It's OK bud - people aren't dying on the streets I've learned they all have a home with a huge mortgage to die in
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Vox: Bernie Sanders's tax hikes are bigger than Donald Trump's tax cuts
- Thread starter noshten
- Start date
- Status
It's OK bud - people aren't dying on the streets I've learned they all have a home with a huge mortgage to die in
Sorry for a late reply but do you have a source for this?
I just can't see someone making 50k a year plus benefits, an employer gets a new payroll tax, drops the benefits for the employee and gives them a $5k paycut?
It may effect salary of new hires to some extent but I'm not seeing how employers would get away with passing the cost of a new tax on them directly to people already working there.
Zoe
Member
A few people have mentioned it, but I'm trying to figure out how Vox is getting its numbers. Employees only see a 2.2% tax increase. The employer is supposed to cover the remaining 6.2% much like how they cover half of your Medicare and Social Security.
The bigger change is lifting the Social Security ceiling... which doesn't seem to affect anyone who has complained here so far.
The bigger change is lifting the Social Security ceiling... which doesn't seem to affect anyone who has complained here so far.
Huh. Winter Park used to be one of the most expensive places in Orlando when I was younger. You're getting an amazing deal it seems.
My wife and I pay $1,000 a month for rent in a 1BR apartment in Austin. And you can't get too much lower than that. With houses usually going for $300k on the low side, people are pretty much stuck paying high rental rates.
Marty Chinn
Member
Uh that's illegal in America too ya know.
Yep, agreed. I mean, looking at my tax rate in comparison to American tax rates, my tax rate appears ridiculous and heart attack inducing, but it's for the good of the country and I'm willing to pay so much of my money into the system in order to help those who can't help themselves. Nobody should have to fear going to the doctor because of potential medical bills or be barred from going to University because they can't afford it.
Gotdatmoney
Member
At first I sae those increases and thought wtf that is insane. Then I thought about it and realized that is more inline with what I pay in tax in Canada. It's really not bad and the benefits drastically out weigh the detriments. If you had universal health care your insurance can cover things like optical, drugs, dental, etc which I'm sure lots of Americans also forgo because of the price.
The amount of money this saves you is worth it people.
The amount of money this saves you is worth it people.
iamBlkpleAsedoNt
Banned
Trump specifically said in a Presidential Republican debate that he wouldn't allow anyone to die in the streets over healthcare and asked Rubio and Cruz if they would to which they didn't reply.
It's not so much the overall tax rate as it is the change from the norm. If tax rates have been generally stable withing a few % for twenty years, people have based all their decisions on that. You can't just come in and hike them 10% and have people go along just because other countries pay that. This is also only federal taxes, a lot more is paid in state, city, sales, and property taxes.
Gotdatmoney
Member
I understand the shock such a large hike. I'm just saying peiple freaking out about it aren't being nickel and dimed by any means. And we pay all the extra taxes in Canada too. Sales, city, property. Its not really insane when you run the numbers. He would be better off with a more graduated and tapered plan though I agree. But the numbers arent insane given everything you're gonna get outta it.
Society allowed for everything. Success or failure. You got yours at least have the honesty to say fuck you.
What are the "other savings" that are going to offset a 4K-15K tax increase?
Lol wut? Pay your share back in? The fuck on.
Hey jackass, who do you think pays for the roads you drive one? The plumbing that comes to your house? The electrical lines in a lot of cases that feed your house with electricity. The fire department that comes and saves your ass when your house is burning down.
Damn right, those people talking as If taxes were ever useful for anything, what kind of society that ever worked was founded on cooperation? Russia lost the cold war, it's time to move on losers
Zoe
Member
I think the numbers in the OP are wrong/misleading. The person seeing a 15K increase only really sees 4000 of that. The remainder is paid by the employer which is comparable to what employers are already paying for private insurance.
1. My vehicle registration fee every year
2. My water bill
3. My electric bill
4. My property taxes.
Marty Chinn
Member
Are you saying he's been doing tax evasion?
Eighty Deuce
Banned
On point
Come on, really?
We can't get big money out of healthcare now, how is that going to get any better with a government mandated single payer system?
Surely there is somewhere between 'fuck you, I've got mine' and 'everything should be shared with everyone equally!' This is basically shitposting and doesn't really advance the conversation further.
This is an issue with far more nuance.
your vehicle registration covers a pittance of the up keep.
Your water bill mostly covers usage.
again this covers usage mostly.
the majority of your property taxes go to education.
So if you lost your job and lost all your savings you would be fine with losing your residence, and living on the street because "fuck the government"?
In other words your posts are essentially "fuck you, I got mine"
Despite your insistence that you did it all yourself the government still built the infrastructure to allow you to be successful.
Marty Chinn
Member
The government and your paid taxes doesn't prevent you from losing your house and living on the street.
I also ask again, are you saying he's not paying taxes and doing tax evasion?
I work for a electric utility. The portion you pay on your bill is a recoup on costs incurred by said utility to provide growth for a more stable grid. Same goes with the water utility and roads.
