• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Would you favor an 8% sales tax to pay for national Health care?

Would you favor an 8% sales tax to finance national health care?

  • Yes

    Votes: 9 32.1%
  • No

    Votes: 19 67.9%

  • Total voters
    28

barfolemew

New member
Joined
Jan 18, 2006
Messages
20
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Who out there pays more than 8% of their income towards health care costs?
How do people feel about a sales tax to cover national health care?
 
Absolutely not. Both a national sales tax and universal health care would be economically devastating.
 
National health care sounds like a recipe for disaster.

I have a question for anyone in favour of it, do you really trust the government enough to be in charge of your health?
 
One only needs to look at the systems around the world that do have government health care. I would not want to trust my health to any bureaucracy, it's just too important to me.
 
Congress has no power to create legislation dealing with health care (among about a million other things).
 
Not no but hell no........I am for tax cuts not tax increases......
 
Last edited:
Actually I fully support some form of national health care coverage. The health inssurance agencies hold a complete monopoly on our health as is today. I can not see a physician of my choosing without the approval of my insurer. Even after I'm "approved" I end up footing 80% of the bill anyway.
National health care coverage in other countries that I've seen and been to are excellent. Went on vacation in GB, had "travelers" food poisoning and ended up in the hospital. How was I charged? 5L for the antibiotics, and nothing for seeing the physician. I'm not even a citizen of that country and yet they just said don't sweat it.
Something needs to be addressed with regards to how the US sees healthcare. If only 8% sales tax is all that's need, I could care less about that extra 1% if it means I get full coverage.
 
National health care is a disaster in Canada....I know people who have had to wait up to a year for critical surgery and have finally gave up and came to the states to get it done.......
 
Don't do it.

A few years ago the conservative government of John Howard introduced a 10% sales tax in Australia. Many people thought that the GST would herald in tax system changes or at least provide more funding for our (inefficient) government hospital system.

Well several years later, Australians are still waiting from tax reform, and we are still waiting to have a better hospital system. :2brickwal

Sales tax would be great, if that was the only form of government tax!
 
Australianlibertarian said:
Don't do it.

A few years ago the conservative government of John Howard introduced a 10% sales tax in Australia. Many people thought that the GST would herald in tax system changes or at least provide more funding for our (inefficient) government hospital system.

Well several years later, Australians are still waiting from tax reform, and we are still waiting to have a better hospital system. :2brickwal

Sales tax would be great, if that was the only form of government tax!

Thank you for that personal experience mate.;)
 
jfuh said:
Actually I fully support some form of national health care coverage. The health inssurance agencies hold a complete monopoly on our health as is today. I can not see a physician of my choosing without the approval of my insurer. Even after I'm "approved" I end up footing 80% of the bill anyway.
You have --absolute-- control over what doctor you see.
You --abdicate-- your control when you choose to have someone else pay your bills.

National health care coverage in other countries that I've seen and been to are excellent. Went on vacation in GB, had "travelers" food poisoning and ended up in the hospital. How was I charged? 5L for the antibiotics, and nothing for seeing the physician. I'm not even a citizen of that country and yet they just said don't sweat it.
Ok, lesse...
-Insurance company monopoly over heath care = bad
-Government monopoly over health care = good
Anyone else having a problem visualizing that?

Something needs to be addressed with regards to how the US sees healthcare. If only 8% sales tax is all that's need, I could care less about that extra 1% if it means I get full coverage.
Thats 8% on TOP of what you pay now.
Glad to see you;re so willing to have me pay for your health insurance -- maybe I can get the government to slap another 1% on so you can pay for my guns.
 
Navy Pride said:
National health care is a disaster in Canada....I know people who have had to wait up to a year for critical surgery and have finally gave up and came to the states to get it done.......

I bet those people paid alot of money for that surgery in the US. What about a poor Canadian who can't pay that kind of money - I'm sure they are grateful for national healthcare.

But hey in the good old USA the poor are always getting f**ked over.
 
GarzaUK said:
I bet those people paid alot of money for that surgery in the US. What about a poor Canadian who can't pay that kind of money - I'm sure they are grateful for national healthcare.

But hey in the good old USA the poor are always getting f**ked over.

Not at all, that is why we have government cheese, who doesn't love cheese?:roll:
 
Australianlibertarian said:
Don't do it.

A few years ago the conservative government of John Howard introduced a 10% sales tax in Australia. Many people thought that the GST would herald in tax system changes or at least provide more funding for our (inefficient) government hospital system.

