Thread Rating:

AZDuffman
AZDuffman
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 217
  • Posts: 10982
March 15th, 2010 at 1:42:52 PM permalink
Quote: boymimbo


Legally, in Canada, I have the right to free education up to Grade 12 (as well as heavily subsidized University) and health-care. And based on my income, I could also receive "Welfare" that provides a very basic stipend for food and shelter. So as a Canadian citizen I have the right to these things.



You are confusing "right" with "entitlement." "Rights" are given by God (or nature if you prefer) as a human condition. However, one person't natural rights cannot take away something from another person. Take the case of subsidized university. Your "right" is taking away from other people in the form of higher taxes. So it is an entitlement, not a right.

Quote:

Are the people doing this work enslaved? No. They are getting paid out of a collective, the taxes that most of us pay. When teachers and doctors make up the decision to take up their career in Canada, they understand that they get paid by the government and that the government is collecting the money from taxpayers, so I guess they chose to be "enslaved".



It is not the workers in the government system who are "enslaved," rather it is those who are paying for that system. Go back to feudal Europe. The peasants had to give up a few days labor to the lord in exchange for protection. Like taxes in modern countries, the rate varried wildly form one to six days a week. They had no choice. Same with taxes today. If I have to pay 20% in taxes for school and health care (your "rights" as you say) then I am effectively enslaved 20% of the time if we assume a five day work week.

"Rights" are better left few but vague than more and speciffic. Look at the USA where we started with just three named rights but built a system on them. Then look at the failed European Constitution. It tried to list hunderds of "rights," most of which were "entitlements." It failed to pass.
Tolerance is the virtue of believing in nothing
Nareed
Nareed
Joined: Nov 11, 2009
  • Threads: 373
  • Posts: 11413
March 15th, 2010 at 3:04:56 PM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

If I have to pay 20% in taxes for school and health care (your "rights" as you say) then I am effectively enslaved 20% of the time if we assume a five day work week.



Right. That fifth of your life gets taken from you by threat of force.

Quote: AZDuffman

"Rights" are better left few but vague than more and speciffic. Look at the USA where we started with just three named rights but built a system on them.



As you remarked before, rights are not something given or granted by a government, but rather inherent to human beings. A government may grant certain "rights" in special circumstances, such as the right of the accused to be represented by an attorney. But if you look deeper, you'll see the purpose fo such grants is to safeguard other, existing rights, seeing as how the accused might be innocent, therefore he's entitled to a defense.

The "right" to remain silent is not a "right" per se, but rather a recognition that the government may not force you to say anything, btw.

When it comes to entitlements and particualrly health-care as entitlement, the great big problem is that en entire industry becomes government-controlled. Regulation is bad enough, but full cotrol by the government is a hundred times worse. Think of any transaction you've ever been forced to undertake in a bureaucracy, then ask yourself if that's what you want as far as health care is concerned.

I've seen just that in government-run health care in Mexico. There are horrendous wait times, shortages of drugs and equipment, not to mention how many people are turned away because they lack some paper or their papers weren't in order. It's frightening.
Donald Trump is a fucking criminal
cclub79
cclub79
Joined: Dec 16, 2009
  • Threads: 35
  • Posts: 1147
March 15th, 2010 at 3:18:23 PM permalink
Quote: Nareed

Quote: AZDuffman

If I have to pay 20% in taxes for school and health care (your "rights" as you say) then I am effectively enslaved 20% of the time if we assume a five day work week.



Right. That fifth of your life gets taken from you by threat of force.

Quote: AZDuffman

"Rights" are better left few but vague than more and speciffic. Look at the USA where we started with just three named rights but built a system on them.



As you remarked before, rights are not something given or granted by a government, but rather inherent to human beings. A government may grant certain "rights" in special circumstances, such as the right of the accused to be represented by an attorney. But if you look deeper, you'll see the purpose fo such grants is to safeguard other, existing rights, seeing as how the accused might be innocent, therefore he's entitled to a defense.

The "right" to remain silent is not a "right" per se, but rather a recognition that the government may not force you to say anything, btw.

When it comes to entitlements and particualrly health-care as entitlement, the great big problem is that en entire industry becomes government-controlled. Regulation is bad enough, but full cotrol by the government is a hundred times worse. Think of any transaction you've ever been forced to undertake in a bureaucracy, then ask yourself if that's what you want as far as health care is concerned.

