politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Still remarkably low,
There are medicare advantage supplements provided by private insurance that would continue. I'm sure the only people who like private health insurance are ones where employer is paying the majority share.
The best question would be would you prefer an after tax raise as a result of M4A? (based on following table)
| Coverage Type | Average Employee Share | Average Employer Share | Total Annual Premium | |
|
|
|
| | Single Coverage | $1,440 | $7,885 | $9,325 | | Family Coverage | $6,850 | $20,143 | $26,993 |
where a 4% income tax surchage for a M4A plan that saves overall economy $1T, $60k salary would net $7500 as single plan, and $23500 in family plan in extra disposible income, when employer passes on their savings as extra salary.
$1T in savings also means $1T in additional disposible income for non-healthcare/insurance economy, and more employment/business profits in "useful economy" that multiplies to more economic growth.
So, the proper poll question is do you want a big after tax salary increase, with huge economic growth that gives you more job/raise opportunities, or do you want a corrupt extortion based healthcare system with private AI/death panels that denies you coverage?
Nit. Employers don’t pay for healthcare. People need to get over this mode of thinking.
A company hires you at a total compensation rate that include the salary they pay you, the contribution to your retirement, your health insurance, etc.
Think of it this way. The portion of the salary they COULD have paid you, they instead keep from you to pay for your health insurance.
It’s your money. You’re just delegating to them the responsibility of paying your insurance.
Once we get beyond this mode of thinking we can realize that we can, instead, delegate the government to pay for our health insurance.
Yes, the plan would have that compensation included somehow, to the workers who earn it or to the universal healthcare plan. This and a revenue system to fund it like successful places, benefits most people in cost and health. No more bankruptcies, like people still have with insurance. If the owners skip out on paying this worker compensation in the changeover, people are still more free to leave bad jobs with "good insurance" and do something else, start their own business, care for loved ones, more education, etc. It's win win for the vast majority of us when we look at the full picture! :)
That's my core point. Unions also tend to prefer 30% higher cost health plans because its non taxable to their membership, and life being shittier for the rest of us, is reason to apply to join their union.
Yes. And and both polls and "marketing" of M4A ignore this principle.