Deseret News | Reader comments: House Dems want to tax the rich for health care

Reader comments
Dems: tax the rich for health care

Bro Chuck's Rant n Rave's | 3:37 p.m. July 10, 2009

So House and perhaps Senate Demo's want to tax the rich, and the GOP wants to tax the working poor. That's more then fair. Conservative support of income taxation. Consider another example of conservative abandonment of conservative principles: the matter of the so-called surplus. Conservatives once believed that what a person earned belonged to him by right. Property, conservatives would remind us, is a fundamental, God-given right with which no government can legitimately interfere. Thus, when the 16th Amendment was proposed, after approximately 125 years of life without a national income tax, conservatives ardently opposed it. Today, the conservative spectacle with respect to income taxation is a disgrace to the princi-ples of liberty, private property, and limited government which conservatives once stood for and fought for. Bush proposes an income-tax reduction, which is just another way to try to buy votes from people during election time. Worse, however, is his implicit acknowledgement that every-one's income is owned by the government, which has the power to adjust the percentage so that people can be offered a bigger allowance at election time. I guess NOW we'll all get Health Care.

Brother Chuck Schroeder | 3:45 p.m. July 10, 2009

What really makes me sick, and what's pathetic about all of this GOP bickering now about Health Care for us all, is that conservatives continue to mouth ONLY the principles for which their forebears stood, not these RINO's of today. We favor free enterprise, private property, and limited government, they often remind us. Yet, when you ask a conservative, Does this mean that you favor abolishing public schooling and having a totally free market in education? he answers, Oh, I believe in free enterprise, but education is just too important to be left to the free market. Or if you ask conservatives, Does this mean you favor repealing Medicare and Medicaid and occupational licensure so that there will be a totally free market in health care? they answer, Oh, we believe in free enterprise, but health care is just too important to be left to the free market. Or, Does this mean you favor abolishing Social Security and leaving retirement and the honoring of mother and father totally to the free market? Their answer, Oh, we believe in free enterprise, but that would cost us votes. HOPEFULLY NOW we'll get Health Care.

Just like Robin Hood did to | 3:52 p.m. July 10, 2009

I hope those Democrat's tax and take everything the Rich have, just like Robin Hood. We need Health Care. Look what the other side does. Conservatives and public schooling. It's the same with public schooling. Bush has made education a central theme of his presidential campaign, as if he were indeed running for national superintendent of schools. He's got a federal reform plan that will finally fix public schools all across America, after 100 years of admitted failure. What Bush and so many other conservatives don't want to recognize is that public schooling has failed not for lack of the right reform but simply because it is inherently defective. It is impossible to find a better example of socialistic central planning than public schooling. A central board of elected or appointed commissars, whether at a national, state, or local level, plans, in a top-down fashion, the educational decisions of thousands or hundreds of thousands of children. Attendance is coerced. People are forced to fund the system through taxation. Students are required to listen to state-approved doctrine from state-approved schoolteachers using state-approved textbooks. WE ALL NEED HEALTH CARE. Right now.

Comments continue below

Chet | 3:57 p.m. July 10, 2009

DEMS are in love with The Robbin Hood approach.... The old liberal give them something for nothing view.

Atlas | 5:46 p.m. July 10, 2009

Any tax on any one hurts us all.

oracle | 5:48 p.m. July 10, 2009

Demonrats and taxes are coming for you next.

DanO | 5:59 p.m. July 10, 2009

It should be noted that the rich are currently taxed at a lower rate than the middle class because of various loopholes, tax shelters and writeoffs that aren't available to the average person.

Anonymous | 6:01 p.m. July 10, 2009

"Demonrats and taxes are coming for you next." Does Rush have a weekly name calling contest? I wondered what happened to people with arrested development. They become conservatives. Cute name. :-)

I'm real scared. The sky is falling!

That university study connecting conservatives to being courageously challenged seems correct.

Chet, liberals earn six-percent more because they are better educated. The Kennedy family has money. George Soros has billions. We have Warren Buffet.

Notice wealthy liberal don't spent a lot of time whining.

Because of book sells, Obama earns over $2,000,000 a year. Obama would be rising his taxes too.

Anonymous | 6:24 p.m. July 10, 2009

the frightening thing is that on his campaign both BO and his staff were quoted as saying $350, $250, $200 and even $150K are the "wealthiest" americans...
This tax increase could (and likely will) come to a lot of us who work hard and hardly feel wealthy.

