Found out how Hillary wants to fix Health Care and the mortgage mess

Just wondering how do you garnish a dancers wages? Add another tip out fee for mandatory Health Care based upon an average take home pay scale for dancers? Someone might need to come up with a average dancers take home pay and then require dancers to pay that into the fund. Everybody else will be required to pay into Hillary's plan it appears. I'm not sure how that would work. I can just imagine a boss telling the guying making minimum wage that he has a minimum 200 dollars deducted from his monthly pay check to pay for mandatory health care. I would be ranting except I heard her say she wanted to garnish wages. That part is true.

Don't worry Hillary has all sort of high powered economic advisors, nearly all with a similar world view.

Hillary "It takes a Village" Clinton is a true socialist and socialists have all sorts of supposed solutions to various problems - she invariably believes govt is the solution, and these solutions in the past have often ended up as disasters in practice. Socialism is very good at doing one thing: dividing up all the poverty it creates, in part by demotivating the otherwise most productive members of society when they begin to understand the majority of their earnings will go to income redistribution.

The top half of income tax filers in the USA are currently paying 94% of fed income taxes, not enough for Hillary and her socialist friends.

"If you already have health care, hey, you make too much money under the Hillary plan, plan on paying extra taxes to help everyone else."

Didn't know you were a millionaire casualguy...congrats on that. Give me a break...do you even have health care coverage now? If the answer is yes, then don't worry about Hillary. Besides...all you guys long to have a woman dominate you anyways...lol...

"before Hillary freezes all funds and stock market trading."

Ummmm...no one is planning on doing this BTW.

"Everybody else will be required to pay into Hillary's plan it appears."

Wrong again. Where the heck are you getting your info BTW?

They already garnish wages. It's called Federal Income Tax Withholding. Why not allocate a portion of it to some mandatory minimum health insurance, rather than letting the Pentagon waste it all on $200 hammers?

Book Guy the answer to that will be suprisingly similar to why we don't fix social ills at home rather than sending troops and money abroad.

There should be a flat tax instead of the current rip off system. Where did the idea that someone that works smarter, not harder, or takes risks to fund start ups that may or may not give any return, should pay a higher percentage of the returns on those risks originate?

There will never be a flat tax, because it's not a fair way to tax people...great deal for the rich, not so much for anyone else. Progressive taxation is taxation based on one's ability to pay.

I guess I'd have to agree with all three of the preceding comments. :)

I was simply ranting about Hillary's plans for our future money. Socialism like she is talking about will take away a lot of taxpayer money that all of us taxpayers pay. I think Social Security was based on the government providing for us. I think I would have been a lot better off if I could have saved and invested that percentage of my income rather than have the government take it away from me. Hillary's plans for Health Care start sounding a lot like that. Another tax based on percentage of income where you may not have a choice of whether or not you can pay it.

If I retire 20 or 30 years from now if inflation takes off, I may need to be a millionaire by that time to be able to retire. Then with Hillary's plans, I won't be able to afford retirement very easily because I would be rich if someone later fixes the systems so that it's not indexed for inflation. Again I'm ranting about plans I think she would like to implement even though I'm haven't heard that many details. I guess I'm of the opinion that she and Obama and even McCain may have some similiar plans so we probably won't be able to retire unless we somehow become multi-millionaires. Excluding those guys on here who are already retired or close to it. I'm talking at least 20 to 30 years away. Ahhh, probably pointless to argue about though, I read a quote that she tried to get this health plan through Congress for 8 years already without any luck. Now she wants to do it all over again. That's what I heard.

In different news, I wonder if she would have male interns working privately in the White House while Bill is out visiting strip clubs. Nahh, Bill Clinton probably would find some other Monicas around I think.

No one is stopping you from saving and investing on your own...although I do think that the govt. needs to do more to encourage that. You already need to save a million plus to retire IMO...if you're not on track for that...you're in trouble. Who care who blows Bubba...as long as it's not Chelsea...

"Posted by: MisterGuy Send Private Message to MisterGuy Read MisterGuy's blog [ ignore ] There will never be a flat tax, because it's not a fair way to tax people...great deal for the rich, not so much for anyone else. Progressive taxation is taxation based on one's ability to pay."

You missed the point of my post. I want to know why it's considered fair to tax me at a higher rate based on the extra risks I take to get a high return (higher income) and exercised my brain to get out of a "McJob" flipping burgers and made enough money to be able to stop 'working' and be able to become an investor. "Progressive taxation" is just an attempt to make income redistribution sound less like take the money worked hard for and took high risks to make and giving it to some unmarried broad who knows that the more illegitimate brats she turns out the more money she gets every month that's stolen out of my pocket.

There is nothing fair about anything other than a flat tax. Actually, it would more "fair" to be the opposite of the current system since the 'rich' use way less government services than the lowest income people do. If you change to a pay-for-service-used model you then have a fair system, anything else is communism (and Hillary's nanny-state, which is even worse).

A progressive tax is where people with more disposable income pay a higher percentage of that income in tax than those with less income...the rates progress from low to high. If you have a problem with that idea, I suggest that you take it up with Adam Smith and/or Karl Marx...and they didn't tend to agree on much I bet. We will never, ever have a flat tax in this country...just run the numbers for different income brackets to see why.

I agree that a flat tax in this country will never work unless the government is run very efficiently and has little need for tax revenue from income taxes. As an example if the government spends too much and needs too much money from the poorer folks, the flat tax won't work. ie, poor guy makes 100 a day while the rich guy makes 1000 a day. You're the government and you enact Hillary care demanding 12 dollars a day. That's on top of other demands like Social Security say that takes 11 dollars a day. Then you add a flat tax and say add 23 dollars a day. The minimum cost for rent and food is say 65 dollars a day and that leaves nothing for transportation or other taxes. The poor guy doesn't have enough money left over at the end of the day. He can't cut back his spending to survive. His choice with the flat tax might be to starve or go start a life of crime. Just an example if the taxes in this country are too high in my opinion on the lower and middle class. Imagine how it would feel to have nothing left over after taxes while some rich guy gets to save even more money because he succeeded in getting the flat tax passed. I'm not impressed with any Republican plans to save Bill Gates a few extra million dollars. Now if it saves me money I'm fine with that.

While I'm not opposed to taxing the rich more than the poor and middle class, the way things are now, I am opposed to Democratic thoughts thinking it's ok to put higher taxes on businesses located here in the US. While I don't expect all the rich people to leave this country, many businesses and companies have already done so and may continue doing so unless their taxes are lowered or they are encouraged to come here to do their business from foreign countries. Lower taxes on business encourages businesses to locate here versus locating their business and jobs overseas. It would be nice if politicians understood that. I think NAFTA might have promoted more trade but it also broke down the barriers for companies to not have any problem relocating due to less taxes, lower labor costs, and less government regulations to pay for. The US lost hundreds of thousands of good paying manufacturing jobs as a result of trade deals with China and other countries. I actually prefer my clothes made somewhere other than China but that is getting a lot harder to find now. I think their quality is inferior and their products don't last as long. However the textile business here in the US and other countries has been decimated by free trade with China.

Maybe it's not free but simply without all the tariffs that used to be imposed that enabled businesses here to stay in business.

How do you know how much "Hillary care" is gonna cost? The problem with globalization is that it's become a race to the bottom...that's bad for us and good for a whole lot of people that aren't us IMO.