I sort of like McCain's health care plan..........

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2008/10/03/2008-10-03_joe_bidens_health_care_whopper-2.html

It definitely sounds better for the everyman. Not all jobs provide health insurance, so this really benefits anyone in one of those positions. And unlike Obama's socialistic universal health care plan, it won't require me to be taxed out of my rear end and then have my wages lowered so my employer can compensate for the increase in their taxes.

Nariman wrote:It definitely sounds better for the everyman. Not all jobs provide health insurance, so this really benefits anyone in one of those positions. And unlike Obama's socialistic universal health care plan, it won't require me to be taxed out of my rear end and then have my wages lowered so my employer can compensate for the increase in their taxes.

Only those making $250,000 will have their taxes increased, I'm all for it, there's been two classes that have grown in the past 8 years...the rich and the poor, the rich can afford to take it this time. Also, under Obama's plan your not forced to select government health care, you can keep your private (and probably better) health insurance.

Only those making $250,000 will have their taxes increased, I'm all for it, there's been two classes that have grown in the past 8 years...the rich and the poor, the rich can afford to take it this time. Also, under Obama's plan your not forced to select government health care, you can keep your private (and probably better) health insurance.

Including millions of small businesses that would fall into that category. THAT, my dear troll, affects the employees of these small companies.

PalinRocks7 wrote:

Nariman wrote:It definitely sounds better for the everyman. Not all jobs provide health insurance, so this really benefits anyone in one of those positions. And unlike Obama's socialistic universal health care plan, it won't require me to be taxed out of my rear end and then have my wages lowered so my employer can compensate for the increase in their taxes.

Only those making $250,000 will have their taxes increased, I'm all for it, there's been two classes that have grown in the past 8 years...the rich and the poor, the rich can afford to take it this time. Also, under Obama's plan your not forced to select government health care, you can keep your private (and probably better) health insurance.

Wrong. I took one of Obama's tests on how my taxes would be affected by his plan. I make much less than $250,000 and my taxes would raise by about $400 per year.

Siouxie wrote:

Only those making $250,000 will have their taxes increased, I'm all for it, there's been two classes that have grown in the past 8 years...the rich and the poor, the rich can afford to take it this time. Also, under Obama's plan your not forced to select government health care, you can keep your private (and probably better) health insurance.

Including millions of small businesses that would fall into that category. THAT, my dear troll, affects the employees of these small companies.

I can guarantee you that if my business taxes go up as much as Obama wants it to go up there will be less employees.

PalinRocks7 wrote:

Nariman wrote:It definitely sounds better for the everyman. Not all jobs provide health insurance, so this really benefits anyone in one of those positions. And unlike Obama's socialistic universal health care plan, it won't require me to be taxed out of my rear end and then have my wages lowered so my employer can compensate for the increase in their taxes.

Only those making $250,000 will have their taxes increased, I'm all for it, there's been two classes that have grown in the past 8 years...the rich and the poor, the rich can afford to take it this time. Also, under Obama's plan your not forced to select government health care, you can keep your private (and probably better) health insurance.

Au Contraire again.

#1 - How do you know? Obama is a consummate liar. He lies over and over again. You have no idea what he will or will not do once in the White House.

#2 - Clinton campaigned on middle class tax cuts then reneged once he got elected. You have a crystal ball do you that Obama will keep any promises he makes?

#3 - Love your plan to re-distribute the wealth /sarcasm. Knew you were a little communist.

#4 - If your plan is enacted and those over $250,000 a year get taxed - it will get passed on to you. And you call us idiots. The over $250,000 a year bunch are the EMPLOYERS. They will pass this on TO YOU in the form of lost jobs and higher prices. Great plan genius.

