Consolidation in health insurance industry shows need for steeply progressive corporate income tax

[dcraelin]

Consolidation in health insurance industry shows need for steeply progressive corporate income tax.

WSJ today has article showing how 5 biggest insurance companies in health insurance may soon be down to 3 with mergers, if regulators allow it, and they shouldnt.

But this is another area where the government has been bought off and my bet is the mergers get approved.

What the hell is the purpose in maintaining the semblance of private health care....if the insurers are a monopoly?

 

[bendog]

Nonsense. This is a democratic dream. Consolidate the number of private firms, regulate how much profit they can keep from each dollar they take in, and specify what products they must offer. It's prrrrrrrrrfect

 

[Sonny Clark]

Consolidation in health insurance industry shows need for steeply progressive corporate income tax.

WSJ today has article showing how 5 biggest insurance companies in health insurance may soon be down to 3 with mergers, if regulators allow it, and they shouldnt.

But this is another area where the government has been bought off and my bet is the mergers get approved.

What the hell is the purpose in maintaining the semblance of private health care....if the insurers are a monopoly?

It has nothing to do with taxes, and everything to with CORRUPTION. We have a CORRUPT GOVERNMENT seated in Washington, and have had for a very long time.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

For regular income tax purposes, a system of graduated marginal tax rates is applied to all taxable income, including capital gains. Through 2011, the marginal tax rates on a corporation's taxable income are as follows:
Taxable Income ($) Tax Rate[27]
0 to 50,000 15%
50,000 to 75,000 $7,500 + 25% Of the amount over 50,000
75,000 to 100,000 $13,750 + 34% Of the amount over 75,000
100,000 to 335,000 $22,250 + 39% Of the amount over 100,000
335,000 to 10,000,000 $113,900 + 34% Of the amount over 335,000
10,000,000 to 15,000,000 $3,400,000 + 35% Of the amount over 10,000,000
15,000,000 to 18,333,333 $5,150,000 + 38% Of the amount over 15,000,000
18,333,333 and up 35%
This rate structure produces a flat 34% tax rate on incomes from $335,000 to $10,000,000, gradually increasing to a flat rate of 35% on incomes above $18,333,333.

Looks pretty progressive already.

 

[dcraelin]

For regular income tax purposes, a system of graduated marginal tax rates is applied to all taxable income, including capital gains. Through 2011, the marginal tax rates on a corporation's taxable income are as follows:
Taxable Income ($) Tax Rate[27]
0 to 50,000 15%
50,000 to 75,000 $7,500 + 25% Of the amount over 50,000
75,000 to 100,000 $13,750 + 34% Of the amount over 75,000
100,000 to 335,000 $22,250 + 39% Of the amount over 100,000
335,000 to 10,000,000 $113,900 + 34% Of the amount over 335,000
10,000,000 to 15,000,000 $3,400,000 + 35% Of the amount over 10,000,000
15,000,000 to 18,333,333 $5,150,000 + 38% Of the amount over 15,000,000
18,333,333 and up 35%
This rate structure produces a flat 34% tax rate on incomes from $335,000 to $10,000,000, gradually increasing to a flat rate of 35% on incomes above $18,333,333.

Looks pretty progressive already.

apparently not progressive enough, at least as applied to health insurance companies, cause they still think it benefits them to get larger.

Interesting tho....if it does apply ,it means, depending on howmuch they make, that they can gouge more than the tax penalty if they get bigger.

further I question these numbers as they seem to go to 38% then back down then up again.

 

[dcraelin]

Nonsense. This is a democratic dream. Consolidate the number of private firms, regulate how much profit they can keep from each dollar they take in, and specify what products they must offer. It's prrrrrrrrrfect

it isnt this democrats dream.

 

[dcraelin]

Consolidation in health insurance industry shows need for steeply progressive corporate income tax.

WSJ today has article showing how 5 biggest insurance companies in health insurance may soon be down to 3 with mergers, if regulators allow it, and they shouldnt.

But this is another area where the government has been bought off and my bet is the mergers get approved.

What the hell is the purpose in maintaining the semblance of private health care....if the insurers are a monopoly?