EthicsAreNeeded | 6:38 p.m. July 10, 2009

Sounds good to me since their is a lot of rich greedy out there not willing to share.

The private Health industry is unethical as its practices has failed at providing quality healthcare at a reasonable price.

Is the current health system ethical? It provides only to the rich (Those who can afford it) and the wicked (those who break the law and are in prison)?

What about the 50 million who do obey the law and cannot afford Health Care?

What happens if we ignore the health issue once again like past administrations did?

The Health Industry and Lobbyists have paid elected officials to stagnate the issue with arguments and false propoganda about freedom to the public so they can continue to dominate this monopoly.

Banks lobbyists (for Profit) complained when the idea of Credit Unions (Non Profit) were introduced?

Many people benefited from service and loans from credit unions when they were refused them from banks.

Say No to "We the Lobbyists".

Say Yes to "We the People".

The Healthcare system needs change now to Focus on Care (Non Profit Industry) instead of Profit.

Anonymous | 6:55 p.m. July 10, 2009

Reminds me of the lyrics from "I'd Love to Change the World": "Tax the rich, feed the poor, til there are no rich no more".

Oh, how simple it seems.. | 7:09 p.m. July 10, 2009

To dupe the citizens of this great country into class hate warefare. Our beloved reps are spitting in the face of one class of people to get the masses riled up. Then they (the government) slyly move in to take from us ALL our liberty, freedoms, and property.

You people who say 'Great them rich folks SHOULD pay more!' Don't even realize what trap you are falling into.

The government starts with the rich, and once the idea has settled in, the next thing you know the poor are hit every bit as hard as the rich, and usually harder, because the rich always outsmart the legislators and the legislators come feed off the easy target.

Sn8key | 7:12 p.m. July 10, 2009

Why would I ever want to do well financially, when the government keeps throwing rocks at me everytime i try to climb another step on the ladder of financial freedom?

Please advise.

Nothing but greed | 7:13 p.m. July 10, 2009

This is nothing but greed! Greed of Americans wanting more entitlements paid for by someone else! As it always does, this will cause the economy to slide even more! Why? BECAUSE IF PEOPLE ARE NOT ALLOWED TO KEEP WHAT THEY EARN THEY WILL NOT INVEST, CREATE WEALTH AND WORK!

Concerned Citizen | 8:20 p.m. July 10, 2009

Creepy. Very creepy that so many are eager to use the coercive power of government to acheive their ends.

jed | 10:14 p.m. July 10, 2009

Sweet! Don't the Dem's realize that when you crush the rich, there will be nobody left to pay for their socailism?

ethics??? | 10:31 p.m. July 10, 2009

you think it is ethical to have a government run health system???
lets be clear...this will be a bottom of the barrel, yugo type plan...NOT the mercedes version of health care that can afford the luxury of dialysis or cancer treatments...
I love the pic of Obama with a cancer survivor because under the government plan she would have gotten flowers and a sympathy card.
This will drive a further divide between the haves (those who can afford actual coverage) and the have-nots (those on a government plan that allows you to see a nurse for a sore throat)
The american people need to realize what they are eagerly (and blindly) getting themselves into...

Scott | 10:42 p.m. July 10, 2009

I have an idea, lets tax the people who go to years and years of school and work really hard. After we do that, we will give hand outs to those who don't go to school and don't work at all. Do you know what this equation equals? 9% UNEMPLOYMENT! Thank Obama and friends.

125 years? | 12:01 a.m. July 11, 2009

The first income tax was introduced during the Civil War, that's only 70 years since the nations founding. I disagree with raising taxes on anybody, rich or poor. Without fail, whenever you raise taxes you cut out on free capital within the economy that can be used to stimulate itself naturally. When people have money to invest the economy grows. When you do what the Dems or every other failed nation in Europe has done and raise taxes and social spending you destroy that capital that could have been used to create more money through investment in new business opportunities. You do things the Dems or failed European economic way you reduce capital, and economic expansion and you end up with companies like GM who can't compete because of the high cost of doing business due to taxation. Why do you think Canada's medical system is starting to move towards privatization? Its because the socialist economic structure prevents it from expanding and meeting the needs of the people. Its worse than having no insurance at all. At very least In the US, you can get basic care through community health centers and an E.R.

My concern... | 12:11 a.m. July 11, 2009

Didn't Obama and Biden just admit to the fact that the stimilus programs were a "guess" and are not working like they had hoped. Once a tax is in place, it is hard/near impossible to remove. I hope we are not "guessing" that this will work.

