Go Back   This Blue Marble, a Global Current Events Discussion Forum > Main Floor > Politics

Politics Step up and make your case on all manner of political topics.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 11-17-2009, 11:43 PM   #1
Ought Six
Dismember
 
Ought Six's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 35,164
Blog Entries: 15
Thanks: 176
Thanked 390 Times in 326 Posts
Arrow Majority of Americans Say It’s Okay to Tax the Rich to Pay for Health Bill

Majority of Americans Say It’s Okay to Tax the Rich to Pay for Health Bill


By Erica Werner
The Associated Press, via CNS News
Tuesday, November 17, 2009


Washington -- When it comes to paying for a health care overhaul, Americans see just one way to go: Tax the rich.

That finding from a new Associated Press poll will be welcome news for House Democrats, who proposed doing just that in their sweeping remake of the U.S. medical system, which passed earlier this month and would extend coverage to millions of uninsured Americans.

The poll found participants sour on other ways of paying for the health overhaul that is being considered in Congress, including taxing insurers on high-value coverage packages derided by President Barack Obama and Democrats as "Cadillac plans."

That approach is being weighed in the Senate. It is one of the few proposals in any congressional legislation that analysts say would help reduce the nation's health expenditures, but it has come under fire from organized labor and has little support in the House.

Lawmakers also are looking at levying new taxes on insurance companies, drug companies and medical device makers. But the only approach that got majority support in the AP poll was a tax on upper-income Americans.

The House bill would impose a 5.4 percent income tax surcharge on individuals making more than $500,000 a year and households making more than $1 million.

The poll tested views on an even more punitive taxation scheme that was under consideration earlier, when the tax would have hit people making more than $250,000 a year. Even at that level the poll showed majority support, with 57 percent in favor and 36 percent opposed.

"You know, I mean, why not? If they have that much money, it should be taxed," said Mary Pat Rondthaler, 60, of Menlo Park, Calif. "It isn't the same way that the guy making $21,000 is."

Not everyone agreed.

"They earn their money. And they shouldn't have to pay for somebody else. It doesn't seem fair," said Emerson Wilkins, 62, of Powder Springs, Ga.

The latest survey was conducted by Stanford University with the liberal-leaning Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

Overall, the poll found the public split on Congress' health care plans. In response to some questions, participants said the current system needed to be changed, but they also voiced concerns about the potential impact on their own pocketbooks, preferring to push any new costs onto wealthier Americans.

For example, 77 percent said the cost of health care in the United States was higher than it should be, and 74 percent favored the broad goal of reducing the amount of money paid by patients and their insurers. But 49 percent said any changes made by the government probably would cause them to pay more for health care. Thirty-two percent said it wouldn't change what they pay, and just 12 percent said they would end up paying less.

With lawmakers searching for new revenue sources to pay for their overhaul legislation, upper-income taxes may be increasingly gaining favor.

Legislation passed by Senate committees did not go that route, but now Majority Leader Harry Reid, who has a free hand in merging two committee-passed bills, is considering raising the payroll tax that goes to Medicare on income above $250,000 a year, officials told The Associated Press last week. Current law sets the tax at 1.45 percent of income, an amount matched by employers.

The Senate Finance Committee bill would tax health insurance plans costing more than $8,000 annually for individuals and $21,000 for families, although those numbers could rise. Union members are lined up against that approach because they fear their benefits could be hurt, and the public doesn't like it either, the AP poll found. Fifty-six percent were opposed and only 29 percent in favor.

Other payment methods being contemplated on Capitol Hill also met with disapproval. Participants in the poll didn't support new taxes on medical device makers, drug companies or even insurers -- even though they said in response to different questions that drug companies and insurance companies made too much money.

Forty-eight percent in the poll were opposed to new taxes on insurance companies, and 42 percent were in support. Fifty-one percent opposed raising taxes on drug and device makers, while 41 percent supported that approach.

But 72 percent of people polled said insurance companies made too much profit, compared with 23 percent who said they made about the right amount of profit. And 74 percent said drug companies made too much profit, versus 21 percent who said they made about the right amount of profit.

People who told pollsters they generally supported Congress' health care overhaul plan were also more receptive to new taxes to pay for it. Taxing health care companies, drug companies and equipment manufacturers eked out majority support from that group.

The payment approach that met with least approval by far in the poll was borrowing the money and increasing the federal debt, something Obama has repeatedly vowed not to do. Just 6 percent of people polled said they could support that approach, while 88 percent opposed it.

The poll was based on landline and cell phone interviews with 1,502 adults from Oct. 29 to Nov. 8. It has a margin of error of plus or minus 2.5 percentage points. The interviews were conducted by GfK Roper Public Affairs and Media. Stanford University's participation was made possible by a grant from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, which conducts research on all facets of the health care system.
__________________
* I have the right to live, thus I have the right to defend my life from attackers who would take it from me.
* I have the right to my private property, thus I have the right to defend my property from thieves who would take it from me.
* I have the right to self-determination, thus I have the right to defend my liberty from tyrants who would take it from me.
* The only usable tools for these tasks are guns, and thus I have the right to shoot anyone who would take my guns from me.
Ought Six is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2009, 02:14 AM   #2
BirdGuano
H1N1 Crash Dummy
 
BirdGuano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: The I.O.U. State
Posts: 8,961
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I blame it on this guy. Oh ya, and the public school system.

__________________
--

Quote:
"It is better to have lived one day as a tiger than a thousand years as a sheep." -- Tibetan proverb
News and commentary updates on Twitter @guanosphere
BirdGuano is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2009, 09:24 AM   #3
Bri2301
Member Level 4
 
Bri2301's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: TX
Posts: 534
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Yes, Lesko? The government is giving away free money?

I suspect that the polling approach may have been constructed to render an answer which they were looking for at the outset.

There are other polls which suggest that most of the 85% who are covered by an insurance aren't hot for "reform", at least in this version.

Jeff B.
__________________
"The real destroyer of the liberties of the people is he who spreads among them bounties, donations and benefits"
Plutarch
Bri2301 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2009, 09:50 AM   #4
Potemkin
Omne ignotum pro magnifico
 
Potemkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 23,227
Blog Entries: 3
Thanks: 69
Thanked 1,621 Times in 995 Posts
I wish they would just call it Medical Welfare instead of "Public Option Insurance".

The way things are you would think the government is setting up a public risk pool and then would go to insurance companies and get a big discount because of the size of the pool.

You would then pay your share of the insurance.

But no, people don't want that. They could do that now. What they want is FREE or reduced fee medical care.

Who the heck doesn't like "free".

Why not set it up and everyone could get this free care?

Wait. They who would you loot?
__________________
When surfing online remember Sturgeon's Law: "90% of everything is cr@p."

© Gregori Potemkin. All rights reserved. But wait . . . fair use allowed and encouraged. Actually, go 'head and publish the whole thing as is. I don't care.
Potemkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2009, 10:03 AM   #5
Glockd
5.56, faster than 911
 
Glockd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Arizona
Posts: 4,540
Thanks: 9
Thanked 455 Times in 235 Posts
Who are the "rich" in the eyes of America? Paris Hilton, Spears, Clooney, Penn, Polanski, Whoopi (its not rape, rape) the chicks on Real Housewives, etc. Not a very flattering image of wealth, and not folks most people would want around the dinner table, so it comes as no surprise that some would want to sock it to the rich.
__________________


"When the enemy is in range, so are you!" - Murphy
كافر & Proud
Glockd is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
americans, bill, health, it’s, majority, pay, rich, tax

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:33 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright © Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.