The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Outdoor Media
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 22

Thread: how much will you pay

  1. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Eastern NC
    Posts
    2,755

    Default

    That would be a good idea if they would pay me more to cover the extra costs I would be incurring. Would that happen? Not a chance. You would end up with people having even less of their net pay to live off of. What happens to the economy when people don't have much expendable income?

  2. #12
    Senior Member Sabireley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Culpeper VA
    Posts
    1,103

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by YardleyLabs View Post
    For a long time, I have also believed that companies should not be permitted to buy health insurance on behalf of their employees, but that employees should have to pay for their insurance directly. That would probably do more to control health care costs than anything that can ever be done through regulation.
    I agree as well. Companies providing insurance is the result of tax law allowing them to provide a benefit to employees without paying taxes on the incremental value. Having people pay for their own health insurance and eliminating the tax withholding from pay checks would drastically change healthcare costs and government spending. It would require an army of jack booted thugs to collect the taxes, however. ; ).

  3. #13
    Senior Member luvmylabs23139's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    3,811

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by junfan68 View Post
    I would be happy of if the 50% of Americans that currently pay no tax, pay tax.
    It would be only be fair if they paid for what they get.
    It will never happen. THe dumms try to reduce the # of people who pay federal income taxes so they will vote for SOCIALISM!!!!
    Hihope Hiland Heathen of Perth CD, RE, CGC, TDI

  4. #14
    Senior Member luvmylabs23139's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    3,811

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by YardleyLabs View Post
    For a long time, I have also believed that companies should not be permitted to buy health insurance on behalf of their employees, but that employees should have to pay for their insurance directly. That would probably do more to control health care costs than anything that can ever be done through regulation.
    Even going back to the old days when health insurance was " Major Medical"
    would help.
    How many people race their kids to the doctor for a cold or a sneeze because it only costs $20 co-pay and demand a useless antibiotic.
    Hihope Hiland Heathen of Perth CD, RE, CGC, TDI

  5. #15
    Senior Member M&K's Retrievers's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Royse City, TX
    Posts
    5,200

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by luvmylabs23139 View Post
    Even going back to the old days when health insurance was " Major Medical"
    would help.
    How many people race their kids to the doctor for a cold or a sneeze because it only costs $20 co-pay and demand a useless antibiotic.
    That would make too much sense. Catastrophic coverage as it was meant to be before state and federal regs destroyed it.
    M&K's HR UH Tucker of Texoma JH
    M&K's SHR Prime Black Angus
    M&K's Miss Jessie Girl JH
    Sir Jacob of Lakeview-Jake
    Freeway JYD

    Mike Whitworth

  6. #16
    Senior Member Sabireley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Culpeper VA
    Posts
    1,103

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by luvmylabs23139 View Post
    Even going back to the old days when health insurance was " Major Medical"
    would help.
    How many people race their kids to the doctor for a cold or a sneeze because it only costs $20 co-pay and demand a useless antibiotic.
    Health insurance has really become a prepaid medical plan rather than insurance protecting you from financial hardship due to catastrophic illness.

  7. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Eastern NC
    Posts
    2,755

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by luvmylabs23139 View Post
    Even going back to the old days when health insurance was " Major Medical"
    would help.
    How many people race their kids to the doctor for a cold or a sneeze because it only costs $20 co-pay and demand a useless antibiotic.
    So people shouldn't be allowed to take their children to the doctor unless big brother approves?

