PursuitOfHappinessParty

Welcome to OMOF's world of fuzzy math

__________________
" Tie two birds together and though they have four wings they cannot fly " Blind Master in 'Circle Of Iron'

Malkavian

That would work for some thing easy like cigarettes, but for more complicated cases, it'd be a headache to manage... This is my problem with sin taxes - too much micro management. It may work with cigarettes, but are we going to tax all the different cheesecakes out there? This one has X calories, and this one has one Y... but i eat those cakes and work out so i'm not really a health risk.. This is the type of pain OMOF was complaining about, and something i want to avoid... I do not wish to punish or even reward a particular lifestyle. I just want make people aware of their costs.

In my vision, it's very simple - you go to the doctor, and doc tells you your lungs are half gone. If you get them back, you get $$$ (or in your vision, if you don't, you get taxed, which is probably just as well)... But i don't micromanage how it's done - it is between you and your doctor. If you want to quit smoking, that's up to you. But if you want to smoke 20 packs a day and then take some crazy oxygen bath and clear your lungs this way, you can do that too... It's not the smoking that's the problem, it's the lung cancer it causes... If you can find a way to avoid lung cancer while smoking heavily, more power to you, the system doesn't care. This approach eliminates the problem of over management and yet at the same time allows people to live their lives as they see fit. You wanna smoke? Sure, but then do something about your lungs... You wanna eat cheesecakes? Sure, but then hit the gym for a while... People will be making those decisions. All the administrators will have to do is watch the vitals.

__________________
Woof!

PursuitOfHappinessParty

With UHC, I'd prefer the costs to be spread amongst the people. To give incentives and spread the costs to include businesses is convulted. It retains, IMO, an unneccessary loop in the whole affair that not only leads to more possibilities of graft, but a whole new industry of paperwork. The employees pay everywhere, and corporations and companies that wish to use incentives to retain or acquire employees will have to do so thru wages. These wage increases in defacto ARE the company paying for their employee's UHC. Smaller companies will have to compete as the market share allows, like the good ole days.

__________________
" Tie two birds together and though they have four wings they cannot fly " Blind Master in 'Circle Of Iron'

DanS.

The reason it matters...is because the way the costs are imparted onto the individual...it also still offers the choice of participating or not....it also doesn't levy a huge burden on the government....

PursuitOfHappinessParty

I was originally using my stance as a 'what if' scenario. Compromise toward unhealthy lifestyles, combined with Party politics, might make such a scenario necessary for passage.

In reality, the only proper way is to flat fee everything, and treat all people equally under UHC. As the posts progressed, it DID appear I was advocating these sin taxes. I do support them in certain areas, such as cigarettes and sports equipment - both undeniably hazardous and voluntary. But in food, unless you target fast-food, you're talking a rediculous amount of big-brotherism. Targeting fast-food is undesirable to me due to my aversion to allowing the government to 'target' things.

__________________
" Tie two birds together and though they have four wings they cannot fly " Blind Master in 'Circle Of Iron'

PursuitOfHappinessParty

How does it matter in relation to the way the costs are imparted onto the individual?

The choice of participating isn't really a choice at all. Either smaller business receive governmental 'welfare' to even the playing field or they're left out, unable to compete with corporations. Small business welfare is as undesirable to me as corporation bail-outs.

The paperwork generated, records keeping, regulators, inspectors, and management sounds kinda burdenish and re-adding additional industry and it's costs. That this industry will at one point become privatized is a given. Then you add a profit loop, too.

__________________
" Tie two birds together and though they have four wings they cannot fly " Blind Master in 'Circle Of Iron'

DanS.

In terms of disposable income....

and also...here's the thing...with insurance cpmpanies some of the costs of healthcare are recouped through investing the money. With employers doing it some of the costs are absorbed through profits, even if the costs are reflected in the price of the products...it still gives the individual the option to spend or not in many cases....in addition...some of those costs ar transferred overseas when people in foreign markets pay for the products

I don't think I'd call it corporate/small business welfare unless it is a net positive gain for the employer....would you...and...if I had to choose between being taxed at 25% of the rate and it going to corporate welfare to provide the same service as me being taxed 100% for that same service....I choose the former.....

Whens the last time that you saw a government bureaucracy run more efficiently than a business in terms of cutting waste to be more efficient?


Also...is it fair to tax a single individual at the same rate for healthcare as a family of five? If I'm 26 years old and single...why should I pay the same as a 50 year old with a wife and 3 kids?

DanS.

So....does demand create its own supply or does supply create its own demand?

Or neither? And if in this case....then what?

OldManOnFire

Demand can create a supply; if low-cost housing is in demand...someone will surely build it.

Supply does not create demand; if you have thousands of empty low-cost housing units, there will be little demand.

Supply and demand simply defines the cost of a product or service. If you have too much product, meaning little demand, the prices will be quite low. If you have no inventory, and there is demand, the prices can be higher. If you wish to buy the latest sports car with a 'list price' of $75K but there is a long waiting list ahead of you, these cars will probably be selling for $100K. High demand/low supply equals higher prices.

__________________
Did you know both our problems and the solutions can be found simply by looking in our mirrors...and...Never confuse the extraordinary stuff I think and write with that of a well-balanced person...

DanS.

Not a fan of Says Law I take it?

I should have noted that this was a macro question as it pertains to money...

What's the goal? Full employment or zero inflation?