Quote:
Originally Posted by Arles
So, based on the bolded part, do you really think if Bernie enacted universal health care tomorrow and employers no longer paid for it - that we would all get a raise in our wages?  That's pretty funny. No, workers just would lose the employer subsidized portion and then have to pay higher taxes for worse coverage.
I don't see the need to throw away a system that works for a vast majority of workers in this country. I'm fine setting up a plan to cover those people who make less than a certain amount (say 60K) and have a subsidized scale moving up to help people making under 100K cover their premiums. But leave employer subsidized heath care the way it is. The focus should be on finding better ways to subsidize coverage for those not currently covered - not throw the baby out with the bath water and setup a system that gives a majority of this country worse coverage at a higher price to them.
It's his raising of marginal rates and upping the payroll tax on people who make between 75 and 120K. These people already pay 40% wage tax, Sanders would up that to almost 50%. |
I'm surprised that Vox ran a chart like that. Marginal tax rates don't mean much, what matters is effective tax rates, what people actually pay. Nobody, except perhaps the people at the bottom, is paying those percentages currently, nor would they pay the full Sanders percentages.