I've seen just that in government-run health care in Mexico. There are horrendous wait times, shortages of drugs and equipment, not to mention how many people are turned away because they lack some paper or their papers weren't in order. It's frightening.



Maybe the President will read this thread. I think it's remarkable to have someone from Canada, the US, and Mexico debating health care on a thread about Casino taxation. I'm not complaining.
Nareed
Nareed
Joined: Nov 11, 2009
  • Threads: 373
  • Posts: 11413
March 15th, 2010 at 3:32:17 PM permalink
Quote: cclub79

Maybe the President will read this thread. I think it's remarkable to have someone from Canada, the US, and Mexico debating health care on a thread about Casino taxation. I'm not complaining.



Well, it's like this:

In Mexico most health care is provided somehow by the government. There's a mish-mash of agencies at various levels. Then there's private-sector health care. This includes everything from doctors' offices to hospitals of varying price points. And there are some charitable health care providers with their own clinics (most charity, though, goes on in private hospitals).

It used to be that private care here was good, but not quite up to date. So if you had anything seriously wrong with you, such as heart disease or cancer, and your insurance covered it or you coudl afford it, you'd travel to the Mayo clinic in Rochester or to one of Houston's hospitals.

That's no longer the case. Private hospitals today in mexico, at least in the larger cities, are near state of the art in both equipment and personnel. But, and this is the crux, a great many local doctors trained wholly or partially somewhere in the US (a very few elsewhere such as Canad or Europe). They in turn pass on what they've learned to local med students and interns, but as medicine advances it's curcial that more new doctors get trained in America. And many of them do.

It may be worht noting that some doctors who take internships and training in private hospitals wind up working in government hospitals. More wind up in charitable institutions full or part time.

So if America goes and wrecks its health care system, they wreck Mexico's as well, and probably others too.
Donald Trump is a fucking criminal
boymimbo
boymimbo
Joined: Nov 12, 2009
  • Threads: 17
  • Posts: 5988
March 15th, 2010 at 3:47:43 PM permalink
Quote: cclub79

Quote: Nareed

Quote: AZDuffman

If I have to pay 20% in taxes for school and health care (your "rights" as you say) then I am effectively enslaved 20% of the time if we assume a five day work week.



Right. That fifth of your life gets taken from you by threat of force.

Quote: AZDuffman

"Rights" are better left few but vague than more and speciffic. Look at the USA where we started with just three named rights but built a system on them.



As you remarked before, rights are not something given or granted by a government, but rather inherent to human beings. A government may grant certain "rights" in special circumstances, such as the right of the accused to be represented by an attorney. But if you look deeper, you'll see the purpose fo such grants is to safeguard other, existing rights, seeing as how the accused might be innocent, therefore he's entitled to a defense.

The "right" to remain silent is not a "right" per se, but rather a recognition that the government may not force you to say anything, btw.

When it comes to entitlements and particualrly health-care as entitlement, the great big problem is that en entire industry becomes government-controlled. Regulation is bad enough, but full cotrol by the government is a hundred times worse. Think of any transaction you've ever been forced to undertake in a bureaucracy, then ask yourself if that's what you want as far as health care is concerned.

I've seen just that in government-run health care in Mexico. There are horrendous wait times, shortages of drugs and equipment, not to mention how many people are turned away because they lack some paper or their papers weren't in order. It's frightening.



Maybe the President will read this thread. I think it's remarkable to have someone from Canada, the US, and Mexico debating health care on a thread about Casino taxation. I'm not complaining.



Fine, I concede that it's an "entitlement", not a right.

But with the case of health care, here in Canada the system, while not perfect, is quite adequate. We pay a heck of a lot less for prescription drugs because the provinces negotiate rates as a large buyer. Our urgent care is exemplary. We have longer life expectancy and lower mortality rates than both the US and Mexico. Unfortunately, because we live next door to the place with the most expensive health care in the world, our costs too soar. Competition from the USA takes away our best doctors and nurses who go and work down there and drives up other costs. Yes, we have waiting lists for procedures. If you have the cash you jump the line and head south. Governments have to make the choices between providing more care and raising taxes. As far as efficiency goes however, the system is fairly efficient.

