[OpVJokl8]

The working poor have jobs that supply health insurance. They are getting a tax hike.

Since you are mocking me for being against this tax hike, do we take it that you are for it?

I don't think you have read the article, or understood it. The working poor with jobs that supply health insurance are not getting a tax hike. It is the wealthier people who can afford very good health insurance policies who will pay the tax.

And no, I don't support the plan. I am just pointing out your hypocricy.

[OpVJokl8]

Because Bush is able to get the hatefilled ignorant bigot vote in addition to the uber wealthy vote.

I didn't realize you voted for Bush.

[Prererularl]

I guess you are under the impression that working poor won't qualify. But the tax seems to be for anyone of any salary who has a good health plan with their job. So are you telling me there is a clause for people who make under a certain wage? Or are you just talking shit?

I'm not telling you anything except that you have once again made assumptions without knowing any details -- besides, the lower-wage workers are already pretty much income-tax exempt [remember, roughly 52% of wage earners pay 99.x% of income taxes].

[iOqedeyH]

I didn't realize you voted for Bush.

I voted Libertarian in '04. Devilcrats and their uncharismatic corpse agenda led by Kerry wasn't appealing. Repiglicans and their hating our constitution was even less appealing. I figured if the worst thing Libertarians do is advocate child prostitution then I could deal with it.

[TheBestCheapestOEM]

I don't think you have read the article, or understood it. The working poor with jobs that supply health insurance are not getting a tax hike. It is the wealthier people who can afford very good health insurance policies who will pay the tax.

And no, I don't support the plan. I am just pointing out your hypocricy.

No, it's people who's job pays for a health plan of $7,500 a year - single or $15,000 a year - family, that will be getting a tax hike. If a person has a job that doesn't pay a lot but offers good health insurance, they will get a tax hike. It has nothing to do with their salary.

[TheBestCheapestOEM]

I'm not telling you anything except that you have once again made assumptions without knowing any details -- besides, the lower-wage workers are already pretty much income-tax exempt [remember, roughly 52% of wage earners pay 99.x% of income taxes].

Are you trying to tell me that salary determines this tax hike?

You must be reading a completely different story than what the OP posted.

[Grizli]

The good news is that the Bush-league plan won't be enacted, as is.

Jota,

If you factor in fees, the 'Working Poor' pay a greater % of their income than do the Rich.

[Prererularl]

Are you trying to tell me that salary determines this tax hike?

You must be reading a completely different story than what the OP posted.

What I'm saying is I don't think you understand this tax hike, much less taxes in general.

[Viafdrear]

Just saw this....

Millions could see taxes up in Bush health plan - Boston Globe, Jan. 22, 2007:

About 30 million Americans could face a tax hike under President George W. Bush's plan to expand health insurance coverage and address rising health care costs, the White House said on Monday.

"There are always going to be some winners and some losers, but the people who might initially be losers have options," Kate Baicker, a member of the White House Council of Economic Advisors, told reporters.

There are about 47 million people with no health insurance in a country of 300 million. Baicker said Bush's tax proposal would result in "upwards of 3 million or more newly insured people." Baicker said about 30 million Americans could face higher taxes under the president's plan "if they didn't change their behavior" -- meaning giving up an employer's more generous health plan in favor of a less-costly one. The White House added that "more than 100 million Americans" would save money under Bush's plan. 30 million is a lot of people. If they change health plans to less costly - and therefore, less comprehensive - alternatives, their tax doesn't go up, their premiums go down ... but their out-of-pocket costs could go up quite a bit. Sounds like it might be a good deal for young and/or healthy people, and not-so-good for older or not-so healthy people. Personally, as someone who is making the transition from the first group to the second, I need to know a whole lot more about this plan ... but my initial reaction is, no thanks.

[kranfid]

The target is unionized workers who have negotiated good health plans, like school teachers for example. After all, isn't it Republican dogma that "greedy teachers" are to blame for most of our nations ills?

[TheBestCheapestOEM]

What I'm saying is I don't think you understand this tax hike, much less taxes in general.

Yes I am just a dumb broad and you are smarter than everyone, right? This tax is not based on salary as you and samintheburgh are trying to infer. It is based on how much your job pays for your health insurance.

[casinobonusa]

Bush has always been about raising taxes on the Middle Class to offset tax cuts for the wealthy.
a) He gives everyone a tax cut, the biggest cuts go to the highest brackets.
b) He runs huge deficits that will create inflation.
c) Bracket creep pushes the Middle Class into higher tax brackets, while leaving the wealthy with the same lower top rate.

MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!

This is very, very true. Those wealthy people sure do enjoy a piece of that rum-drenced, yummy, decadent, cream-fulled tax cake. Meanwhile, we get the crumbs.

