Bad Andy, your example is mathematically impossible. The tax brackets are progressive. Therefore you would only be taxed a higher percentage on the amount above the lower bracket. Let's create an easy example so everybody can understand:

Let's pretend there are 3 tax brackets: 15%, 20%, and 25%.

Let's pretend the first bracket applies to income under $20K, the second applies to income $20,001-$40K, and the third applies to income over $40K.

Let's now pretend that a person, we'll call him Andy, makes $20,000 this year, while some other person, we'll call him Joe, makes $21,000 this year.

Andy is in the 15% tax bracket, and owes $3,000 in taxes, creating a net income of $17K
However, Joe does NOT owe $4,200 in taxes (20% of $21,000) for a net income of $16,800. Joe owes $3,000 (15% of $20K) plus an additional $200 (20% of $1K), for a total of $3,200 in taxes, creating a net income of $17,800.

In other words, it is not possible to reduce your income by making more money, even if that extra income pushes you into a higher tax bracket.

"Joe the Plumber", by forecasting a 280% increase in revenue on this business he hasn't even purchased, is bitching about paying, in all likelihood, less taxes under Obama than under our current system, even if his outlandish prediction were to come true.

Kuzi, if Obama raises taxes, but then creates a nationalized health care system, nobody would need to use private money to pay for their health care. Businesses wouldn't be paying for health plans. So that money would be a wash, and you can't find anything but conjecture that would tell you otherwise.

---

phobicsquirrel:

ummm milk it..

dutyje:

Kuzi, if Obama raises taxes, but then creates a nationalized health care system, nobody would need to use private money to pay for their health care. Businesses wouldn't be paying for health plans. So that money would be a wash, and you can't find anything but conjecture that would tell you otherwise.

i can look at every socialized system that exists or has existed in the past and show you that they are inefficiant, opressive, and have failed. this one will too. not to mention that i dont want Uncle Sam to tell me who what when how or where i can/cannot see a doctor. if you think that wont happen, look at both Canada and England, where the system worked for a moment... then when it started to fail, as all socialized systems do, they tried to cut corners by denying health care to people that are a drain on the system due to their own behaivior. ...i.e. smokers in the later years of their life, alcaholics, people with terminal disease... this effects us.


not to mention waiting lists and the infinite demand that this will create because of "free" healthcare. ... that will drive the cost up.

like all social systems, it looks good on paper, but will fail.

if you dont think this is true, just watch what happens to health care if that system takes hold. its only a matter of time.

any time the government puts its hands in a system it has mucked it up. this is no different. Its not the Goverment's job to interfere with private lives and systems.

---

Kuzi's cigar catalog blending 101 developing your palate

dutyje:

... and you can't find anything but conjecture that would tell you otherwise.

I cant?
just as i hit "post" i heard on the radio that Hawaii has dropped their universal health care for children because it has failed. It seems that anyone in hawaii that could not afford or did not have health care for their kid could get it for free through the state. because people could get it for free the people WITH private health care dropped it and went for the state run health care... cos it was free. there was a huge demand in hawaii for it; so much so that the state could not keep up.

---

Kuzi's cigar catalog blending 101 developing your palate

kuzi16:

i dont want Uncle Sam to tell me who what when how or where i can/cannot see a doctor.

You're right... it's better to have an insurance company tell you the same thing.

---

phobicsquirrel:

ummm milk it..

dutyje:

kuzi16:

i dont want Uncle Sam to tell me who what when how or where i can/cannot see a doctor.

You're right... it's better to have an insurance company tell you the same thing.

but i have a choice on what company to choose. and if i dont like what i hear i can change my company or just drop it all together. when its government run i will have less or no choices.

for example. I smoke cigars. my insurance company is OK with that and charges me less than others that are not. I have that choice. i wont if its a government run system. i have to take what they dish out.

---

Kuzi's cigar catalog blending 101 developing your palate

kuzi16:

dutyje:

kuzi16:

i dont want Uncle Sam to tell me who what when how or where i can/cannot see a doctor.

You're right... it's better to have an insurance company tell you the same thing.

but i have a choice on what company to choose. and if i dont like what i hear i can change my company or just drop it all together. when its government run i will have less or no choices.

for example. I smoke cigars. my insurance company is OK with that and charges me less than others that are not. I have that choice. i wont if its a government run system. i have to take what they dish out.

I don't have a choice of providers. I need to choose whatever is offered by my employer. If I try to go through a private provider, my annual costs are astronomical ($40K+ for my family) because I have MS.

---

phobicsquirrel:

ummm milk it..

Um ok. I know I was taxed more when I made more. Period. Math and Taxes are notthe same thing. Where math is pretty standard and logical, taxes are not and essentially opposite. It's just that taxes are so complicated.

You can change insurance companies. It may be expensive but you can still change.