#5 - The only thing you're right about is the middle class is shrinking and the poor is growing. Its the leftist, socialist, communist policies of the DEMOCRATS and liberal Republicans in Congress who are accomplishing this as proven by the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac fiasco giving loans to people who could not afford them and didn't pay their bills because of DEMOCRATS in Congress forcing that on the banks! Result: Economic collapse - Thanks Dems! Socialism and Communism always fails it cannot sustain itself and you vote for these disastrous policies, not us.

My sister and brother-in-law live in a rural community and because of the lack of quick police response, they have had multiple break-ins. The police have told them that the people who they have caught have told the police that it shouldn't matter because insurance covers the loses and "those people can afford the insurance". Kind of like PalinRocks and Obama's thinking . . . you rich guys can afford it. Re-distribution of wealth. Let's just forget, unlike Obama, most of those "rich guys" worked hard to have the money that they have. Too bad Obama and PalinRocks don't want or know how to work for their money.

WA State Voter wrote:

PalinRocks7 wrote:

Nariman wrote:It definitely sounds better for the everyman. Not all jobs provide health insurance, so this really benefits anyone in one of those positions. And unlike Obama's socialistic universal health care plan, it won't require me to be taxed out of my rear end and then have my wages lowered so my employer can compensate for the increase in their taxes.

Only those making $250,000 will have their taxes increased, I'm all for it, there's been two classes that have grown in the past 8 years...the rich and the poor, the rich can afford to take it this time. Also, under Obama's plan your not forced to select government health care, you can keep your private (and probably better) health insurance.

Wrong. I took one of Obama's tests on how my taxes would be affected by his plan. I make much less than $250,000 and my taxes would raise by about $400 per year.

The test on Fox News.com doesn't count.

GOPgal wrote:

PalinRocks7 wrote:

Nariman wrote:It definitely sounds better for the everyman. Not all jobs provide health insurance, so this really benefits anyone in one of those positions. And unlike Obama's socialistic universal health care plan, it won't require me to be taxed out of my rear end and then have my wages lowered so my employer can compensate for the increase in their taxes.

Only those making $250,000 will have their taxes increased, I'm all for it, there's been two classes that have grown in the past 8 years...the rich and the poor, the rich can afford to take it this time. Also, under Obama's plan your not forced to select government health care, you can keep your private (and probably better) health insurance.

Au Contraire again.

#1 - How do you know? Obama is a consummate liar. He lies over and over again. You have no idea what he will or will not do once in the White House.

#2 - Clinton campaigned on middle class tax cuts then reneged once he got elected. You have a crystal ball do you that Obama will keep any promises he makes?

#3 - Love your plan to re-distribute the wealth /sarcasm. Knew you were a little communist.

#4 - If your plan is enacted and those over $250,000 a year get taxed - it will get passed on to you. And you call us idiots. The over $250,000 a year bunch are the EMPLOYERS. They will pass this on TO YOU in the form of lost jobs and higher prices. Great plan genius.

#5 - The only thing you're right about is the middle class is shrinking and the poor is growing. Its the leftist, socialist, communist policies of the DEMOCRATS and liberal Republicans in Congress who are accomplishing this as proven by the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac fiasco giving loans to people who could not afford them and didn't pay their bills because of DEMOCRATS in Congress forcing that on the banks! Result: Economic collapse - Thanks Dems! Socialism and Communism always fails it cannot sustain itself and you vote for these disastrous policies, not us.

Wow, just wow, you are easily the most brainwashed individual on these boards. Did employers pass their 8% Bush tax cut down to employees? NO, THEY POCKETED THE MONEY FOR THEMSELVES! Taxes were higher when Clinton was in....yet 24 million jobs were created, and wages were UP!

So here's a little anecdote, I went to my local big chain grocery store this morning at 11:00AM to buy a gallon of milk. When I get to the lines, only 3 out of the 8 registers are open, and each one is backed up 8 people deep, and they didn't have enough employees to open another register. Now remember, this is a large national chain that can't afford to keep more than 3 registers open.

