Finland experiment: Basic income for the unemployed.

[CarlV]

At least in Finland abortions are legal and free and none of the garbage from extremists trying to control women.


Carl

[Tom Joad]

Originally Posted by CarlV

At least in Finland abortions are legal and free and none of the garbage from extremists trying to control women.


Carl

Finland does shit right.

The US should emulate them.

[d-ray657]

Originally Posted by Tom Joad

Finland does shit right.

The US should emulate them.

And you believe that Trump will even come close to that?

[Tom Joad]

Originally Posted by d-ray657

And you believe that Trump will even come close to that?

I've heard that good chess players are always thinking five moves ahead.

That's what I am doing.

[d-ray657]

Originally Posted by Tom Joad

I've heard that good chess players are always thinking five moves ahead.

That's what I am doing.

That's a dodge. You know that you are supporting a politician that will try to move us as far away from the Finland model as he possibly can.

[bobabode]

Cue up the 'We gotta break some eggs to get "Our Revolushun" off the blocks and up a running' rationale from Joad.

[CarlV]

Originally Posted by Tom Joad

Finland does shit right.

The US should emulate them.

Like this?

What will be the impact on the federal budget?

One might think that repealing a law like the Affordable Care Act would save the federal government money. Actually, in many scenarios, it won’t. That’s because the law doesn’t just spend money -- it also raised revenue through taxes, and it implemented policies designed to keep costs in check. So getting rid of the law also gets rid of the revenue it produced.

While it acknowledged some uncertainty, the CBO estimated that over a 10-year period, repealing the law would increase federal budget deficits by $353 billion. A more recent estimate by the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget mirrored what the CBO found -- $350 billion over 10 years.

According to the group’s calculations, the revenue losses would be driven by rolling back tax increases on the wealthy. About half of the $800 billion in revenue losses would come from payroll and investments surtaxes on wages and income above $200,000 -- a tax windfall that very few Americans could take advantage of after a repeal. Another quarter of the revenue losses would come from repealing fees on insurers, medical-device companies and drugmakers.
Link

Carl

[Tom Joad]

According to the group’s calculations, the revenue losses would be driven by rolling back tax increases on the wealthy. About half of the $800 billion in revenue losses would come from payroll and investments surtaxes on wages and income above $200,000 -- a tax windfall that very few Americans could take advantage of after a repeal. Another quarter of the revenue losses would come from repealing fees on insurers, medical-device companies and drugmakers.

OK, so some tax increases on wealthy people will be rolled back. We should be taxing those bastards back to the stone age, so that's a negative. But fees on insurers, medical device companies, and drug companies? C'mon. Those "fees" are being passed on to the consumer in the form of higher prices. Obamacare is a big windfall cash cow for all the gougers in the Medical Industrial Complex. They are all making too damned much money. And they are greedy and want more. That's the problem and Obamacare does nothing to change that.

All Trump has to do is one thing that he proposed about healthcare and he will have accomplished more for Healthcare than Obummer did in his entire time in office. And that is to allow Medicare to negotiate the price of drugs.

[bobabode]

What a load of horseshit, Joad. Pre-existing conditions were outlawed and lifetime caps were eliminated.

[Tom Joad]

Originally Posted by bobabode

What a load of horseshit, Joad. Pre-existing conditions were outlawed and lifetime caps were eliminated.

Those are good things.

And from what I hear Trump wants to keep them.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapoth.../#38a1c8db4e1c