through 2023.

Click to expand...

The lion's share of the tax savings would go to the wealthy and very wealthy. According to the Tax Policy Center, the top 20 percent of earners would receive 64 percent of the savings and the top 1 percent of earners (those making more than $772,000 in 2022) would receive 40 percent of the savings.

Click to expand...

chuckiechan said:

The US Tax Code is often referred to as "The Book of Favors". Nearly every deduction, carve out, tax credit is a favor to someone or another. Both house and senate tax plans seek to get rid of many of these exemptions (I get an exemption, you get a loophole)! We really need a complete overhaul of tax code, but that is a bridge too far unless it's done piecemeal.

I get what you are saying, but the way Obamacare is structured now is the middle class that is subsidizing the lower classes, not the rich - or so it seems.

You did hit on a point that has been lost. Obamacare was to help the poor. And it did that by hurting the middle class.

FYI, one the House is done, and the Senate is done, it will go to joint committees to create a unified bill that the Prez will sign. It's just getting warmed up.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the reasoned response. At the end of the day, at least for now, whatever happens I will be largely unaffected. If I get some kind of savings I am not sure it will really amount to much, and if it stays the same, well...I'm doing okay. Call me a bleeding heart, but I do worry about the poor. I've been there in my life. There were a few years after I got out of the military where it was difficult to find work that would support a growing family. Even working two jobs we still qualified for WIC, Medicaid, and food stamps. I worked very hard to get out of that situation. But I remember how it kept my heat on in the winter, made sure my kids could see a doctor when they were sick, and there was food on the table (we did a lot of shopping at Aldi's and Food4Less in those days). I have no shame in admitting that I needed those programs for a while. There is no thought of tax loopholes and exemptions when you have a kid with pneumonia and barely enough gas in the car to get across town to the hospital.

Our political leaders are addicted to deficit spending. I just don't see that changing.