It has nothing to do with taxes, and everything to with CORRUPTION. We have a CORRUPT GOVERNMENT seated in Washington, and have had for a very long time.

I think it has more to do with the corruption of the health care industry.........

news today had doctors saying something should be done about the high cost of drugs, they're right on that.........but meanwhile I guess everyone is just going to let excessively high doctors salaries slide.

 

[sealybobo]

Nonsense. This is a democratic dream. Consolidate the number of private firms, regulate how much profit they can keep from each dollar they take in, and specify what products they must offer. It's prrrrrrrrrfect

We probably should regulate them just like we use to tell the airlines how much they can charge.

Public schools police. We use to have public prisons and we outsourced that. We've even given into shitty charter schools.

Oil companies should be like dte or Edison. Same with healthcare. Regulate them all. That's what good governments would do. What would a libertarian do? Nothing.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

For regular income tax purposes, a system of graduated marginal tax rates is applied to all taxable income, including capital gains. Through 2011, the marginal tax rates on a corporation's taxable income are as follows:
Taxable Income ($) Tax Rate[27]
0 to 50,000 15%
50,000 to 75,000 $7,500 + 25% Of the amount over 50,000
75,000 to 100,000 $13,750 + 34% Of the amount over 75,000
100,000 to 335,000 $22,250 + 39% Of the amount over 100,000
335,000 to 10,000,000 $113,900 + 34% Of the amount over 335,000
10,000,000 to 15,000,000 $3,400,000 + 35% Of the amount over 10,000,000
15,000,000 to 18,333,333 $5,150,000 + 38% Of the amount over 15,000,000
18,333,333 and up 35%
This rate structure produces a flat 34% tax rate on incomes from $335,000 to $10,000,000, gradually increasing to a flat rate of 35% on incomes above $18,333,333.

Looks pretty progressive already.

apparently not progressive enough, at least as applied to health insurance companies, cause they still think it benefits them to get larger.

Interesting tho....if it does apply ,it means, depending on howmuch they make, that they can gouge more than the tax penalty if they get bigger.

further I question these numbers as they seem to go to 38% then back down then up again.

apparently not progressive enough

Going from 15% at $50,000 to 39% at $100,001 is pretty damn progressive.

cause they still think it benefits them to get larger.

That's due to idiotic government regulations, not low tax rates.

further I question these numbers

Feel free to find the correct numbers.

 

[dcraelin]

For regular income tax purposes, a system of graduated marginal tax rates is applied to all taxable income, including capital gains. Through 2011, the marginal tax rates on a corporation's taxable income are as follows:
Taxable Income ($) Tax Rate[27]
0 to 50,000 15%
50,000 to 75,000 $7,500 + 25% Of the amount over 50,000
75,000 to 100,000 $13,750 + 34% Of the amount over 75,000
100,000 to 335,000 $22,250 + 39% Of the amount over 100,000
335,000 to 10,000,000 $113,900 + 34% Of the amount over 335,000
10,000,000 to 15,000,000 $3,400,000 + 35% Of the amount over 10,000,000
15,000,000 to 18,333,333 $5,150,000 + 38% Of the amount over 15,000,000
18,333,333 and up 35%
This rate structure produces a flat 34% tax rate on incomes from $335,000 to $10,000,000, gradually increasing to a flat rate of 35% on incomes above $18,333,333.

Looks pretty progressive already.

apparently not progressive enough, at least as applied to health insurance companies, cause they still think it benefits them to get larger.

Interesting tho....if it does apply ,it means, depending on howmuch they make, that they can gouge more than the tax penalty if they get bigger.

further I question these numbers as they seem to go to 38% then back down then up again.

apparently not progressive enough

Going from 15% at $50,000 to 39% at $100,001 is pretty damn progressive.

cause they still think it benefits them to get larger.

That's due to idiotic government regulations, not low tax rates.

further I question these numbers

Feel free to find the correct numbers.

it may seem progressive, but maybe there are loopholes, especially for the health industry.

yes yes sure, the idiotic government regulations that force us to buy from these crooks.........somehow I dont think theyre hurting from regulations.

you cant give me an explanation for why it goes up, comes down 3 times?
to 39 back to 34 to 38 back to 35 to 34 then finally back up to 35

those numbers dont make sense unless the government is TRYING TO MAKE THEM BIGGER

the numbers should go to 39 AS THEY GET BIGGER, NOT somewhere in the middle.

