Citation on sanctions requested.
Community Reinvestment Act, as amended.
I don't buy it. Not with the proposition. I'd like to know how the Senates health care works before I jumped to this conclusion. I am, admittedly, uneducated on that. Does the government pay doctors or does a private company provide senators with insurance?
It depends.
The Federal workforce, for the most part, has the option of choosing fee-for-service plans, HMOs, or plans like Blue Cross/Blue Shield. We're given a brochure to compare rates and coverage availability for our area, and then make our choice based on those competitive rates.
I mentioned the value of being able to competitively shop for healthcare earlier and the usefulness of the free market, but it got lost somewhere in the thread. (Or maybe another thread?)
So, in essence, the "gouging" everyone keeps referring to is nothing more than repealing the Bush tax cuts. Which, really as far as I'm concerned, is a great idea. Trickle down doesn't work. Rich people are Rich because they tend not to spend money.
Umm, actually, Federal revenue
increased after the Bush tax cuts were emplaced, even allowing for population growth.
Also:
The Obama plan pays for these tax cuts by:
cutting spending overall. Obama’s spending cuts include responsibly ending the war in Iraq, limiting payments to high income farmers, cutting subsidies for private plans in Medicare, reforming student loans, cutting earmarks to at least the level they were in 1994, ending no-bid contracting **(my god, how much money would this save, seriously?)**, and phasing out unnecessary and duplicative programs. He will also support pay-as-you-go budget rules and a constitutionally acceptable line-item veto to cut pork-barrel spending.
Many of these are fine ideas...which haven't a prayer of being adopted in a Democratically-controlled Congress.
Again, much will come down to Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid.
He's eating DONUTS with an OLD GUY. Your argument clearly fails.
--And this is germane..................how?
[15% one-time levy on every IRA]
This would be political suicide for anyone right now. Or ever.
Sure it would. But it's been seriously discussed by Democratic leaders.
Note that Argentina has recently taken over ALL retirement plan funds in that country. That was 'only' 30 billion dollars; there's a lot more money in IRAs here, and levying even a small percentage of the total value would net a lot of dough.
% Don't cry for meeeeee, Argentinaa.... %
I have a question for you, as a clear republican. The country suffers from a massive.. nay.. near insurmountable debt created by Bush(es), even after a hefty surplus during the Clinton years. (I'm sure you've seen
the graphs ) .. that's hardly a partisan statement ... how do you propose we turn that around without raising taxes?
Implement the 'Fair' Tax as soon as possible.
Okay, I used shorthand there.
Immediately terminate Federal income and employment taxes, amend the US Constitution as needed, and implement a nationwide consumption tax to replace it, along with the prebate sent to every household, etc.
At first, it would be revenue-neutral (meaning the intake would equal the current intake from income taxes). Economic activity would increase sharply for several reasons afterwards, though, including:
- Reduced tax-compliance costs for businesses and individuals
- Elimination of corporate income taxes
That last point is interesting; I see that, as of November 7th, the Democrats are considering lowering the US corporate tax rate from 35% to 30.5%, possibly lower. Since the US has the second-highest corporate tax rate in the industrialized world, this is encouraging news.
I'm a libertarian, not a Republican, BTW.