So bscause I'm already taxed the fuck back and forth to hell and back because I'm doing well for myself is "fuck you, got mine"? No. Fuck you.
The huge tax increase for someone in my salary range is ridiculous and no one should be happy about it.
My salary already goes to a social security that I'll never see. It goes to Medicare and Medicaid that I don't qualify for. And Obamacare that I'm glad that passed.
brainchild
Banned
The bolded
And that's not even accounting for the actual costs of healthcare that members would incur without Sanders healthcare plan, like high deductibles, or worse, services that aren't covered under typical insurance plans.
If your new 4k-15k tax hike will eventually pay for your potential $20k-$100k medical bill, I'd say that your savings are disproportionately beneficial to you as a citizen than your tax hike not directly benefiting you.
None of the stuff you mentioned is really covered by federal income tax, which is mostly the topic of this thread.
Marty Chinn
Member
That still doesn't add up to cover the 4K to 15K and doesn't explain where the extra $3200 a year comes from.
Nowhere do they explain why take-home pay would rise by $3200.
The "free college" portion of Sanders' plan isn't even covered by the income tax hike, IIRC. It's supposed to be covered by new taxes on banks/Wall Street. You can go to a state university for less than 9K a year though.
I'm still at a loss to see where the savings are coming from.
metalslimer
Member
That kind of money for someone making 30k a year is crippling. Hell for a person living paycheck to paycheck any kind of additional payments can be back breaking. It might be worth it in the end, but it would take years to implement his healthcare system and you are asking a pretty high price up front
ArkhamFantasy
Member
I make less than 30k a year and in the last 3 months ive spent 1500 dollars on the dentist/oral surgeon, and i have insurance.
brainchild
Banned
I love how both of you conveniently ignored the fact that the tax hike is likely to be offset by the cost of your medical bills (even WITH coverage) alone.
But more to the point, I'm assuming the $3200 (specifically for the middle class) number is an automatic savings by virtue of not having premiums to pay for.
As for the savings from rebuilding infrastructure, these would basically be decreases in costs applied directly to the consumer, such as utilities.
This is exactly what I'm taking about.
And dental coverage in the US is fucking abysmal.
actually, the federal government paid for the "I" freeways under Eisenhower. Which as i mentioned previously in thsi thread, the infrastructure is literally crumbling around us. Meanwhile taxes are pretty much at an all time low. Most people that are against higher taxes are also for all that we spend on defense and the wars. you can't have both, something has to give. Cut defense spending, raise taxes or do both.
my wife and i make way more than you do from passive and active income, so yea you are selfish and "fuck you i got mine"
Except the government provides welfare and government housing. Its not nearly enough or adequate, but they do.
you've asked me this twice, and neither time was it relevant or have any remotely anything to do with what i asked the poster. So i will not respond further than that, because in threads like these, you are a terrible poster, you split hairs, parse words, and take just about everything out of context to fit your argument. So no will not engage in that, i dont have the time nor do i care.
I just leave the thread by repeating what i said on page 7, some of you are very selfish. We have people making 50-60 or 100k or more get mad that people making fucking minimum wage wanting a few dollars more. Or god forbid someone bring up someone on welfare as if they're living the high life getting something for nothing from the government.
Raven117
Gold Member
There is no doubt that the government as a servant of the people have built much of the infrastructure and provided services to a society that have enable folks to succeed. However, it is the spirit of this post (as perhaps unfairly imputed the argument around this thought) that absolutely drives me insane.
We as citizens do not inheritely owe ALL success to the government no more than we owe all failures to the government.
the government should not be viewed as a giver of success or failure so much as it should enable citizens opportunity to function and make of their life what they will. Obviously this is a general statement and others need more help than others, not debating that.
But the idea of "indebtedness" to a government for success is a dangerous idea for individual freedom.
We don't live in the "government's country," they live in ours.
Just a thought to bear in mind. (I'm on my phone so I won't be able to respond to much quoting. I'm not drive by shit posting!). Just making a suggestion of a thought to consider.
Kite
Member
Spending other people's money is easy, taxing the rich is popular cus no one think they're rich. I guess people aren't feeling The Bern so much when they find out that they're going to have to pay as well and for people in the $35kish range those taxes are potentially crippling. I don't think it is selfish of them to be pissed, asking them to risk not being able to pay their rent or bills while waiting for Bernie's free healthcare to appear and eventually start being worthwhile. It is very easy to ask others to take one for the team.
This is why you make small incremental changes, not sudden revolutions. Small tax increases over many years are manageable and can be planned for.
This is why you make small incremental changes, not sudden revolutions. Small tax increases over many years are manageable and can be planned for.
Except that the article doesn't claim that you are "saving" $3200. It claims an additional 3200 in "take home pay". Where does that come from?
Do you think people with insurance are spending thousands in medical bills on top of that? On a regular enough basis that it would offset an annual tax increase?
Doubtful.
You must hate Obama too, because this is what he said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKjPI6no5ng
You're using GOP talking points against Bernie here, what a disgrace.
Uhhh..I voted for Obama.
brainchild
Banned
Yes, take home pay is talking about net income. Premiums are taken out of your gross income. If less is taken out of your gross (which is a savings), then MORE is going into your net (which is an increase).
