« Liberal Blogs »

11/19/2004

What Could Have Been

While President Bush is floating the idea of more tax breaks for the rich and corporate America while paying for those cuts by making employer contributions to employee health insurance no longer tax deductible, John Kerry is set to introduce a bill in the new Senate to provide health care for every single child in America and also to help lower income adults get coverage. We all need to "co-sponsor" this bill with Senator Kerry so click here to do so. With this one bill Kerry will accomplish more for the less fortunate and the children of America than Bush has in four years.

This only serves to remind us what could have been in this election. By the way, which of these two proposals do you presume Jesus would be in favor of?

4 Comments:

At 11/22/2004 09:29:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm not rich nor do I belong to corperate America and yet Bush's tax break helped me (although I wish more). Universal HC is a great concept but how will it be paid for? We first need to get the deficit under control then focus on responsible ways to provide HC to those who need it. HC is a priviledge not a constitution right. Sponsoring a bill like this may give you a "warm and fuzzy" feeling but we need to address cost and implementation issues.

 
At 11/22/2004 11:29:00 AM, Blogger Trent Dlugosh said...

Tax cuts are not a constitutional right either. Is government only to provide for constitutional rights?If in fact your employer no longer gets a tax break for paying part of your health insurance costs and thus stops paying the portion of your premiums that they currently pay, leaving the entire burden to you, then how much did your tax cut actually get you? It's also funny how Republicans never ask the question "how are we going to pay for it?" when it comes to tax cuts with no spending reduction while fightig a war or say privitization of Social Security while still paying out to current and soon to be retirees. I'll answer the Republicans do, the cost of doing nothing is greater than the cost of providing health care to every child, so we will find the money.

 
At 11/22/2004 01:22:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Actually, taxation (not tax cuts specfically are part of the constitution i.e., taxation without representation). Nevertheless, using your example of employer's no longer paying a portion of my benefits..that would definitely hurt everyone's wallet. But I have not seem any specifics on this proposal..where is it? As for Repubs never asking the "where" question when it come to tax cuts, that is not true, at least not in my case. The fact is, when folks have more money in their pockets (ala tax cuts) they tend to spend more thereby increasing tax cofers (it's a wonderful model). As for privitization of SS, let's be straight with everyone: it's allowing younger folks to set-aside 2% of the normal 7% of SS tax...it is not wholesale privitization, as many dems would like us to believe. There is however a question I want answered before I OK this...where is/how is SS going to make up the difference (if 2% is taken out)...I want to see the facts on this before I say.."GOOD IDEA".
You are right that the cost of doing nothing is worse than not at all....but we both should stick to facts.

-PunditCafe (righty friend)

 
At 11/22/2004 09:29:00 PM, Blogger Trent Dlugosh said...

Here is the link to the story that outlines the plan I was talking about above. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A58554-2004Nov17.html?sub=AR

 

Post a Comment

<< Home

Google