543
Donald Trump's losing baby boomers, silent generation to Kamala Harris
(www.newsweek.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 15 Aug 2024
543 points (98.4% liked)
politics
19089 readers
1480 users here now
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 politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted 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 another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- 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 a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple 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.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
They also want to tax employee benefits.
They only want to tax employee benefits above $12,000. The point of it seems to be to limit how much health insurance people get, so it limits their access to healthcare.
If all employer-provided health insurance was taxed (not just the amount above $12,000) it would be a good thing in the long run, because it would disentangle health insurance from employment.
Not unless there's a viable alternative..... If put into effect today it would just be the equivalent to a giant cut for 15 million people.
No.. just the federal marketplace. Like it should be. Then move the shit to single payer and boom done. The federal government negotiates prices like all other civilized countries do
The federal marketplace is not an adequate replacement for all income levels, it's barely adequate for people who qualify for subsidies.
A large part of our current problem is that our fed government isn't negotiating prices like other countries.
As I said, we can only get rid of employer based benefits if there is an adequate replacement.
Wait, sorry, I'm an accountant in another country; you guys don't tax employee benefits? Lucky.
Based upon the down votes, I am adding an edit: Lucky because it can get nit picky for an accountant, not lucky because your government doesn't care for you. But I mis spoke and it was off topic, so I accept my comment wasn't appreciated.
We don't tax them because they are an end run around having universal healthcare paid through taxes. If it was taxed, we might just decide to go single payer through taxes instead and that would cut into insurance provider profits!
Yikes, thanks for the info. I think I misspoke, I just find the taxing to be nit picky as a process, and my sympathy that your country doesn't provide Healthcare.
You may have meant to write this under the cast iron post vs. The taxes under the Harris-Trump Boomer article.
I think a ublock origin filter is messing with my inbox.
In spite of what Republicans say, the overall tax burden in the US is lower than most other developed countries:
https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/how-do-us-taxes-compare-internationally
Our taxes generally pay for fewer services, though, so we get to pay more for things like our absurd health care system, which ties the ability to afford health care to being employed.
Instead of taxes we have exploitative business practices...
Some of them we do, but the really ubiquitous standard stuff like health/vision/dental and retirement savings are deducted pre-tax.