Bucket Guild | FUBU BH Forums

If they're going to repeal obamacare on a federal level for the notion that it is unconstitutional, than they also need to (and should) repeal about 1/3 of the most recent federal laws that are also unconstitutional including the patriot act; as well as bring home the troops from Afghanistan and Iraq who are there serving in wars that have not been declared by congress and are stuck there policing countries they didn't swear an oath to protect and defend.

Totally, dude.

RETIRED.
[armory loc="US,Bleeding Hollow"]Mayonaise[/armory]
[armory loc="US,Bleeding Hollow"]Jerkonaise[/armory]

Couple points - those are averages. An individuals experience can differ...i can tell you that the government ganks 26% of what I make every month. It's a lot. The government also taxes the shit out of small business owners. Also, a large % of people simply don't pay any taxes in America.

So yeah, taxes are terrible any way you cut it. My thing, is I don't mind paying taxes for good social programs, and health care for every American citizen. I do mind paying taxes for bombs, planes, and weapons (and tear gas) for corrupt governments like Egypt/Israel, and for our military to wage expensive wars that I don't support.

That's the thing people don't seem to understand...it's military spending that is completely unnecessary that is the biggest problem. If we slashed that budget, pulled out of these pointless wars, and focused on our infrastructure, I guarantee we'd be able to reduce the deficit and create better social programs.

20-30% of most peoples income is a lot, no matter how you cut it. it may not be much to one on a horse as high as yours, but to the rest of us plebians....

The number of unemployed would affect that average, as they pay no taxes. Which could bring the average down.

Ofc, there have been jobless people since forever. But there have been more as of late. I also question the average income of $102,000. I know people make more on average (and pay more) on the coasts, but average earnings among people I know is floating around 40-60k a year, and I don't think people on the coast are pulling on average up to 2.5 times as much.

I'd have no problem paying that much if the government didn't waste more money than any three other nations combined.

Vinsen's opinion (of which I've read every page) is results based. He wants to find a limit to federal power, and he uses this case to find that limit. His biggest error is failing to address Scalia's concurrence in Raich, which Vinsen cites extensively and ignores the holding of. The government is allowed to regulate nonactivity and inactivity, and the Necessary and Proper clause allows it to do so. This, if justices show any consistency, will not be the issue. Of course, they won't do that, and they're all going to bend over backwards and try to distinguish one as being a prohibition on activity rather than an enforcement of inactivity or some nonsense like that.

The shit everyone's got a hard time swallowing, as Aestu said, is that we're essentially forced to buy into a private system. It would have been nice to have flat out gutted the entire health insurance industry and nationalized it from the ground up, because everyone knows those coverage-denying cocksuckers don't deserve any more money. Since that didn't happen, we're stuck with the above problem. The obvious problem with "Congress can't regulate inactivity" is that if it's applied universally, there's a shit-ton of potentially hugely injurious activity that Congress can't touch, because it's one step removed from commercial activity. Since case law swings both ways on this, we're not going to be able to predict outcomes.

The "it's a tax not a fine" argument would be unassailable if they actually meant it, since any tax that generates revenue as of 1937 is constitutional.

Basically, we're relying on Kennedy to do the right thing. That, or Scalia to be consistent. It's happened before, and even he might not be able to distinguish this from his own concurrence in Raich.

The worst part is that a public option would have been unequivocally 100% constitutional.

If destruction exists, we must destroy everything.
Shuruppak Yuratuhl
Slaad Shrpk Breizh

I'd have a lot of questions about how a public system would work in the US. What sort of standards would we have for care? Would rationing be inevitable, especially given that we already basically have rationing in one form or another in our (most likely more efficient) private system? How do we avoid the waiting lines that opponents of such systems cite as an issue in other systems? What will our requirements for medical personnel be, and would their pay be commensurate with those requirements? How do we address the cost of those in the country illegally who pay no taxes to support the system using the system for free (this is already a subject of discussion impacting the private system in the southwest)?

Like most problems, I could solve this if I had the time to study it in depth and find the solutions, but also like most problems, if I did that too many influential people wouldn't like my solutions and I'd be fired out of a cannon into a wall.

Your Pal,
Jubber

AKA "The Gun"
AKA "ROFeraL"

World Renowned Mexican Forklift Artiste

20-30% tax is a fairly conservative figure since people have state taxes, local taxes, sales taxes, property taxes, taxes on savings/investments, businesses, etc.

Also, I'm thinking that $100K+ Average is fucked by the Mark Zuckerburgs of the United States.

The thing with the Mark Zuckerbergs of the United States too is that they are also very good at hiding their money (off-shore accounts, etc.). They still are taxed a lot, but they stuff that cash in all sorts of orifices to keep it away from Uncle Sam. This, along with useless spending, earmarks, and general government waste, is one of the many reasons US taxes are high, yet the government never seems to have enough money and we are operating at a 14 trillion dollar deficit.

I think the $102k average household income figure is wrong. The median household income (what most people would consider the average) in the US is around $50k, and the most recently published mean I can find was $60k in 2004. It is possible the published mean is wrong (it's based on a survey that may miss the very richest people - the top 1% of households have ~20% of the income in the US), but I have no idea where the figure of $102k comes from.

Laelia Komi Anomalocaris

Something like 93.456% of statistics are made up on the spot.

All those advertising expenditures sure are efficient.

If destruction exists, we must destroy everything.
Shuruppak Yuratuhl
Slaad Shrpk Breizh

This is why I have a problem with a private system. Capitalism generally promotes efficiency for products (IE supply/demand)

However, when it comes to someone's health - if you put capitalism into the equation it gets really muddy. Health insurance companies don't care about running efficiently...their way to maximize profit is to have the largest amount of customers making the smallest amount of claims. This is why we have things like "pre-existing conditions" which can result in someone being denied health care. This is one of the biggest things that Obamacare is attempting to fix, since it is terrible that someone should not be able to get health coverage because of it.

Not to mention, have you ever been to a hospital? Hospitals are some of the most inefficient organizations you will ever see. Coupled with America's health care system...it's little wonder that Americans spend more on health care than any other country:



If our capitalistic system made things so "efficient" this wouldn't be the case at all.

Usd is right tho, you can compare our taxedness to some other nations currently... and we're mild.

But if you compared our taxedness now, to our previous taxedness (when it so happens our $ was also worth more because of no bs fiat currency system) our nation was wealthier and less an empire/military industrial complex driven/nanny state birth to death to marriage taxed-- we are being outrageously taxed to that comparison.

We are currently a quasi corporatist police nanny state with luckily a few groups/remnants of social and fiscal liberty freedom fighters keeping our bs in check...(not sure how much longer it's all going to last tho b/c of the budget and federal reserve monetary crisis and over-extending our military arm) Move along, nothing to see here.