 

[The Rabbi]

Of course it shows no such thing.
Democrats cheered ACA and swore it would stick it to the insurance companies. Of course that was a lie, repeated by the useful idiots on this board.
What it shows is government regulation increases competition, reduces choice, and increases costs. All things anyone could have predicted.

 

[dcraelin]

Of course it shows no such thing.
Democrats cheered ACA and swore it would stick it to the insurance companies. Of course that was a lie, repeated by the useful idiots on this board.
What it shows is government regulation increases competition, reduces choice, and increases costs. All things anyone could have predicted.

of course it DOES show such a thing.

Not all democrats cheered...I didnt and I believe it was pointed out by some that the insurance industry had to much influence over writing the bill.

you say government regulation "increases competition".....well it could....which is why the tax rate should be progressive so monopolistic power is reduced.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Of course it shows no such thing.
Democrats cheered ACA and swore it would stick it to the insurance companies. Of course that was a lie, repeated by the useful idiots on this board.
What it shows is government regulation increases competition, reduces choice, and increases costs. All things anyone could have predicted.

of course it DOES show such a thing.

Not all democrats cheered...I didnt and I believe it was pointed out by some that the insurance industry had to much influence over writing the bill.

you say government regulation "increases competition".....well it could....which is why the tax rate should be progressive so monopolistic power is reduced.

Government regulation benefits the biggest corporations.
If you really wanted more competition you'd suppoort reduced taxes and reduced regulation.

 

[dcraelin]

Of course it shows no such thing.
Democrats cheered ACA and swore it would stick it to the insurance companies. Of course that was a lie, repeated by the useful idiots on this board.
What it shows is government regulation increases competition, reduces choice, and increases costs. All things anyone could have predicted.

of course it DOES show such a thing.

Not all democrats cheered...I didnt and I believe it was pointed out by some that the insurance industry had to much influence over writing the bill.

you say government regulation "increases competition".....well it could....which is why the tax rate should be progressive so monopolistic power is reduced.

Government regulation benefits the biggest corporations.
If you really wanted more competition you'd support reduced taxes and reduced regulation.

reduced regulation doesnt necessarily lead to more competition, neither does reduced taxes. But a progressive corporate tax should create disincentive to monopolistic growth.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Of course it shows no such thing.
Democrats cheered ACA and swore it would stick it to the insurance companies. Of course that was a lie, repeated by the useful idiots on this board.
What it shows is government regulation increases competition, reduces choice, and increases costs. All things anyone could have predicted.

of course it DOES show such a thing.

Not all democrats cheered...I didnt and I believe it was pointed out by some that the insurance industry had to much influence over writing the bill.

you say government regulation "increases competition".....well it could....which is why the tax rate should be progressive so monopolistic power is reduced.

Government regulation benefits the biggest corporations.
If you really wanted more competition you'd support reduced taxes and reduced regulation.

reduced regulation doesnt necessarily lead to more competition, neither does reduced taxes. But a progressive corporate tax should create disincentive to monopolistic growth.

reduced regulation doesnt necessarily lead to more competition,

Yeah, but chances are it would.

neither does reduced taxes.

I think it would benefit the smaller, up and comers.
What do you think it would do?

But a progressive corporate tax should create disincentive to monopolistic growth

Why?

 

[OKTexas]

Consolidation in health insurance industry shows need for steeply progressive corporate income tax.

WSJ today has article showing how 5 biggest insurance companies in health insurance may soon be down to 3 with mergers, if regulators allow it, and they shouldnt.

But this is another area where the government has been bought off and my bet is the mergers get approved.

What the hell is the purpose in maintaining the semblance of private health care....if the insurers are a monopoly?

Their profits are already limited by maobamacare.

