talk.politics.misc

On Oct 3, 7:23 pm, "Sid9" wrote:
> mpa...@ wrote:
> > On Oct 3, 12:09 pm, zzpat wrote:
> >> mpa...@ wrote:
> >>> On Oct 3, 10:24 am, zzpat wrote:
> >>>> mpa...@ wrote:
>
> >>>>> Should poor people pay taxes to pay for the insurance for a family
> >>>>> making $83,600?
> >>>> Poor people don't pay taxes.
>
> >>> .
>
> >>> Read . 3162. The funding for the bill is coming from an increase
> >>> in cigarette taxes. Since cigarette smokers are disproportionately
> >>> poor, the poor will be funding the families making $83,600..
>
> >>> It makes far more sense to increase the coverage, such as dental, to
> >>> the poor and low income, than to expand SCHIP to include people
> >>> making $83,600.
>
> >> You are correct, everyone pays taxes - the poor also have to pay
> >> employment taxes but they also receive tax credits which offset
> >> many, if
> >> not all their taxes. The $83,600 number comes from only one state,
> >> New
> >> York so your implication is also very misleading.
>
> > I don't think that my implication is misleading, but I will accept
> > what you say.
>
> > Actually, I think that the implication is far worse than I had
> > implied. By NY setting their upper limit at 400%, they will be
> > collecting taxes from other states that set a more reasonable limit.
> > For example, a poor farmer in NC will be subsidizing a NY family
> > making $83,600.
>
> > I think it is admirable for states to implement these plans. That is
> > where I think that health care subsidies SHOULD come from (I am a
> > believer in the Xth Amendment). One of the BIG problems I have with
> > the proposed bill is that the old program allowed states to set their
> > own limits, but the Federal subsidy had its own limit.
>
> > Under the new proposed program, the limit on Federal subsidies has
> > been removed completely and the limit is determined by the individual
> > states.
>
> > 1)This will create disparity between states and one state (a lower
> > limit) will end up subsidizing another state with a higher limit.
> > 2) $83,600 is NOT the upper limit. It is only the upper limit of NY
> > TODAY. There is nothing that would stop any state from raising the
> > limit higher.
>
> > I personally think ANY president, republican or democrat, that doesn't
> > veto this bill is being irresponsible.
>
> In 2004 NY State was the fourth highest contributor of Federal taxes and the
> 42nd receiver of tax money from the Federal government.
>
> New Yorkers got back $.79 of each dollar the Federal government received.
>
> The disparity exists, but not the way you think.
>
> /research/show/ #ftsbs-timeseries-...
>
> jr has dug the Republican hole a lot deeper today.
>
> >> --
> >> Impeach Bush /
>
> >> Impeach Search
> >> Engine: /coop/cse?cx=012146513885108216046:rzesyut3kmm

I am talking about one specific program, not taxes in general. My
other point is that ANY state, even a state collecting more than it
pays in "general" federal dollars can raise its SCHIP cap to collect
more federal dollars. It can do this because the current proposed
bill has removed the upper income cap on federal contribution to the
state's program.

Would you vote for a program that has removed all limitations and
allow the states to expand the program at their whim?