And of course I don't think people with insurance are PAYING that much in medical bills annually; they get BILLED that much, but they just can't afford it!
Marty Chinn
Member
Except that's not what you said. Welfare isn't the same as a program and infrastructure funded by taxes that stops you from losing your home if you lose your job. The government doesn't stop that from happening. Unemployment, which you pay into with your taxes, certainly helps you get by but without having savings to begin with, welfare/unemployment isn't going to save your mortgage payments.
It is relevant but you seem to pick the things that fit your narrative and ignore the things that don't. The person YOU replied to was balking at the notion of having to prop up other programs at a huge expense to him that would greatly impact his ability and lifestyle. It's not merely he has a surplus sitting around he can give away. You then jumped at him about where does all this infrastructure come from as if he isn't paying taxes that pays for that infrastructure. In fact he has no issue with paying those taxes for that infrastructure. So he's already putting back in to the system. The only way your accusation makes any remote sense is if he's doing tax evasion.
I bet you think you got me figured out and that I'm against paying more for universal health care. That couldn't be even remotely on target. I'm actually not against having my taxes raised. I do understand how such a huge tax increase is going to negatively impact people and think that some of the expected increases are insane given that it's in addition to the taxes they're already paying. That's asking a lot for people who don't have that surplus laying around as is. I'm all for people putting in to the system to help better society but it by no means should be at the expense of crippling people in the process.
I'm not ignoring those costs at all. I've even factor in the deductible that people get and it still doesn't add up for you to come out ahead. That $3200 assumes they're getting at least $266 pulled out of their paycheck every month for premiums. I know that's not the case for a lot of people out there. I think the $3200 gain is a lot of hand waving and positive outlook that so far as I've seen hasn't been justified to be reality. Show me where that comes from and we can start with that and figure out where all the other savings are coming from. Many of those things you listed won't apply to people or they won't ever seen the gain to offset what they put in in the long run. What they will see is money that could have gone into savings, investments or retirement disappearing in up front tax hikes.
benjipwns
Banned
The President of the United States is, you know, our boss. But also, the president and the first lady are kind of like the mom and the dad of the country. And when your dad says something, you listen. And when you dont, it usually bites you in the ass later on.
Well said.
I'm absolutely for different types of universal health care, which is why I said I was FOR Obama care. A huge tax increase like he's proposing is what I'm AGAINST. I believe they're too big at one time.
EDIT: I also just wrote a pretty big check to the Gov for my taxes, so no tax evasion here.
Yes, but what you argued is directly contradicting what he advocated with his tax plan. There is absolutely a difference of degree between Sander's plan and Obama's, but your point of "fuck you for telling me I should put back in to the society that enabled my success" is not liberal or progressive. It's a right-wing position that not many Democrats, even moderate ones, share.
But I am "putting back into society" every 15th and last of the month in the tax bracket that I'm in. I just don't want any more of my money to be taxed to hell.
Marty Chinn
Member
I think maybe there's a misunderstanding/miscommunication here. I'm assuming he's against putting back in to society meaning he shouldn't give up what he's gained and negatively impact his life so that other people can then have it. That doesn't mean not paying taxes nor does it mean not having taxes increased. He however shouldn't have to give up the things he worked hard for so that other people can now have it. There's got to be a middle ground where one can pay more but not be impacted so badly.
The premiums taken out of your paycheck would have to be nearly 3 times what I pay to see a $3200 savings. And that's assuming that the base tax rate isn't increased at all....when it all but certainly will be.
You believe that people's annual medical bills (with insurance) range from 4-10K? I don't deny that health care is expensive, but the big expenditures are relatively infrequent.
Damerman
Member
Well this is bullshit. I worked for a company that procured the financial statements of municipal utilities because they are constantly issuing debt. And those bonds are guarenteed by the utilitie's respective municipality. One of the main components in the rating of the bonds for a utility is the ROI from a municipalities tax base. The reason they issue this debt varies from expansion and maintenance to just having cash flow. I have no clue what you are talking about.
Paying bills is a small portion of a utilities cash flow... Its why they are always looking for long term debt, not to mention they are public entities who dont really seek profits.
Not every utility is a public entity. The company I work for is a pubically traded utility that's regulated by the PUC. The bill they charge us is to recoup capital construction that's going on. Every so often, they file for a rate case to increase the rate base to get back their costs to expand the strength of the grid
Raven117
Gold Member
I respectfully disagree with your view on the President. We elected him. We chose him. He works for us, the citizens of the United States.
Read the preamble to the Constituiton. "We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union." Emphasis on WE THE PEOPLE. We created government. We gave people power to act on our behalf.
Obviously, you are free to view any branch of the government or anything else for that matter however you wish.
But for me, I will always remain skeptical of power, I will always remain skeptical of people who seek it, I will always remain skeptical of those who wield it.
And I will never under any circumstance view the president or the First Lady as my mom and dad.
We have no king, I have no king. I'm a free citizen of the United States beholden only to the rule of law.
- Status