4 ms·

We could spend a lot less money on un-needed things. For one, why are we the police of the world? What if we shut down ALL military bases abroad, docked most of

We could spend a lot less money on un-needed things. For one, why are we the police of the world? What if we shut down ALL military bases abroad, docked most of our carriers except in times of war, put half the military on reserves. What if we capped politician benefits across America at what the average American's is? One big thing is-- if we ended Healthcare's ability to 'lobby' washington... made it illegal to spend healthcare money in lobbying endeavors, they could divert that to r/d and other worthwhile endeavors... All insurance companies are --are companies that take our money and pay medical companies...couldn't the medical companies become the insurer? What if instead of single-payer hospitals would take 'subscribers' locally, they'd pay 6% of their income. Make it a requirement that every American needs to signup with a hospital, and that all hospitals need to take anyone regardless of income or lack thereof. Hospitals would then have a guaranteed monthly residual income they can track/chart and use to figure out their budget. We'd no longer be wasting ANY money on insurance CEO's, etc... When traveling your host hospital pays the guest hospital, or other providers. The hospitals could work with each other to bring prices/costs down. There are solutions and there's ways to pay for things, like maybe dropping progressive income taxes for consumption/vat instead... a vat would be paid by anyone in the country regardless of legal status, citizen or immigrant. So everyone would contribute.

rayiner 8y ago
> What if instead of single-payer hospitals would take 'subscribers' locally, they'd pay 6% of their income. Make it a requirement that every American needs to signup with a hospital, and that all hospitals need to take anyone regardless of income or lack thereof. Unrealistic ideas are easy to throw around. In Germany, health insurance premiums are a mandatory 15.5% of income. Are we ready to impose a new 15.5% tax on everyone? > We'd no longer be wasting ANY money on insurance CEO's, etc... > What if we capped politician benefits across America at what the average American's is? Feel-good moves that would save little real money, because at the end of the day what costs money are the salaries for all the middle class people involved in the health care system (doctors, nurses, administrators). > progressive income taxes for consumption/vat instead... a vat would be paid by anyone in the country regardless of legal status, citizen or immigrant. Except the people who want universal healthcare want the tax system to be even more progressive.
- MagnumOpus 8y ago
  > Are we ready to impose a new 15.5% tax on everyone? If at the same time pre-tax salaries increase by 15-30 percent when the employer no longer has to pay $16k for insurance, most employees would probably prefer it. (Apart from people earning 6 digits -- and in Germany those people can opt for private gold-plated insurance instead, too.
  - tptacek 8y ago
    How does this math work? Those numbers are for salaried employees at large companies, but most Americans work for smaller companies. The new tax has to make the system work for everyone.
- gremlinsinc 8y ago
  I want universal healthcare, but I want to use technology/common sense and end bloated programs. Military for instance could be cut in half or more (close the bases, keep the carriers, but dock unless during war). Focus on domestic defense, and let the rest of the world figure out their own shit. End income tax, move to consumption tax/vat. (A modified version that would be sort of a negative tax). Basically, you'd have basic income making everyone who has a physical address (must spend some of the $$ on residence) would receive a check for whatever the poverty level is divided by 12. Then everyone is a tax payer and pays consumption tax, we'd also have a land value tax, which would be more even on what land is 'worth' regardless of if you're using it for it's total 'worth'.. E.G. -- 2 people own same amount of land, same location, one builds a skyscraper, one doesn't, they both pay what the land/property would be worth if the area was 'fully developed', encouraging people to not just 'hold' land but 'use' it, or pay as if they did, so they might as well develop or sell it to someone who will. We'd have to figure out ways of getting more off the top of the pile, as consumption does take a bit from the lower classes and funnels it up, but they're getting it back in terms of GBI + Healthcare. Consumption tax could be tied to a citizen ID, ID = 10%, no ID = 15% tax rate. Could work in a +5% for college grads who used free education grants, until they're > 30 to pay for free college (State/Community schools). This way they pay back when they shop, but it's not permanent and it hurts a lot less than normal loans/etc...and doesn't affect credit. Or could just have a 'twenty's' tax of +5%, whether you go to college or not you pay an extra 5% from 20-30 to on goods, to pay for those who 'took' the advantage to go to school. I like to believe that there's 'out of the box' ways to do things... I'm a social democrat with some techno-libertarian ideas, I feel the government needs to work and support all people, but it needs to do so in a way that can eliminate the most 'bureacracy' as possible, and drive down costs. I'd be happy if govt could be ran completely by AI and have maybe 10 people over-seeing / auditing the machines. I'd like to see bills submitted like github issues - small, easily enacted/reversed 'pull requests' that only change small bits of law/codes. Instead of 10-100+ page omnibuses, everything would need to be < 5 pages (or something rudimentarily agreed upon - I'm not a lawyer/politician), and it must only effect a specific item or items that relate to each other. No combining other things for political 'fancy' or posturing.