This is before McCain's tax cuts or Obama's tax hikes. I wonder how many fewer employees they'll have to keep to maintain their profit ratios after the tax hikes? Maybe we won't see dips in the prices of goods, but we will see less people being laid off, and more people being hired. I'd prefer my neighbor being able to find or keep a job to help feed his family, than to save 15 cents on a gallon of milk.

The tax cuts are not always passed down through the price tag, sometimes it's passed on through helping the community.

PalinRocks7 wrote:

WA State Voter wrote:

PalinRocks7 wrote:

Nariman wrote:It definitely sounds better for the everyman. Not all jobs provide health insurance, so this really benefits anyone in one of those positions. And unlike Obama's socialistic universal health care plan, it won't require me to be taxed out of my rear end and then have my wages lowered so my employer can compensate for the increase in their taxes.

Only those making $250,000 will have their taxes increased, I'm all for it, there's been two classes that have grown in the past 8 years...the rich and the poor, the rich can afford to take it this time. Also, under Obama's plan your not forced to select government health care, you can keep your private (and probably better) health insurance.

Wrong. I took one of Obama's tests on how my taxes would be affected by his plan. I make much less than $250,000 and my taxes would raise by about $400 per year.

The test on Fox News.com doesn't count.

Wrong . . . too bad for you. It was actually on an Obama site. You lose.

Let me see but isn't Clinton a racist / bigot and a lot of jobs were lost during the clinton administration ( as per BO during a private fundraiser in SF ) and now the dems (DNC / BO in particular remind us of the clinton years ). We can play this game both ways. No one is a saint is this field. So please stop with your usual rants. we have less than 30 days left. Your time is better spent elsewhere ( serious not to be sarcastic ) there are many undecideds , people in the rural areas whom you could convince to support your candidate.

Too bad that Obama and his Bots cannot figure out the correlation between higher taxes and higher unemployment.

independant_visionary wrote:Let me see but isn't Clinton a racist / bigot and a lot of jobs were lost during the clinton administration ( as per BO during a private fundraiser in SF ) and now the dems (DNC / BO in particular remind us of the clinton years ). We can play this game both ways. No one is a saint is this field. So please stop with your usual rants. we have less than 30 days left. Your time is better spent elsewhere ( serious not to be sarcastic ) there are many undecideds , people in the rural areas whom you could convince to support your candidate.

People in rural areas will never vote for Obama. NEVER! He is so out of touch with them.

The Farm Bureau had in their last newsletter how each of the candidates would deal with agricultural issues. The candidates answered the questions and they were reprinted word for word. McCain presented specific proposals. Obama gave ZERO specific proposals, just a lot of empty words. When he came close to proposing something, it was just flat stupid. He actually said that he would help out farmers by stopping the outsourcing of jobs. OUTSOURCING OF JOBS absolutely does not fit farming. NAFTA does, but not outsourcing jobs.

Obama is just a bunch of flat lies and nothingness.

One of my first posts on this site was how S-corps would be hammered under Obama's plans. Remember, you figure your loss or gain on one form, then transfer that to your PERSONAL 1040, where you are taxed.
So a business like ours would have had to lay people off, raise prices, and cut benefits to survive. Look up my post on that. Small businesses, mom and pop shops will suffer BIG time! I know, I was one and did the math.

PalinRocks7 wrote: Wow, just wow, you are easily the most brainwashed individual on these boards. Did employers pass their 8% Bush tax cut down to employees? NO, THEY POCKETED THE MONEY FOR THEMSELVES! Taxes were higher when Clinton was in....yet 24 million jobs were created, and wages were UP!

Gee, I was thinking the same thing about you. But anyway I don't know where you've been. Bush's tax cut was passed on to me, didn't you get your check???? I got mine and it came in pretty handy too. Of course you actually had to have PAID taxes at some point in time to get one so maybe that's the problem.