Once again though, I don't have a problem with paying taxes. If you don't like paying them, you can always move somewhere where the tax regime is more agreeable.
----- You want the truth! You can't handle the truth!
ahiromu
ahiromu
Joined: Jan 15, 2010
  • Threads: 112
  • Posts: 2101
March 15th, 2010 at 4:35:00 PM permalink
Quote: Nareed

It used to be that private care here was good, but not quite up to date. So if you had anything seriously wrong with you, such as heart disease or cancer, and your insurance covered it or you coudl afford it, you'd travel to the Mayo clinic in Rochester or to one of Houston's hospitals.

That's no longer the case. Private hospitals today in mexico, at least in the larger cities, are near state of the art in both equipment and personnel. But, and this is the crux, a great many local doctors trained wholly or partially somewhere in the US (a very few elsewhere such as Canad or Europe). They in turn pass on what they've learned to local med students and interns, but as medicine advances it's curcial that more new doctors get trained in America. And many of them do.



This is the exact problem with socialized medicine in any form. You inadvertently create a two-tier system, with a ridiculous gap. Anyone, even upper middle class (Which in my experience, still exists in Canada but is very rare in Mexico), who isn't making millions is required to go into the government system. This system tends to be overcrowded, and when it comes down to IMPORTANT surgeries you have problems. When you have a cough, at least in Canada, you're as good as you are in the US. In this country, the difference in care between someone on medicare and the CEO of Boeing doesn't contrast nearly as much. If you have a heart problem in the US, and one of the mass majority of people with some kind of insurance, the two will get similar care. In Canada, even if you're the premier of let's say... Newfoundland, you have to go to the US to get the quick and professional care that you want.

Newfie Premier Gets Heart Surgery In The US

Now, let's talk about taxes. Someone mentioned VAT, Canada does not have a VAT. They have a GST, which means that it is added on as a sales tax. This is unlike Mexico and almost the rest of the world who has a VAT which is built into the price sticker you see. I know in Germany, it's ILLEGAL to show a price without the VAT. As a side note, you can no longer get your GST back at least between Washington~British Columbia.

In Canada (Sorry people, I'm going to have to generalize here) the absolute top marginal rate not considering cities and using the highest provincial income rate, is 43%. This hits in at an astounding ~130k/year. America's top marginal rate will be ~39.something% after Obama fucks us over. I live in Washington, which does not have an income tax. I know California goes much higher (for the rich) than the 43% but I mainly want to talk about the poorer people since this applies to them more. This kicks in at ~350k/year.

The minimum for Canada is 20% (10% of both federal/provincial) with the US not even taxing you until $8k and not hitting 20% until around 20k. Looking at this, the lower income people have to pay both around 15% (nominal) more in income taxes and a GST which is a HIGHLY regressive tax along with provincial sales taxes (I assume). So these people making less than 40k-CN/year are paying 2-3k in sales tax with an additional... I don't know... 500 in GST? Most likely, the worst thing that will happen to these people is a cough which, because of American charity, can usually be cured at a very low cost.

Personally, I will always be at least 2-3 times the poverty line. If I continue in my field of choice (I'm a student, yes a far right conservative college student in Seattle) I will probably be making 6 figures easily in 15-20 years. I would be destroyed in Canada, but in the US I would not have as many of these funds stolen from me by the government.

Lastly, I agree with the Wizard. The proper term is the "Fair Tax" and has been proposed by those like Huckabee, whom I find to be a horrible voice for this message. The fact of the matter is, we could have a 25-30% VAT on every new item produced in the US. People would be sent a check at the beginning of each month to cover the cost of the VAT, this way low income families wouldn't be hurt by a regressive sales tax and could still pay for their family's food and housing. Think about it, right now let's say you make 60k/year. How would you like your paycheck to say 2500 every pay period? The 25-30% VAT would cover Medicare/SS. Personally, I don't trust our government to not have a sales tax period. The next time an Obama fools the public, he/she would come in and throw in a "Small tax" "For the rich". Let's remember the US income tax started at a 7% top marginal rate.