350, 500, 1mil | 12:36 a.m. July 11, 2009

Good. I've been arguing for this for a long time. $250,000 just isn't the huge household income that it used to be. After taxes you are down to $150,000 or so. Raising a family of 4 (or more) and putting kids through college and paying for health care at $150,000 a year and you are not living some lavish excessive lifestyle.

With pro athletes, celebrities, and CEO's making in the 10s of millions a year, its about time that they stretch out the brackets a bit.

Even Bill Gates said that Yes, he should be taxed at a higher rate because it is because of our Country that he was able to make his billions and for that he is indebted. Remember, Warren Buffet even said that his secretary paid more than he did in taxes because of various loopholes. Its time to ease the burden on $250,000 households and stretch that out over the mega-rich so we can get a better healthcare system which will in turn create a healthier economy where a serious illness doesn't mean bankruptcy.

to "my concern" | 12:42 a.m. July 11, 2009

They didn't say they "guessed" that the stimulus would work, they said that the "guessed" at the unemployment rate. Don't get that confused. And there is not guessing about it that increased taxes will bring the gov more revenue. (at least in the short term)

Its about time they ease up on the $250,000 households and made new brackets at $500,000 and 1 mil. I think they should add a bracket at 10 mil too. Then lower taxes for us working class and create an afordable healthcare alternative that doesn't pick and choose the healthy people for its own profit. Track down all that money being held in off-shore accounts. Its greed and its not right.

WeThePeople | 2:00 a.m. July 11, 2009

To 125 Yrs.

GM a United States Company, not a canadian company.

GM failed in the US because of the ethics of the rich here in US.

Whining doesnt get answers. What are the answers?

Are you the politician getting paid by the lobbyists?

The Health Industry and Lobbyists have paid elected officials to stagnate the issue with arguments and false propoganda about freedom to the public so they can continue to dominate this monopoly.

If the private industry can fix everything alone, why do they ask for funding from the government?

Why hasnt the Private Health Industry fixed the problem?

What is your wonderful solution?

Business Owner | 2:13 a.m. July 11, 2009

I am a business owner. We are a "S" corp. Since all profits fall to me personally even though I don't make that much money I will have to pay for your healthcare? I already provide health care for 60 employees. Why should I pay for more?

If I have to pay for more healthcare then I will not have any retained earnings to keep running my business. Then I will just lay off as many employees as I have to in order to remain solvent. Does that sound like a good idea? Government health care for all but no job?

Obama and the Dems need to understand how business works. None of them have every ran one and don't know anything about economics. Go ahead, tax the so called "rich" so we can make the unemployment percentages increase until people start to think you are Jimmy Carter II. Then they will rethink the "soak it to the rich" mentality. It never has worked and it won't work this time. If we don't learn from history it tends to repeat itself! Remember?

Who are the rich? | 6:45 a.m. July 11, 2009

Our congresses are banding this about very freely but as of yet there has been no line drawn as to who they consider the rich. Surely it won't be from the millionaires and billionaires, there's not enough of them that will relinquish all their assets to pay for public health care. You can count on the rich to include even the poorest of working americans. All those with jobs will pay for this program and with an extravagant price tag costing all workers hundreds of dollars a month. The dollar amounts have never been revealed, yet, and who the rich are.

By Islamic definition, the rich are anyone working or have a job outside of the public welfare system. He is using the poor, including the illegals, to unite them and overthrow our form of government and rid us of democracy. The more I watch, read, and learn about Obama, he scares the hell out of me and what a dangerous man he is to america.

Political Cycle | 11:25 a.m. July 11, 2009

We are just in a natural / recurrent political cycle. We had much prosperity with conservative principals/capitalism. Then the promise of Socialism gains traction, and we take from the rich to give to the poor.

When people can't keep the fruits of thier labors, they stop being as productive and prosperity falls. Poverty becomes rampant and the people rebel and return to conservative/capitalism.

We are just in a natural cycle; sit back and enjoy the ride-but be smart enough to have some food stockpiled and stay out of debt so you don't become a slave.

RE: Political Cycle | 4:27 p.m. July 11, 2009

Actually it just take form the rich,

the poor NEVER recieve anything directly,

the are CERTAINLY noNOT made richer,

the governemnt jsut provides them some social program or other.

The end result is:

The poor stay poor,
and the rich get poorer.

Who does this really benefit?

politicians use it to gain votes, and the federal government gains more power over us.

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.