WA State Voter wrote:

PalinRocks7 wrote:

WA State Voter wrote:

PalinRocks7 wrote:

Nariman wrote:It definitely sounds better for the everyman. Not all jobs provide health insurance, so this really benefits anyone in one of those positions. And unlike Obama's socialistic universal health care plan, it won't require me to be taxed out of my rear end and then have my wages lowered so my employer can compensate for the increase in their taxes.

Only those making $250,000 will have their taxes increased, I'm all for it, there's been two classes that have grown in the past 8 years...the rich and the poor, the rich can afford to take it this time. Also, under Obama's plan your not forced to select government health care, you can keep your private (and probably better) health insurance.

Wrong. I took one of Obama's tests on how my taxes would be affected by his plan. I make much less than $250,000 and my taxes would raise by about $400 per year.

The test on Fox News.com doesn't count.

Wrong . . . too bad for you. It was actually on an Obama site. You lose.

(High five's WA State Voter) Slam dunk!!

WA is one smart cookie! (that's a compliment......... just in case on the NW it means something else)

Anyway, here's the low-down on the Obama plan, well, depending on which week this is!

ARLINGTON, VA -- With Barack Obama lying about John McCain's health care plan today, please find below the facts about Barack Obama's health care record:

BARACK OBAMA RECENTLY ACKNOWLEDGED HIS PLAN WILL COST AT LEAST $150 BILLION A YEAR

Despite What He Claimed Today, Barack Obama Recently Said His Plan Will Cost At Least $150 Billion, Despite Earlier Claims That It Will Cost Much Less:

Barack Obama Said On "60 Minutes" That His Plan Would Cost At Least $150 Billion. CBS' Steve Kroft: "How much is it going to cost? $150 billion it's going to cost, right?" Obama: "It is. It is. But we pay for every dime that we propose to spend. I believe in pay as you go. That if you want to propose a new program, you better cut some old ones. If you want to expand a program, then you better figure out where the money's coming from." (CBS' "60 Minutes," 9/21/08)


Previously, Barack Obama Said His Plan Will Save The Average Person $2,500 Per Year And Will Cost Taxpayers Between $50-$65 Billion Per Year. "Obama said his plan could save the average consumer $2,500 a year and bring health care to all. Campaign aides estimated the cost of the program at $50 billion to $65 billion a year, financed largely by eliminating tax cuts for the wealthy that are scheduled to expire." (Mike Glover, "The Time Has Come For Universal, Affordable Health Care, Obama Says," The Associated Press, 5/29/07)


BARACK OBAMA'S CLAIM THAT HIS PLAN SAVES FAMILIES $2,500 IS BASED ON "MISLEADING MATH"


There Is "Zero Credible Evidence" That The Obama Plan Will Lower The Costs Insurance Premiums By $2,500, Which Is Based Off Of "Misleading Math":


Obama's Pledge To Lower Health Care Premiums By $2,500 In His First Term "Is A Matter Of Considerable Dispute" Among Experts. "In speech after speech, Senator Barack Obama has pledged that he will lower the country's health care costs enough to 'bring down premiums by $2,500 for the typical family.' Moreover, Mr. Obama, the presumptive Democratic nominee, has promised that his health plan will be in place 'by the end of my first term as president of the United States.' Whether Mr. Obama can deliver is a matter of considerable dispute among health analysts and economists." (Kevin Sack, "Obstacles For Obama In Meeting Health Care Goal," The New York Times, 7/23/08)


A Health Policy Professor At The University Of North Carolina-Chapel Hill Said The Savings In The Obama Plan Are "Wishful Thinking." "Jonathan B. Oberlander, who teaches health policy at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, called it wishful thinking. 'Do they have the potential to generate significant savings in the long run?' Dr. Oberlander asked. 'Yes. Do I believe they will produce substantial savings in the short run that can be used to finance Obama's plan? No.'" (Kevin Sack, "Obstacles For Obama In Meeting Health Care Goal," The New York Times, 7/23/08)