Sorry this turned into a rant, but I have some good numbers in there. My source for the tax information is worldwide-tax.com

Back to the topic: I have no idea how casinos are taxed currently, are they treated as any normal business or do states tag an extra % from them? Just know, the more you tax them the less they will be inclined to stay in Nevada. Especially because LV is becoming less and less of a luxury in terms of legal gambling.
Its - Possessive; It's - "It is" / "It has"; There - Location; Their - Possessive; They're - "They are"
boymimbo
boymimbo
Joined: Nov 12, 2009
  • Threads: 17
  • Posts: 5988
March 15th, 2010 at 6:24:57 PM permalink
Quote: ahiromu

This is the exact problem with socialized medicine in any form. You inadvertently create a two-tier system, with a ridiculous gap. Anyone, even upper middle class (Which in my experience, still exists in Canada but is very rare in Mexico), who isn't making millions is required to go into the government system. This system tends to be overcrowded, and when it comes down to IMPORTANT surgeries you have problems. When you have a cough, at least in Canada, you're as good as you are in the US. In this country, the difference in care between someone on medicare and the CEO of Boeing doesn't contrast nearly as much. If you have a heart problem in the US, and one of the mass majority of people with some kind of insurance, the two will get similar care. In Canada, even if you're the premier of let's say... Newfoundland, you have to go to the US to get the quick and professional care that you want.

Newfie Premier Gets Heart Surgery In The US



Canadaís system is not overcrowded. The problem with Canadian health insurance is that the costs are simply too high and resources too thin for the population. It creates wait lists. If anything, I would say that Canadian health insurance is adequate. You get the care you need, a little bit late sometimes, but when you need it. Most Canadians support the premierís right to go south for his surgery. He had the money to get a superior procedure that wasnít available in his province, so he went.

ďMass majority.Ē The problem is that if you donít have insurance, you will be bankrupt. And if youíve had a history of a heart problem and you transfer jobs, chances are that the insurance company will not cover that either. 62% of bankruptcies in the United States is due to medical reasons, unable to pay their bills or having lost their job for medical reasons. That number in Canada is ZERO. A health system that covers only 85% of the population sucks. The USís life expectancy ranks BELOW Chile and Cuba. A 2009 Harvard study shows that there are about 45,000 excess deaths per year in the United States due to a lack of health coverage.

The United States pays 15% of its GDP on health care and is indeed 1st in responsiveness (when you have insurance, that is), while Canada only pays 10%. Part of our problem is that a lot of our talent goes south, where they can make more money.

Quote: ahiromu

Now, let's talk about taxes. Someone mentioned VAT, Canada does not have a VAT. They have a GST, which means that it is added on as a sales tax. This is unlike Mexico and almost the rest of the world who has a VAT which is built into the price sticker you see.



By definition, GST is a VAT. It is a flow-through tax, in that manufacturers and firms are allowed to claim credits on GST paid to produce its goods and services. In fact, most of Canada is getting rid of sales tax altogether in favour of a harmonized sales tax (HST) rate. Canada doesnít hide it. Sales taxes, on the other hand, are only charged to the end user and is seen as very regressive as every level of business as to pay it. Washington has such a sales tax.


Quote: ahiromu

In Canada (Sorry people, I'm going to have to generalize here) the absolute top marginal rate not considering cities and using the highest provincial income rate, is 43%. This hits in at an astounding ~130k/year. America's top marginal rate will be ~39.something% after Obama. I live in Washington, which does not have an income tax. I know California goes much higher (for the rich) than the 43% but I mainly want to talk about the poorer people since this applies to them more. This kicks in at ~350k/year.



Letís compare apples to apples here. First, Canadaís top marginal tax rate is indeed 43% at 130k. That includes health care coverage, where as health insurance is paid directly by employers or employees in the United States. The 2009 per capita health care spending is 8,160/year source. 1.45% is collected as FICA to fund Medicare.

The United States marginal tax rate at 130,000 is generally between 34 and 37% (state tax contributes between 6 and 9% where state taxes exist). But the USA of course is running a 1.2 trillion dollar deficit that is not being paid by taxes. Thatís $3,500 per American. So maybe your tax rate should be higher. Just how do you suppose the American people are going to pay back a 12.556 trillion dollar debt?

So if you add 8,100 for per capita health care (source: Kaiser foundation) (which is in effect a tax if you are comparing to Canada) and 3,500 for debt that you are not paying (we can be fair and add $1,600 which is the deficit that weíre not paying either), that adds up to 10,000 or about 8% to your marginal tax rate, which brings your rate to 42-45%, very much in line with Canadaís. This does not take into account sales taxes or city taxes.

Quote: ahiromu

The minimum for Canada is 20% (10% of both federal/provincial) with the US not even taxing you until $8k and not hitting 20% until around 20k. Looking at this, the lower income people have to pay both around 15% (nominal) more in income taxes and a GST which is a HIGHLY regressive tax along with provincial sales taxes (I assume). So these people making less than 40k-CN/year are paying 2-3k in sales tax with an additional... I don't know... 500 in GST? Most likely, the worst thing that will happen to these people is a cough which, because of American charity, can usually be cured at a very low cost.