Well several years later, Australians are still waiting from tax reform, and we are still waiting to have a better hospital system. :2brickwal

Sales tax would be great, if that was the only form of government tax!

Hey mark down the day and time.........We agree on something..........
 
Goobieman said:
You have --absolute-- control over what doctor you see.
You --abdicate-- your control when you choose to have someone else pay your bills.
Sure if I had several hundred dollars for normal checkups or that being several thousands of dollars to pay for surgery if required.
By the way, what eslse is health insurance for?

Goobieman said:
Ok, lesse...
-Insurance company monopoly over heath care = bad
-Government monopoly over health care = good
Anyone else having a problem visualizing that?[/QUTOE]
Who said anything over government "monopoly"? Very poor red herring attempt.

Goobieman said:
Thats 8% on TOP of what you pay now.
Glad to see you;re so willing to have me pay for your health insurance -- maybe I can get the government to slap another 1% on so you can pay for my guns.
Why should I pay for your personal property? Completely irrational.
Also, an 8% sales tax is hardly indicative of being on top of what I already pay now. No where in the initiaters thread does it mention that. So by that premise you can not add this additional premise.
 
Kandahar said:
Absolutely not. Both a national sales tax and universal health care would be economically devastating.

I couldn't agree more. Socialism IN GENERAL stagnates economies, cripples production, and kills innovation. I hate it.

The last numbers I saw had Germany's growth rate at 1.1% and dropping, for years. France was 2.2% and dropping, for years.

Our rate was 5.4% and climbing, for years. And 5.4% of an economy OUR size is way, way bigger than 5% of an economy Germany's or France's size!

In their world, around 40% of the workers work for the government. Employees are virtually impossible to fire. Everything costs a fortune. Health care is terrible, slow, and behind in technology. In France, the GOVERNMENT RUN internet hasn't been upgraded since 1996. When people recently started complaining about the poor state of their internet, the government's brilliant solution was to give them a choice between different colored backgrounds for their PCs. It's really laughable.

Remember when the British got to be in charge of one sector of West Germany's reconstruction and we were in charge of the other? They did things their way (socialism), and we did them ours. Within a year, we had to bail them out because their sector's incredibly stagnate economy had grounded to a halt and they couldn't keep it running.

Think about public schools, public transportation, public housing, government food, BMVs and all other things public...

Now think about private schools, private transportation, private housing, store-bought food, and all things private.

There is a reason private is always better, and it is not money. D.C. schools are the most over-funded schools per capita and they are at the bottom in performance. It is about competition. Government agencies have no reason to penny-pinch, to innovate, to cut costs. Actually, government agencies usually waste as much money and resources as possible to be guaranteed equal or greater funding the next year.

The private sector does it faster, cheaper, and better.

Socialism takes all the priority off productivity and innovation and places it all on making life suck a little bit less for those who do the very least for their own station in life.

Socialism is a disease. Let's keep it contained in Europe.
 
Last edited:
aquapub said:
I couldn't agree more. Socialism IN GENERAL stagnates economies, cripples production, and kills innovation. I hate it.

The last numbers I saw had Germany's growth rate at 1.1% and dropping, for years. France was 2.2% and dropping, for years.

Our rate was 5.4% and climbing, for years. And 5.4% of an economy OUR size is way, way bigger than 5% of an economy Germany's or France's size!

In their world, around 40% of the workers work for the government. Employees are virtually impossible to fire. Everything costs a fortune. Health care is terrible, slow, and behind in technology. In France, the GOVERNMENT RUN internet hasn't been upgraded since 1996. When people recently started complaining about the poor state of their internet, the government's brilliant solution was to give them a choice between different colored backgrounds for their PCs. It's really laughable.

Remember when the British got to be in charge of one sector of West Germany's reconstruction and we were in charge of the other? They did things their way (socialism), and we did them ours. Within a year, we had to bail them out because their sector's incredibly stagnate economy had grounded to a halt and they couldn't keep it running.

Think about public schools, public transportation, public housing, government food, BMVs and all other things public...

Now think about private schools, private transportation, private housing, store-bought food, and all things private.

There is a reason private is always better, and it is not money. D.C. schools are the most over-funded schools per capita and they are at the bottom in performance. It is about competition. Government agencies have no reason to penny-pinch, to innovate, to cut costs. Actually, government agencies usually waste as much money and resources as possible to be guaranteed equal or greater funding the next year.