---

Andy

A little rebellion now and then...is a medicine necessary for the sound health of government.
Thomas Jefferson, Letter to James Madison, 1787
3rd president of US (1743 - 1826)

dutyje:

kuzi16:

dutyje:

kuzi16:

i dont want Uncle Sam to tell me who what when how or where i can/cannot see a doctor.

You're right... it's better to have an insurance company tell you the same thing.

but i have a choice on what company to choose. and if i dont like what i hear i can change my company or just drop it all together. when its government run i will have less or no choices.

for example. I smoke cigars. my insurance company is OK with that and charges me less than others that are not. I have that choice. i wont if its a government run system. i have to take what they dish out.

I don't have a choice of providers. I need to choose whatever is offered by my employer. If I try to go through a private provider, my annual costs are astronomical ($40K+ for my family) because I have MS.

then you have MADE THE CHOICE to go through a company that does not give you everything you want because of a cost factor. its still your choice to go through them. if you are willing to pay more then you can choose to go to another company.

---

Kuzi's cigar catalog blending 101 developing your palate

kuzi16:

dutyje:

kuzi16:

dutyje:

kuzi16:

i dont want Uncle Sam to tell me who what when how or where i can/cannot see a doctor.

You're right... it's better to have an insurance company tell you the same thing.

but i have a choice on what company to choose. and if i dont like what i hear i can change my company or just drop it all together. when its government run i will have less or no choices.

for example. I smoke cigars. my insurance company is OK with that and charges me less than others that are not. I have that choice. i wont if its a government run system. i have to take what they dish out.

I don't have a choice of providers. I need to choose whatever is offered by my employer. If I try to go through a private provider, my annual costs are astronomical ($40K+ for my family) because I have MS.

then you have MADE THE CHOICE to go through a company that does not give you everything you want because of a cost factor. its still your choice to go through them. if you are willing to pay more then you can choose to go to another company.

But the point is that, regardless of provider, the expected value of the services provided is less than the amount you pay out of pocket. Since I have a high expected value for provided services, I am saddled with a high out-of-pocket cost. The system is fair when you're talking about a fluke accident or illness here or there that is not predictable. When you have a known cost for medication approaching $20K/year, there is no equitable choice.

---

phobicsquirrel:

ummm milk it..

so you would rather let someone else pay for your health care via government mandate and taxes?

---

Kuzi's cigar catalog blending 101 developing your palate

Alright, I have to stay out of this discussion. I am trying to use facts to support my argument, and all I can get back is that "I know I had a lower net income with a higher gross income" and examples of "failure" in the healthcare systems of countries like Canada, despite the fact that they still rank higher than the U.S. in the independent study conducted by the WHO. Facts. Gripe all you want about those systems not working as well as they should "in theory" and I'll do the same about our current system. The fact is that the systems in those countries are working better.

---

phobicsquirrel:

ummm milk it..

kuzi16:

so you would rather let someone else pay for your health care via government mandate and taxes?

No... I think it should all be individually privatized. Enough with this insurance crap, which is like a half-socialization anyway. That is to say, everybody should be responsible for their own healthcare out of their own pocket. And if somebody's kid gets cancer, *** 'em.

If we're gonna take this socialism bullshit to the extreme, I get to take the capitalist bullshit to the extreme, too.

---

phobicsquirrel:

ummm milk it..

dutyje:

No... I think it should all be individually privatized...

who is going to pay for it when you can get it for "free" through the government? thats what happened in Hawaii.

dutyje:

And if somebody's kid gets cancer, *** 'em.

in a way it sounds harsh. but this is what charity is for. the difference is that charity isnt government mandated. i have a choice to give to it (and i do actually participate in our local MS walk every year BTW)

you are right about it being half socialized anyway. i could make an argument that its all messed up right now BECAUSE of the government involvement.

---

Kuzi's cigar catalog blending 101 developing your palate

ok, works for me. the market, consumers, supply, demand would allow for the prices to come down. the kid with cancer would not go without, people would not allow that to happen. there would be donations and charity groups to help, they help already, why would they stop.

---

Andy

A little rebellion now and then...is a medicine necessary for the sound health of government.
Thomas Jefferson, Letter to James Madison, 1787
3rd president of US (1743 - 1826)

Bad Andy:

ok, works for me. the market, consumers, supply, demand would allow for the prices to come down. the kid with cancer would not go without, people would not allow that to happen. there would be donations and charity groups to help, they help already, why would they stop.

Donations and charity? What are you some kinda Commie? Capitalists unite! If that kid can't afford a half dozen aggressive rounds of chemo and a year and a half in the hospital in addition to a number of surgeries, they're just dragging down the economy.

I wonder how many of Joe the Plumber's buddies would have to pitch in a hundred bucks to help out of one of his kids gets cancer? I hope he's got some rich friends. I'm sure a lot of people working minimum wage jobs are swimming in rich friends that can help them pull through a costly accident or illness.

---

phobicsquirrel:

ummm milk it..