Get your facts straight. In Canada, your first 10,800 is tax exempt. You get a GST rebate of $248/year if you make < 30,000. Most provinces also give you PST rebates for low income families. If you have children under 18 and make 30,000, you get about $500/month in benefits. Sales taxes are not payable on housing or food. So, people making 40K or less are paying probably about a net total of about 1.5K on consumption taxes, total. And even if we have a lot more than a cough, or need to see our doctor every six months for a check up, weíre covered.

---
So, to conclude, in Canada, just like in every other developed country (except the US), we socialized medicine. We pay it as part of our tax rates. When you factor in the US marginal tax rate with the cost of health care (which also makes American companies uncompetitive) and the debt you are not paying, taxes are roughly equal.

Canada, back in the 60s, made the decision that every Canada should have equal and free access to health care, and it is a national value that we hold very dear (almost like hockey). We know it's not perfect.
----- You want the truth! You can't handle the truth!
boymimbo
boymimbo
Joined: Nov 12, 2009
  • Threads: 17
  • Posts: 5988
March 15th, 2010 at 7:58:47 PM permalink
Tax rates, according to Las Vegas Gaming:

Slot machines: $250/year, $20 quarterly fee per machine.

Games: $16,000 + $200 /game over 16 games per year, $20,300 + $25 for each game over 35 per quarter.

Monthly percentage fee: 6.75% of gaming revenue over $134K/month.

So a place like the Wynn/Encore with 3,000 machines and 270 games would pay about $1,000,000 in slot licences ($330 x 3,000) and $16,000 + 81,200 + 254 x 200 + 100 x 235 = 171,500

And then pay 6.5% in revenue.
----- You want the truth! You can't handle the truth!
ahiromu
ahiromu
Joined: Jan 15, 2010
  • Threads: 112
  • Posts: 2101
March 15th, 2010 at 8:44:27 PM permalink
Quote: boymimbo

Canadaís system is not overcrowded. The problem with Canadian health insurance is that the costs are simply too high and resources too thin for the population. It creates wait lists.

The USís life expectancy ranks BELOW Chile and Cuba. A 2009 Harvard study shows that there are about 45,000 excess deaths per year in the United States due to a lack of health coverage.

The United States pays 15% of its GDP on health care and is indeed 1st in responsiveness (when you have insurance, that is), while Canada only pays 10%. Part of our problem is that a lot of our talent goes south, where they can make more money.



Can you further explain your first statement? You state one thing, then basically define yourself incorrect afterwards. The (soft) definition of overcrowding is too many people for a given service.

Two things about the life expectancy. America is the fattest country on earth (or close to it), why don't you take something like that into account? You take one piece of possible causation, then link it directly to the effect. Japan has a pretty reasonable form of healthcare, moderately between socialism and free market albeit a little more on the left. To add onto that, in Japan you have to pay 30% of your medical costs (Probably fine otherwise). The New York Times, hardly an advocate for the free market, feels obligated to mention healthy eating and violence:

http://prescriptions.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/25/health-care-abroad-japan/

Also, we're on part with both Cuba and Chile, but to honestly take Cuba's numbers 100% seriously is foolish:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/datablog/2009/mar/10/health-population

Just because I found this I'll link it. It's basically showing that we have many more of the "emergency" machines than you guys. Many, many more in some cases:

http://www.mackinac.org/2748

Quote: boymimbo

By definition, GST is a VAT. It is a flow-through tax, in that manufacturers and firms are allowed to claim credits on GST paid to produce its goods and services. In fact, most of Canada is getting rid of sales tax altogether in favour of a harmonized sales tax (HST) rate. Canada doesnít hide it. Sales taxes, on the other hand, are only charged to the end user and is seen as very regressive as every level of business as to pay it. Washington has such a sales tax.



I never said that Canada hides it, I directly said that they have to show it. I just had to make a differentiation because a lot of people I know consider them separate entities. With the VAT being hidden and the GST being shown.

Quote: boymimbo

Letís compare apples to apples here. First, Canadaís top marginal tax rate is indeed 43% at 130k. That includes health care coverage, where as health insurance is paid directly by employers or employees in the United States. The 2009 per capita health care spending is 8,160/year source. 1.45% is collected as FICA to fund Medicare.