The private sector does it faster, cheaper, and better.

Socialism takes all the priority off productivity and innovation and places it all on making life suck a little bit less for those who do the very least for their own station in life.

Socialism is a disease. Let's keep it contained in Europe.
complete crap.
 
jfuh said:
complete crap.

If you want to live under socialism or communism move to Venezuela or Cuba..........
 
Despite being personally in favor of a national healthcare system, I'm opposed to sales tax, especially a high sales tax that would apply on top of the various States' sales taxes.

The sales tax is a regressive tax, disportionately placing more of the tax burden upon the poor because the poor spend more of their money on necessary consumer goods.

The income tax and capital gains taxes work, and would work better if we'd quit neutering them every 10-12 years.
 
jfuh said:
Sure if I had several hundred dollars for normal checkups or that being several thousands of dollars to pay for surgery if required.
By the way, what eslse is health insurance for?
Like I said -- don't complain about your lack of choices when you decide to let someone else pay for your bills. Beggars can't be choosers; as soon as you choose to have someone else pay your bills, you give them the right to decide a great many things.

Goobieman said:
Ok, lesse...
-Insurance company monopoly over heath care = bad
-Government monopoly over health care = good
Anyone else having a problem visualizing that?
Who said anything over government "monopoly"? Very poor red herring attempt.
Well, if the government pays for everyone;s health care, then the government gets to make all the decisions, just like the insurance companies. All you;re doing is replacing several insurance companies with one (the government). If the insurance companies presently have a monopoly, then so will the gvmnt.

Why should I pay for your personal property? Completely irrational.
Why shoud -I- pay for -your- personal health care? Completely irrational.

Also, an 8% sales tax is hardly indicative of being on top of what I already pay now. No where in the initiaters thread does it mention that. So by that premise you can not add this additional premise.
Right now, there is a 0% federal sales tax. An 8% federal sales tax for health care would necessarily be on top of whatever sales taxes there already are.
 
Last edited:
Navy Pride said:
National health care is a disaster in Canada....I know people who have had to wait up to a year for critical surgery and have finally gave up and came to the states to get it done.......

Pride, why do you continually blow facts from out of your ass when you've been called on it time-after-time? You haven't a clue about anything Canadian, including our healthcare system. :roll:

If you care to get your head out of the sand (wishful thinking on my part), then you will take the time to read the provided link.

Sure, we don't have the best healthcare system in the world (nor does the US). Sure, some cases fall through the cracks. Sure, we don't have the best and brightest doctors.

What we do have, though, is healthcare for EVERYONE. I don't need to worry about being able to afford a doctor's visit and for paying $5.00 for a cotton swab. I don't need to spend anytime filling out paperwork in hopes my insurance will cover it. I just simply show my healthcard and that's it.

BTW, Tommy Douglas, the father of universal healthcare in Canada, was recently voted the greatest Canadian of all time. That should give you an indication of how Canadians feel about our system.


Here's the link that you won't read:
http://cthealth.server101.com/healthcare_bureaucracy_u_s__vs__canada.htm
 
galenrox said:
Man, EXACTLY! I am astounded how much people who hate this current government trust the government to take care of. I wouldn't trust this government to tell me if it's 12 AM or PM decisively, why the hell would anyone trust them with control of our health?

You make a good point.
 
galenrox said:
Man, EXACTLY! I am astounded how much people who hate this current government trust the government to take care of. I wouldn't trust this government to tell me if it's 12 AM or PM decisively, why the hell would anyone trust them with control of our health?

here, here :applaud
 
jfuh said:
Actually I fully support some form of national health care coverage. The health inssurance agencies hold a complete monopoly on our health as is today. I can not see a physician of my choosing without the approval of my insurer. Even after I'm "approved" I end up footing 80% of the bill anyway.
National health care coverage in other countries that I've seen and been to are excellent. Went on vacation in GB, had "travelers" food poisoning and ended up in the hospital. How was I charged? 5L for the antibiotics, and nothing for seeing the physician. I'm not even a citizen of that country and yet they just said don't sweat it.
Something needs to be addressed with regards to how the US sees healthcare. If only 8% sales tax is all that's need, I could care less about that extra 1% if it means I get full coverage.

mono = Singular
agencies = PLURAL

how do multiple Insurance agencies have a MONOpoly?:roll:
 
Back
Top Bottom