M.I.T.'s Jonathan Gruber Said That There Is "Zero Credible Evidence" That The Obama Plan Will Save The Average Family On The Costs Of Insurance Premiums. "Experts also are skeptical of both [Obama and Clinton's] claims that their plans will reduce the cost of insurance for the typical family by $2,000 or more. 'I know zero credible evidence to support that conclusion,' says M.I.T's Jonathan Gruber." (Factcheck.org Website, www.factcheck.org, Accessed 6/9/08)


Factcheck.Org Said Obama's Claim That His Plan Will Cut Insurance Premium Costs By $2,500 Is "A Bit Of Misleading Math." "That's a bit of misleading math. It assumes individual Americans will share in all of the savings for the health care system, which includes insurance companies, the government and health care providers. Obama claims families will save $2,500 under his plan, but they won't see at least some of those savings directly in the form of lower premiums. And they may not see them indirectly either." (Factcheck.Org, www.factcheck.org, Accessed 6/16/08)


BARACK OBAMA'S PLAN WILL BURDEN BUSINESSES WITH A MANDATE AND IS VAGUE ABOUT WHICH ONES ARE EXEMPT


Barack Obama's Health Care Plan Requires Employers To Provide Insurance Or Contribute A Percentage Of Their Payroll To The Public Plan:


Barack Obama's Plan Includes Required Employer Coverage Similar To The Failed Clinton Mandate Of 1993. "Obama would require almost all employers to offer insurance to workers or face a tax penalty, an idea that many businesses abhor and that is also in Edwards's proposal. This employer mandate drove much of the opposition to the Clinton plan in 1994." (Anne E. Kornblut and Perry Bacon Jr., "Obama Says Washington Is Ready For Health Plan," The Washington Post, 5/30/07)


· "In Addition, Mandated Employer Coverage Has Faced Fierce Opposition In The Past And Likely Will Again, [New America Foundation Len] Nichols Said." (JoNel Aleccia, "Overhauling Health Care: Two Divergent Visions," MSNBC News, www.msnbc.msn.com, 9/22/08)


Barack Obama Is Vague On The Specifics Small Businesses Have To Meet In Order To Be Exempt From His Employer Mandate:


Obama's Campaign Has Not "Put Out A Specific Number" When Asked To Identify Which Small Businesses Would Qualify For The Small Business Exemption And Tax Credit. "Under Obama's health plan, businesses over an unspecified size would have to either make a 'meaningful contribution' to their employees' health coverage or else pay an undefined percentage of payroll towards the costs of the national plan. Obama has also promised 'small businesses' that he would provide them with a refundable tax credit worth up to 50 percent of what they contribute towards their employees' health premiums. 'We haven't put out a specific number,' said Jason Furman, Obama's director of economic policy, when asked by ABC News to identify who would be covered by Obama's small business exemption and health-care tax credit." (Gregory Wallace and Teddy Davis, "Obama Fuzzy On 'Small Business' Exemption," ABC's "Political Radar" Blog, blogs.abcnews.com, 8/5/08)


Obama's Campaign Has Not Laid Out Details About How Much The Play Or Pay Or Tax Would Be For Those Who Don't Offer Health Insurance Or Which Small Businesses Are Exempt. "The campaign has not said how large the tax would be for businesses that opt not to offer insurance, or how small a business would have to be to be excluded from the requirement. If the payroll tax is too low, say 6 percent, many businesses will opt to pay it instead of offering insurance, sending their employees into the public program and boosting federal costs, he noted." (JoNel Aleccia, "Overhauling Health Care: Two Divergent Visions," MSNBC News, www.msnbc.msn.com, 9/22/08)


Obama's Staff "Declined To Be More Specific" For The Philadelphia Inquirer About His Employer Mandate. "Under [Obama's] plan, employers either would give employees 'meaningful' insurance coverage or pay a percentage of payroll to provide coverage for the uninsured. His staff declined to be more specific." (Stacey Burling, "Clinton, Obama Differ Slightly On Health Plans," The Philadelphia Inquirer, 4/15/08)


BARACK OBAMA SAID HIS PLAN MAY LEAD TO A SINGLE-PAYER PLAN "OVER TIME"


Barack Obama Suggested His Health Care Plan Could Lead To A Single-Payer System "Over Time":


Barack Obama Says His Health Care Plan Could Lead To Single-Payer System "Over Time." Obama: "If I were designing a system from scratch, then I'd probably set up a single-payer system. ... But the problem is we're not starting from scratch. ... Making that transition in a rapid way I think would be very difficult. ... So my attitude is let's build up the system we got, let's make it more efficient, we may be over time -- as we make the system more efficient and everybody's cover -- decide that there are other ways for us to provide care more effectively." (Barack Obama, Remarks At A Campaign Event, Albuquerque, NM, 8/18/08)


Barack Obama Was A Self-Described "Proponent" Of Single-Payer Health Care, But Later Backtracked:


Barack Obama Was A "Proponent Of A Single-Payer Health Care Program" And Said It Could Happen If Democrats Occupied The White House And A Majority In Congress. Obama: "I happen to be a proponent of a single-payer health care program. I see no reason why the United States of America, the wealthiest country in the history of the world cannot provide basic health insurance to everybody. A single-payer health care plan, a universal health care plan. And that's what I'd like to see. And as all of you know, we may not get there immediately. Because first we have to take back the White House, we have to take back the Senate, we have to take back the House." (Barack Obama, Remarks At AFL-CIO Forum, Chicago, IL, 6/30/03)


In 2008, Barack Obama Said He Would Only Support A Single-Payer System If "Starting From Scratch." Obama: "[I] never said that we should try to go ahead and get single payer. What I said was that if I were starting from scratch, if we didn't have a system in which employers had typically provided health care, I would probably go with a single-payer system." (Barack Obama, CNN/Congressional Black Caucus Democrat Presidential Candidates Debate, Myrtle Beach, SC, 1/21/08)


KEY DEMOCRATS DOUBT THAT BARACK OBAMA'S PLAN WILL PASS


Senate Democrats Are Already Raising Doubts About The Likelihood That The Obama Plan Will Pass:


Senior Congressional Democrats Are "Maneuvering To Lower Public Expectations" Of Barack Obama's Health Care Promises. "Congressional Democrats are backing away from healthcare reform promises made by their two presidential candidates, saying that even if their party controls the White House and Congress, sweeping change will be difficult. It is still seven months before Election Day, but already senior Democrats are maneuvering to lower public expectations on the key policy issue." (Manu Raju, "Dems Hedge On Healthcare," The Hill, 4/23/08)


Barack Obama's Promises To Deliver Universal Care On The Campaign Trail "May Not Match The Political Reality On Capitol Hill." "For some senators, the promises made by Sens. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) and Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) outside of Washington may not match the political reality on Capitol Hill." (Manu Raju, "Dems Hedge On Healthcare," The Hill, 4/23/08)


Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) On The Obama Health Care Plan: "We all know there is not enough money to do all this stuff. . What they are doing is...laying out their ambitions." (Manu Raju, "Dems Hedge On Healthcare," The Hill, 4/23/08)


Sen. Chuck Schumer Questions If The U.S. Is "Ready For A Major National Heath Care Plan." "Sen. Charles Schumer (N.Y.), a member of Senate Democratic leadership and a key Hillary Clinton ally who also sits on the Finance Committee, said he is 'not sure we have the big plan on healthcare. ... Healthcare I feel strongly about, but I am not sure that we're ready for a major national healthcare plan,' Schumer said." (Manu Raju, "Dems Hedge On Healthcare," The Hill, 4/23/08)


IN ILLINOIS, OBAMA HAD A "PERFECT VOTING RECORD" IN FAVOR OF STATE MANDATES


In Illinois, Barack Obama Had A "Perfect Voting Record" On Insurance Mandates That Are Now In Place In Illinois And Have Increased The Cost Of Health Care In Illinois:


"Obama Voted For All" Of The 18 Insurance Mandates That Passed During His Time As A State Senator. "Today, the requirement is one of 43 mandates imposed by Illinois on health insurance, according to the Illinois Division of Insurance. ... By my count, during Mr. Obama's tenure in the state Senate, 18 different laws came up for a vote and passed that imposed new mandates on private health insurance. Mr. Obama voted for all of them." (Scott Gottlieb, Op-Ed, "Obama's Health Care Record," The Wall Street Journal, 5/5/08)


According To American Enterprise Institute's Scott Gottlieb, Barack Obama Had A "Perfect Voting Record" On Enacting State Mandates That Have Increased Insurance Costs. Gottlieb: "The fact is that about 18 in all, bills came up - public acts came up that would impose new mandates on private insurance plans about things they had to cover and [Obama] voted for all of them. He had a perfect voting record. We know as a matter of policy, these state mandates end up increasing cost. Many of them are pushed by special minutes the states. In the case of dental anesthesia, pushed by the dentists, this is far more complicated dental procedures. Nonetheless, these are things that people may be willing to fund out of pocket or partially pay for. By mandating them, insurance companies need to cover the cost, it ends up increasing the cost of health insurance and cost of basic policies which in many cases is all people can afford." (CNBC's "Squawk Box," 5/6/08)


Barack Obama "Clearly" Did Not Stand Up To Special Interest In Illinois By Consistently Voting In Favor Of Insurance Mandates. Gottlieb: "[B]arack Obama was hardly alone for voting for state mandates. In fairness, they have become less popular because a lot of states are realizing they do increase the cost of health insurance. But he's out on the campaign trail talking about his willingness to stand up to special interests in order to control costs. In the state of Illinois, he clearly didn't do that. He voted for all of these state mandates. In fact, he voted for a lot of additional insurance regulation, some of which we didn't count because we didn't feel it fit the mold of what you call a mandate. If you include the insurance regulation he voted for, voting record was 21 out of 21 public acts that came up." (CNBC's "Squawk Box," 5/6/08)

I can tell you that if Obama's health care plan is anything like Canada's I don't want to have anything to do with it. I know people who have had to deal with it. Canadians cross into WA daily to huge clinics set up along the border because their medical program is horrendous.

From:
http://weeklystandard.com/Weblogs/TWSFP/TWSFPView.asp#9026

Misrepresenting McCain's Health Care Plan
The Obama campaign stepped up its rhetoric against the McCain health care plan over the last week with a new series of ads.

But leave it to Paul Krugman at the New York Times to confuse, twist and misrepresent the McCain proposal. In today’s column, “Health Care Destruction,” Krugman writes:


Mr. McCain, on the other hand, wants to blow up the current system, by eliminating the tax break for employer-provided insurance. And he doesn’t offer a workable alternative.

Without the tax break, many employers would drop their current health plans. Several recent nonpartisan studies estimate that under the McCain plan around 20 million Americans currently covered by their employers would lose their health insurance.


Krugman distorts the impact of McCain’s plan by confusing two tax concepts: the “employee exclusion” and the “employer deduction.”

McCain’s plan eliminates the exclusion but does nothing to the deduction. Here’s how it works:
Say you’re a family of four making $80,000 per year and your employer provides health insurance valued at $10,000 per year. By eliminating the exclusion, you now owe taxes on $90,000 instead of $80,000 (because your health benefit in now included as income). In the 25% tax bracket, you owe $2500 in additional taxes on the $10,000 in extra income.

But McCain’s plan also gives that same family a $5,000 health care tax credit, leaving them with an extra $2500 in their pockets.

At the same time, employers still get to deduct the costs of providing health insurance, just as they do today.

That sounds more like helping middle-class tax payers than “health care destruction.”