The United States marginal tax rate at 130,000 is generally between 34 and 37% (state tax contributes between 6 and 9% where state taxes exist). But the USA of course is running a 1.2 trillion dollar deficit that is not being paid by taxes. Thatís $3,500 per American. So maybe your tax rate should be higher. Just how do you suppose the American people are going to pay back a 12.556 trillion dollar debt?

So if you add 8,100 for per capita health care (source: Kaiser foundation) (which is in effect a tax if you are comparing to Canada) and 3,500 for debt that you are not paying (we can be fair and add $1,600 which is the deficit that weíre not paying either), that adds up to 10,000 or about 8% to your marginal tax rate, which brings your rate to 42-45%, very much in line with Canadaís. This does not take into account sales taxes or city taxes.



In your version, the money that employers are currently paying completely disappears. That money would work its way back into the system in some realm, or be paid directly back to the government. So your numbers are completely false, I appreciated the math though.

Quote: boymimbo

Get your facts straight. In Canada, your first 10,800 is tax exempt. You get a GST rebate of $248/year if you make < 30,000. Most provinces also give you PST rebates for low income families. If you have children under 18 and make 30,000, you get about $500/month in benefits. Sales taxes are not payable on housing or food. So, people making 40K or less are paying probably about a net total of about 1.5K on consumption taxes, total. And even if we have a lot more than a cough, or need to see our doctor every six months for a check up, weíre covered.



Alright, my source didn't say anything about that so I was incorrect and admit it. I decided to go to an income tax calculator for both countries.

http://www.moneychimp.com/features/tax_brackets.htm
http://lsminsurance.ca/calculators/canada/income-tax (canada)

Punch in 150k, which is what a family of one high professional or two relatively moderate professionals would be making. In Canada you would be paying 10-20k more in taxes, with your company covering insurance.

This gives us what was expected, but I found them and decided to have some fun. I also did mention that primary care is very similar.


Quote: boymimbo

So, to conclude, in Canada, just like in every other developed country (except the US), we socialized medicine. We pay it as part of our tax rates. When you factor in the US marginal tax rate with the cost of health care (which also makes American companies uncompetitive) and the debt you are not paying, taxes are roughly equal.

Canada, back in the 60s, made the decision that every Canada should have equal and free access to health care, and it is a national value that we hold very dear (almost like hockey). We know it's not perfect.



I see what you did there (Insert Futurama picture). Yes every other developed country has socialized medicine, but last time I checked we have been a world superpower for 60 years... I couldn't find Canada on the map. Taxes are not roughly equal, companies absorb those costs so please stop saying that. The money wouldn't disappear. Sorry, but we're both taking a few pot shots at each other so that's that.
Its - Possessive; It's - "It is" / "It has"; There - Location; Their - Possessive; They're - "They are"
boymimbo
boymimbo
Joined: Nov 12, 2009
  • Threads: 17
  • Posts: 5988
March 15th, 2010 at 8:59:06 PM permalink
Wait lists <> overcrowding. It only becomes overcrowding if the wait lists are getting longer, which they are not.

Just to be sure, Canada's employers do not pay health insurance or health costs. It is purely accounted for in our income taxes, which is why I pay more taxes. US companies do absorb the cost of health care and it makes them less competitive overall. So, it's fine to add the 8,100 in per capita health care costs to your tax regime because it is paid either by you or absorbed by your employer. And what if your employer doesn't pay it? Then you are stuck paying the tax. Or being uninsured.

The fact that many Americans are obese is also a function of preventative health care. But you ignore the statistic that states that 45,000 people a year die because they are under or uninsured.

And the debt facts that Americans are underpaying taxes by about 3,500 a year because you are running a 1.4 trillion deficit this year.
---

On the healthcare debate, I certainly don't support what's in the legislation today. The people who have health insurance today want to ensure it remains the same despite the fact that the costs have gone up 50% in the past six years and it is becoming an unsustainable cost. The people who don't have it want to have it but those who are insured don't want to pay for the uninsured and they don't want the government to pay for it either.

I think you attack health care by:

(1) regulating costs and increases by health insurance policies to a cap.
(2) have the government take over prescriptions and have governments negotiate rates to be lower.
(3) have the states offer a form of public insurance that is low cost or borne through an employer or state tax with premiums being paid by a sliding scale.
(4) no more denial of service.
(5) no more preexisting conditions with the exception of travel insurance.
----- You want the truth! You can't handle the truth!

  • Jump to: