Millennials like socialism - until they get jobs

[Catwhoshatinthehat]

Article dated yesterday that I don't believe has been posted in any of the other threads:

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/in-theory/wp/2016/03/24/millennials-like-socialism-until-they-get-jobs/

 

To be fair the article actually points out that they're more in favor of the Scandinavian social democracy but it also discusses how those who make more oppose income redistribution and increased taxes.  The millennials on their parents insurance support the idea of higher premiums to pay for the uninsured but the majority of millennials who pay for their own insurance are against higher premiums.  The article also talks about how:

 

"When tax rates are not explicit, millennials say they’d prefer larger government offering more services (54 percent) to smaller government offering fewer services (43 percent). However when larger government offering more services is described as requiring high taxes, support flips and 57 percent of millennials opt for smaller government with fewer services and low taxes, while 41 percent prefer large government."

 

None of this is really surprising but it just reinforces the fact that most of us can sit here and say "yeah it would be nice to provide ______" but paying for it is another issue.  Fact is those paying taxes don't want to pay more because the middle class will get crushed the most.  Nothing is free and it's easy to support raising taxes on the people who pay them when you aren't really paying them yourself which again isn't earth shattering news.  

[nate]

Of course.  The whole allure of Socialism is that they don't have something and want it without having to earn it.  Once they can earn it themselves they aren't fans anymore.

 

Actually, the freebie that annoys me the most is the college one.  Paying to send someone to college without having any incentive for them to use the education is absurd and stupid.

[Make Angels Great Again]

No shit we don't want higher premiums, that's the point of single payer. Reducing it.

[Make Angels Great Again]

By the way, I think it's fairly clear that the WaPo has an anti Sanders bias.

 

https://twitter.com/adamjohnsonNYC/status/707022118819655680/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

[Catwhoshatinthehat]

Yes which you can try to sell as a new tax on employers to pay for it then when that come sup short while reducing jobs and growth you go after the 50% of the country who pays income taxes.  Again, nothing is free and someone will have to pay for it.  Supporting something when someone else is paying for it is pretty easy which the polling in the article discusses.   

[Make Angels Great Again]

 

https://berniesanders.com/issues/medicare-for-all/

 

MAJOR SAVINGS FOR FAMILIES AND BUSINESSES

Bernie’s plan will cost over $6 trillion less than the current health care system over the next ten years.

The United States currently spends $3 trillion on health care each year—nearly $10,000 per person. Reforming our health care system, simplifying our payment structure and incentivizing new ways to make sure patients are actually getting better health care will generate massive savings. This plan has been estimated to save the American people and businesses over $6 trillion over the next decade.

The typical middle class family would save over $5,000 under this plan.

Last year, the average working family paid $4,955 in premiums and $1,318 in deductibles to private health insurance companies. Under this plan, a family of four earning $50,000 would pay just $466 per year to the single-payer program, amounting to a savings of over $5,800 for that family each year.

Businesses would save over $9,400 a year in health care costs for the average employee.

The average annual cost to the employer for a worker with a family who makes $50,000 a year would go from $12,591 to just $3,100.

 

 

THE PLAN WOULD BE FULLY PAID FOR BY:

• A 6.2 percent income-based health care premium paid by employers.

  Revenue raised: $630 billion per year.

• A 2.2 percent income-based premium paid by households.

  Revenue raised: $210 billion per year.This year, a family of four taking the standard deduction can have income up to $28,800 and not pay this tax under this plan.

   

  A family of four making $50,000 a year taking the standard deduction would only pay $466 this year.

• Progressive income tax rates.

  Revenue raised: $110 billion a year.Under this plan the marginal income tax rate would be:

   

  • 37 percent on income between $250,000 and $500,000.
  • 43 percent on income between $500,000 and $2 million.
  • 48 percent on income between $2 million and $10 million. (In 2013, only 113,000 households, the top 0.08 percent of taxpayers, had income between $2 million and $10 million.)
  • 52 percent on income above $10 million. (In 2013, only 13,000 households, just 0.01 percent of taxpayers, had income exceeding $10 million.)
• Taxing capital gains and dividends the same as income from work.

  Revenue raised: $92 billion per year.Warren Buffett, the second wealthiest American in the country, has said that he pays a lower effective tax rate than his secretary. The reason is that he receives most of his income from capital gains and dividends, which are taxed at a much lower rate than income from work. This plan will end the special tax break for capital gains and dividends on household income above $250,000.

• Limit tax deductions for rich.

  Revenue raised: $15 billion per year. Under Bernie’s plan, households making over $250,000 would no longer be able to save more than 28 cents in taxes from every dollar in tax deductions. This limit would replace more complicated and less effective limits on tax breaks for the rich including the AMT, the personal exemption phase-out and the limit on itemized deductions.

• The Responsible Estate Tax.

  Revenue raised: $21 billion per year.This provision would tax the estates of the wealthiest 0.3 percent (three-tenths of 1 percent) of Americans who inherit over $3.5 million at progressive rates and close loopholes in the estate tax.

• Savings from health tax expenditures.

  Revenue raised: $310 billion per year. Several tax breaks that subsidize health care (health-related “tax expenditures”) would become obsolete and disappear under a single-payer health care system, saving $310 billion per year.