rayiner 8y ago

> What if instead of single-payer hospitals would take 'subscribers' locally, they'd pay 6% of their income. Make it a requirement that every American needs to signup with a hospital, and that all hospitals need to take anyone regardless of income or lack thereof. Unrealistic ideas are easy to throw around. In Germany, health insurance premiums are a mandatory 15.5% of income. Are we ready to impose a new 15.5% tax on everyone? > We'd no longer be wasting ANY money on insurance CEO's, etc... > What if we capped politician benefits across America at what the average American's is? Feel-good moves that would save little real money, because at the end of the day what costs money are the salaries for all the middle class people involved in the health care system (doctors, nurses, administrators). > progressive income taxes for consumption/vat instead... a vat would be paid by anyone in the country regardless of legal status, citizen or immigrant. Except the people who want universal healthcare want the tax system to be even more progressive.

MagnumOpus 8y ago
> Are we ready to impose a new 15.5% tax on everyone? If at the same time pre-tax salaries increase by 15-30 percent when the employer no longer has to pay $16k for insurance, most employees would probably prefer it. (Apart from people earning 6 digits -- and in Germany those people can opt for private gold-plated insurance instead, too.
- tptacek 8y ago
  How does this math work? Those numbers are for salaried employees at large companies, but most Americans work for smaller companies. The new tax has to make the system work for everyone.
gremlinsinc 8y ago
I want universal healthcare, but I want to use technology/common sense and end bloated programs. Military for instance could be cut in half or more (close the bases, keep the carriers, but dock unless during war). Focus on domestic defense, and let the rest of the world figure out their own shit. End income tax, move to consumption tax/vat. (A modified version that would be sort of a negative tax). Basically, you'd have basic income making everyone who has a physical address (must spend some of the $$ on residence) would receive a check for whatever the poverty level is divided by 12. Then everyone is a tax payer and pays consumption tax, we'd also have a land value tax, which would be more even on what land is 'worth' regardless of if you're using it for it's total 'worth'.. E.G. -- 2 people own same amount of land, same location, one builds a skyscraper, one doesn't, they both pay what the land/property would be worth if the area was 'fully developed', encouraging people to not just 'hold' land but 'use' it, or pay as if they did, so they might as well develop or sell it to someone who will. We'd have to figure out ways of getting more off the top of the pile, as consumption does take a bit from the lower classes and funnels it up, but they're getting it back in terms of GBI + Healthcare. Consumption tax could be tied to a citizen ID, ID = 10%, no ID = 15% tax rate. Could work in a +5% for college grads who used free education grants, until they're > 30 to pay for free college (State/Community schools). This way they pay back when they shop, but it's not permanent and it hurts a lot less than normal loans/etc...and doesn't affect credit. Or could just have a 'twenty's' tax of +5%, whether you go to college or not you pay an extra 5% from 20-30 to on goods, to pay for those who 'took' the advantage to go to school. I like to believe that there's 'out of the box' ways to do things... I'm a social democrat with some techno-libertarian ideas, I feel the government needs to work and support all people, but it needs to do so in a way that can eliminate the most 'bureacracy' as possible, and drive down costs. I'd be happy if govt could be ran completely by AI and have maybe 10 people over-seeing / auditing the machines. I'd like to see bills submitted like github issues - small, easily enacted/reversed 'pull requests' that only change small bits of law/codes. Instead of 10-100+ page omnibuses, everything would need to be < 5 pages (or something rudimentarily agreed upon - I'm not a lawyer/politician), and it must only effect a specific item or items that relate to each other. No combining other things for political 'fancy' or posturing.