 

[Moonglow]

For regular income tax purposes, a system of graduated marginal tax rates is applied to all taxable income, including capital gains. Through 2011, the marginal tax rates on a corporation's taxable income are as follows:
Taxable Income ($) Tax Rate[27]
0 to 50,000 15%
50,000 to 75,000 $7,500 + 25% Of the amount over 50,000
75,000 to 100,000 $13,750 + 34% Of the amount over 75,000
100,000 to 335,000 $22,250 + 39% Of the amount over 100,000
335,000 to 10,000,000 $113,900 + 34% Of the amount over 335,000
10,000,000 to 15,000,000 $3,400,000 + 35% Of the amount over 10,000,000
15,000,000 to 18,333,333 $5,150,000 + 38% Of the amount over 15,000,000
18,333,333 and up 35%
This rate structure produces a flat 34% tax rate on incomes from $335,000 to $10,000,000, gradually increasing to a flat rate of 35% on incomes above $18,333,333.

Looks pretty progressive already.

apparently not progressive enough, at least as applied to health insurance companies, cause they still think it benefits them to get larger.

Interesting tho....if it does apply ,it means, depending on howmuch they make, that they can gouge more than the tax penalty if they get bigger.

further I question these numbers as they seem to go to 38% then back down then up again.

apparently not progressive enough

Going from 15% at $50,000 to 39% at $100,001 is pretty damn progressive.

cause they still think it benefits them to get larger.

That's due to idiotic government regulations, not low tax rates.

further I question these numbers

Feel free to find the correct numbers.

it may seem progressive, but maybe there are loopholes, especially for the health industry.

yes yes sure, the idiotic government regulations that force us to buy from these crooks.........somehow I dont think theyre hurting from regulations.

you cant give me an explanation for why it goes up, comes down 3 times?
to 39 back to 34 to 38 back to 35 to 34 then finally back up to 35

those numbers dont make sense unless the government is TRYING TO MAKE THEM BIGGER

the numbers should go to 39 AS THEY GET BIGGER, NOT somewhere in the middle.

All you have to do is take away their tax breaks, but don't hold your breathe....

 

[dcraelin]

Of course it shows no such thing.
Democrats cheered ACA and swore it would stick it to the insurance companies. Of course that was a lie, repeated by the useful idiots on this board.
What it shows is government regulation increases competition, reduces choice, and increases costs. All things anyone could have predicted.

of course it DOES show such a thing.

Not all democrats cheered...I didnt and I believe it was pointed out by some that the insurance industry had to much influence over writing the bill.

you say government regulation "increases competition".....well it could....which is why the tax rate should be progressive so monopolistic power is reduced.

Government regulation benefits the biggest corporations.
If you really wanted more competition you'd support reduced taxes and reduced regulation.

reduced regulation doesnt necessarily lead to more competition, neither does reduced taxes. But a progressive corporate tax should create disincentive to monopolistic growth.

reduced regulation doesnt necessarily lead to more competition,

Yeah, but chances are it would.

neither does reduced taxes.

I think it would benefit the smaller, up and comers.
What do you think it would do?

But a progressive corporate tax should create disincentive to monopolistic growth

Why?

it might help smaller companies yes, but that is also what a progressive tax would do, taxing smaller companies less than the larger ones.

 

[dcraelin]

Consolidation in health insurance industry shows need for steeply progressive corporate income tax.

WSJ today has article showing how 5 biggest insurance companies in health insurance may soon be down to 3 with mergers, if regulators allow it, and they shouldnt.

But this is another area where the government has been bought off and my bet is the mergers get approved.

What the hell is the purpose in maintaining the semblance of private health care....if the insurers are a monopoly?

Their profits are already limited by maobamacare.

supposedly

 

[OKTexas]

Consolidation in health insurance industry shows need for steeply progressive corporate income tax.

WSJ today has article showing how 5 biggest insurance companies in health insurance may soon be down to 3 with mergers, if regulators allow it, and they shouldnt.

But this is another area where the government has been bought off and my bet is the mergers get approved.

What the hell is the purpose in maintaining the semblance of private health care....if the insurers are a monopoly?

Their profits are already limited by maobamacare.

supposedly

Supposedly, I guess you missed the threads about the companies refunding excess premiums.