[Zvssxstw]

Dam wealthy people... they have all that money.. and the poor have nothing..

The political machine is of no help , while the political machine talks a good talk about taxing the wealthy the political machine does so little to really do any thing about it.

But if it was not for the wealthy spending money would most of us have a job or a business?

[cepAceryTem]

This is very, very true. Those wealthy people sure do enjoy a piece of that rum-drenced, yummy, decadent, cream-fulled tax cake. Meanwhile, we get the crumbs.

Man, you people are unbelievable. Most people that are "rich" (not John Kerry rich or Ted Kennedy rich) worked their butts off to get there. From the little guy that started his own chicken restaurant to the business pro that put in a gazzilion hours to the doctor (doctor?) to the musician (yes...even gangbanging rappers) to pro athletes, they all worked their asses off to get where they are. They weren't lazy whiners that think life didn't give them a fair shake and let the rest of us know ad nauseum while they cry whoa is me. Most of them deserve what they have and should be entitled to keep it.

My guess is Iron, you don't pay a whole lot of taxes. You may not make a whole lot of money either. I am not putting you down for that but if and when you ever get yours, your outlook on taxes will change also. I have a friend who always says this: "I pay enough taxes to sustain a small country. I think I pay my fair share."

[bapimporb]

This is very, very true. Those wealthy people sure do enjoy a piece of that rum-drenced, yummy, decadent, cream-fulled tax cake. Meanwhile, we get the crumbs.

You get the crumbs? Here's an idea how about people not wait for the govn to give them anything. Go out and work for what you want and don't settle for anything less.

Varus

[casinobonusa]

Man, you people are unbelievable. Most people that are "rich" (not John Kerry rich or Ted Kennedy rich) worked their butts off to get there. From the little guy that started his own chicken restaurant to the business pro that put in a gazzilion hours to the doctor (doctor?) to the musician (yes...even gangbanging rappers) to pro athletes, they all worked their asses off to get where they are. They weren't lazy whiners that think life didn't give them a fair shake and let the rest of us know ad nauseum while they cry whoa is me. Most of them deserve what they have and should be entitled to keep it.

My guess is Iron, you don't pay a whole lot of taxes. You may not make a whole lot of money either. I am not putting you down for that but if and when you ever get yours, your outlook on taxes will change also. I have a friend who always says this: "I pay enough taxes to sustain a small country. I think I pay my fair share."

Actually, I pay a good amount of taxes and let's just say I am not poor. I make a oretty decent wage. MY point is the middle class aren't poor, but they are sure as hell getting there. It is the middle and lower earning classes that suffer from wage inequality. It's a well-know issue in this country. Ever since the wave of technology, knowledge workers have been the demand and then after that degreed knowledge workers. Then we are all taught that "it's [our] fault if we are poor" - to quote Regan. Bullshit. It used to be that highschool diplomas could get you a decent living wage. Not anymore.

Furthermore, as I am indeed on my way to making something out of myself, you better be damn sure that I won't forget where I came from when I finally make it.

[casinobonusa]

You get the crumbs? Here's an idea how about people not wait for the govn to give them anything. Go out and work for what you want and don't settle for anything less.

Varus

What does that have to do with tax cuts going to the top most wealthy quintiles?

[ddwayspd]

whoa...

From what I understand, Sam in correct in that this is determined by how much your employer pays for your GROUP health insurance. For instance, I know for a fact that this targets me. When I paid a portion of my group health plans premium for myself as an employee, and my family, the total premium was right on the cusp of Bush's proposed limit.

I changed jobs and negotiated my new salary based on the fact that the new employer would pay for the total premium for the group health plan for my entire family.

I did NOT understand Bush's proposal to be a tax but rather the rescinding of the tax break for employee paid coverage!

For instance, when I paid for my premiums, that amount was deducted from my taxable wages for my W-2. This is a decent advantage to middle class folks but provides nothing to low wage earners who pay no taxes anyway - a tax break on no tax provides no cash with which to purchase insurance. So the old method helped the middle class specifically.

That means that if the tax BREAK is rescinded, the middle class loses out, the lower class gains nothing but the wealthy folks who have their own individual plans that were never subject to a tax break anyway, now get a tax break so they can afford health insurance.

???

Is this not correct?

[ddwayspd]

By the way...$15,000 for a family is by no means a luxury plan!

[Zvssxstw]

People here just do not get it... the wealthy are paying for the tax cuts by funding the elections.
Why would any elected person cut the funding of the next election?
The government today is funded by the wealthy and controled by the wealthy, it is much today as it was years ago or hundreds of years ago.. government by the wealthy for the wealthy..