   

  Most importantly, health care provided by employers is compensation that is not subject to payroll taxes or income taxes under current law. This is a significant tax break that would effectively disappear under this plan because all Americans would receive health care through the new single-payer program instead of employer-based health care.

[Catwhoshatinthehat]

You talk about the Washington post having a bias and your response is to post info from Bernie's website to support raising taxes to pay for all of the "free" things he's promising?  I already posted this article from the Tax Foundation from January talking about what his plan would do to the economy and jobs in the Sanders thread but I'll link it here as well:

 

http://taxfoundation.org/article/details-and-analysis-senator-bernie-sanders-s-tax-plan

 

-Increase in marginal tax rates (reduces what people have to spend) which reduces GDP

-Negative impact on wages

-Estimated loss of almost 6M full time jobs

-The negative impact on the economy reduces what the plan says it will bring in, i.e. the increased revenue doesn't cover the increased expenses

 

The tax foundation is a non-profit educational and research organization that's been around for almost 80 years.  I don't take everything they say as gospel and like anything or anyone they have their critics but I'll believe what they say more than Sanders, Clinton or Trump about any plans they put forward.  The tax foundation has shown over the years that their analysis is closer to reality than what politicians on either of the aisle claim during elections.  

Edited March 25, 2016 by Catwhoshatinthehat

[mtangelsfan]

Not to mention a overall rise in prices since he is planning on making employers pay more.  That money will go one of two places or maybe both....

 

1.  It will either reduce pay or reduce employment to pay for the higher cost

2.  The higher costs will be passed on to the consumer.

 

Oh, by the way, as usual this will hurt smaller business much more than bigger ones which can absorb or transfer costs much easier.

[Make Angels Great Again]

I'm not calling it free.

 

Concern is understood, but I think you guys are being overly pessimistic.

[Catwhoshatinthehat]

You say overly pessimistic and I say we're being realists.  I may not agree with what you and others say about Sanders and his plan but I can respect the fact it's what you support but you're telling us to take a politician at their word.  Politicians on both sides have shown over the years that their plans cost more than they say they will, bring in less than they say they will and screw and further erode the middle class.  Why someone believes it would be any different now I just can't understand.  

Edited March 25, 2016 by Catwhoshatinthehat

[Blarg]

No shit we don't want higher premiums, that's the point of single payer. Reducing it.

 

You have obviously never been in need of a higher level of health care than a runny nose.

[nate]

Health Insurance companies make on average a 5% profit.

 

People really think that the government can be more efficient than private corporations in running health care?  Not to mention you have to pay for millions more to get healthcare that couldn't before.

 

Bullshit it will save any money, it will cost a ton more.

[Make Angels Great Again]

There we go making assumptions again.

 

I pay 7.2k per year for premiums for my family that is rarely used but necessary, which is sadly not half bad in our system relatively speaking. My parents pay more than double that for the two of them.

[nate]

You work for an employer.  All of your premiums go into a pool to pay for all the employees working there, it is called underwriting.  It will be no different under Bernie's plan, it will just be disguised as a tax.

 

Get you facts straight before posting about health insurance.

[Make Angels Great Again]

Health insurance is a for profit business, right? Eliminating the "for profit" aspect will save money right off the bat.

[nate]

No it wont.  The profit like I said is 5%.  If you really think the government wont be more than 5% wasteful then you really are oblivious.

[Make Angels Great Again]

I would suspect that if the government if paying for healthcare, they'll find a way to reduce the cost.

[nate]

Because they have shown that ability throughout history.  Got it.

[Catwhoshatinthehat]

I work closely with the department/individuals that deal with health insurance at our work and each year they work with a broker then go to market to negotiate rates.  In recent years one of our offices saw a 25% hike because as Nate mentioned they look at the total expenses for the year when providers come back with rate quotes and someone in that office had massive expenses.  Some years back in our office one of my co-workers had very large insurance expenses at year-end.  Obviously individuals pay so much up to a limit but those expenses came in while they were negotiating rates like literally they were negotiating based on the prior expenses when that hit and rates went up for our office another 5%.  

[Make Angels Great Again]

The Aetna CEO has a salary of 30 million dollars.

 

As if the health insurance industry isn't already wasteful.

[nate]

The Aetna CEO has a salary of 30 million dollars.

 

As if the health insurance industry isn't already wasteful.

 

And 24.3 million members.  So yeah, without his pay everyone could save $1.25 a year!  Wow what a big difference!!!

[Lhalo]

I would suspect that if the government if paying for healthcare, they'll find a way to reduce the cost.

 

LOL at the government reducing the cost of anything. 

[nate]

Yeah, it really is a HOF worthy post.

[Catwhoshatinthehat]

Aetna employs almost 50K individuals and as of December 2013 they had net income of about 4%.  Even if you knocked the CEO's salary down to 5M a year that 25M is a drop in the bucket compared to their 45B in expenses and would come out to about $500 per employee.   

[Make Angels Great Again]

According to this: http://healthcareforamericanow.org/ourissues/health-insurance-industry/

 

The private health insurance industry is a $884-billion-a-year industry.