  8. #18
    Senior Member Franco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Lafayette, La.
    Posts
    10,843

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pat addis View Post
    for all you who like bho.how much are you willing to pay in taxes for his programs like health care,cap and tax etc.is 50% enough or more say 80%.don't for get to add in state and local and sales tax to,and any others you can think of
    Just as in Health Care, look for the government to nationalize the oil companies, just like Mexico's Pemex. Watch as several hundred-thousand well paying jobs get exported and the price at the pump mirrors that of the socialist European contries.
    "Well, when I went off to college, the guys I used to hang with were pumping gas and voting Democrat. Today they're still pumping gas and voting Democrat. Guess the Democrats didn't do much for them." Charles Barkley

  9. #19
    Senior Member Hew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    2,082

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by YardleyLabs View Post
    I actually agree that this is important. In fact, I believe that all income should be taxed regardless of source. This would include, for example, paying income of welfare payments even where that means grants need to be increased to cover the tax. Kinda like the grants given to those who receive Earned Income Tax Credits so that in addition to receiving tax refunds on taxes they never paid in the first place they also don't have to pay their share of FICA/Social Security? Paying taxes is sobering and helps build a sense of ownership in how money is used. Paying taxes might be sobering if it actually came out of their pocket. What your proposing is akin to telling your teenager that you're going to charge him rent to live in your house and then giving him the money to pay the rent back to you. What the heck kind of lesson does that teach? That their parents are crazier than sh!thouse rats? And when did it become the government's job to impart life lessons and a sense of ownership to the governed? It also eliminates the nonsensical distinction between "tax payers" and non-tax payers. The reality is that everyone pays taxes, no matter what, and even the lowest income groups pay a relatively high percentage of their incomes in taxes when all the numbers are added together. The reality is that nearly 50% of the country doesn't pay a dime in federal income tax. And of the nearly 50% that don't pay a dime, a goodly chunk of them receive tax refunds for taxes they never paid a dime of in the first place. The taxes they do pay are almost entirely state or local.
    .....................
    I'll take the river down to still water and ride a pack of dogs.

  10. #20
    Senior Member YardleyLabs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Yardley, PA
    Posts
    6,639

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hew View Post
    Originally Posted by YardleyLabs
    I actually agree that this is important. In fact, I believe that all income should be taxed regardless of source. This would include, for example, paying income of welfare payments even where that means grants need to be increased to cover the tax. Kinda like the grants given to those who receive Earned Income Tax Credits so that in addition to receiving tax refunds on taxes they never paid in the first place they also don't have to pay their share of FICA/Social Security? Paying taxes is sobering and helps build a sense of ownership in how money is used. Paying taxes might be sobering if it actually came out of their pocket. What your proposing is akin to telling your teenager that you're going to charge him rent to live in your house and then giving him the money to pay the rent back to you. What the heck kind of lesson does that teach? That their parents are crazier than sh!thouse rats? And when did it become the government's job to impart life lessons and a sense of ownership to the governed? It also eliminates the nonsensical distinction between "tax payers" and non-tax payers. The reality is that everyone pays taxes, no matter what, and even the lowest income groups pay a relatively high percentage of their incomes in taxes when all the numbers are added together. The reality is that nearly 50% of the country doesn't pay a dime in federal income tax. And of the nearly 50% that don't pay a dime, a goodly chunk of them receive tax refunds for taxes they never paid a dime of in the first place. The taxes they do pay are almost entirely state or local.
    Taxes are taxes. Many cry that social security taxes shouldn't count because they pay for a future benefit. The same people tend to be the first to argue that benefits should be cut so that it won't be necessary to pay back all the money borrowed from the social security tax fund to finance current operating deficits. If all taxes are added together, the percentage of income paid tends to be pretty constant across all income groups except that it goes down for people at the highest income levels. Someone like Warren Buffett pays a lower tax rate than any of us because his income comes primarily from dividends and capital gains that enjoy a preferred status (why should return on capital be subject to less taxation than return on labor?). If it weren't for the negative income tax (i.e., low income tax credits), the poorest among us would be paying the highest percentage of our incomes in taxes. I am a strong believer in a progressive tax system. However, most of our taxes are not even proportional; they are regressive. That is true for property taxes, sales taxes, social security taxes, unemployment taxes, and disability taxes. Few states have progressive income taxes; most are proportional. Only the Federal income tax has been historically progressive and the creation of tax and deduction preferences that strongly favor those with higher incomes has has reduced that progressive effect dramatically. By the way, I think protection of income and wealth is a bigger driving force for how we spend our government money than provision of any social safety net.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •