Lying to America

[Ray From Cleveland]

That is true, because a "living wage" as you call it would have a domino effect causing inflation. Isn't it bad enough that we can't even compete with overseas products as it is without increasing our wages to make us less competitive? Isn't it bad enough that more and more industries are turning to automation to replace humans--even McDonald's franchise owners because of increased human wages?

Which is why I have a plan that wouldn't cause inflation.


-Base Federal tax for corporations at 30% of revenue.

-Raise minimum wage to $23.50/hr. Based on where minimum wage should be using 1970-2015 rise in food, shelter, and transportation.

-Eliminate all business subsidies (deductions/write-offs/write-downs) except for employee expenses which are deducted dollar-for-dollar on all city, state, and Federal taxes and fees with the Feds refunding city, State, and fees.

-Companies with 500 employees or less, employee expenses above the deduction are subsidized at 100% with funds usually give back to the States.

-Adjust Social Security and private/public retirement and pension payments using 1970-2015 price structure.

-Remove the FICA limit.

-Back down ALL costs, prices, fees, to January 1, 2009 levels and hold them for 10 years which will eliminate inflation.

-Recall ALL off-shore investments tax free, and disallow any further off-shore investments.

-Make inversion illegal.

My plan would reduce small business costs for employees and taxes to 30%. That's a 15%-30% drop.



My plan would put BILLIONS into the economy daily.



My plan would put the $100 trillion plus currently owned by corporate America back into the economy.



My plan would end all welfare.



My plan would significantly increase social security and pension payments.



My plan would hold prices for 10 years, thus eliminating inflation.

Your plan is not well thought out.

If $23,00 for minimum wage is good, then $43.00 per hour is even better. If $43.00 per hour for minimum wage is better, then $66.00 per hour must be the best.

How could this not cause inflation? If your plan were to go into effect, a $150,000 house today would cost over $300,000 within a few years. Your Big Mac combo would go from $5.50 per meal to $8.50 per meal. Your automobile would go from $27,000 to $40,000. How are you ahead?

All you would really accomplish is distancing ourselves further from our foreign competitors. Let me put it another way:

You have a company that makes widgets. You have starting positions at federal minimum wage. You have better paying positions at $10.00 per hour. You have skilled positions paying $18.00 per hour and the scale increases from there.

You are barely able to stay competitive with your foreign entities, but you still manage to provide some decent jobs and benefits.

Now you are forced to pay all employees $23.50 per hour. Would you still be able to compete with your competitors in China and India? Of course not. You would have to move out of the country or close shop.

Before you respond, remember that your employees that were making up to ten dollars over the old minimum wage would not be happy being back at minimum wage no matter what it was, so you would have to pay them even more. Then your skilled workers would have to make $34.00 per hour and up. Even your non-skilled workers would have to earn at least $26.00 per hour. How could you stay in business?

If $23,00 for minimum wage is good, then $43.00 per hour is even better. If $43.00 per hour for minimum wage is better, then $66.00 per hour must be the best.

If you can justify your wages based on where minimum wage should be using 1970-2015 rise in food, shelter, and transportation then you'd have an argument.

How could this not cause inflation? If your plan were to go into effect, a $150,000 house today would cost over $300,000 within a few years. Your Big Mac combo would go from $5.50 per meal to $8.50 per meal. Your automobile would go from $27,000 to $40,000. How are you ahead?

-Back down ALL costs, prices, fees, to January 1, 2009 levels and hold them for 10 years which will eliminate inflation. Inflation is caused by a rise in good and services, no rise, no inflation.

All you would really accomplish is distancing ourselves further from our foreign competitors. Let me put it another way:

You have a company that makes widgets. You have starting positions at federal minimum wage. You have better paying positions at $10.00 per hour. You have skilled positions paying $18.00 per hour and the scale increases from there.

You are barely able to stay competitive with your foreign entities, but you still manage to provide some decent jobs and benefits.

Now you are forced to pay all employees $23.50 per hour. Would you still be able to compete with your competitors in China and India? Of course not. You would have to move out of the country or close shop.

Before you respond, remember that your employees that were making up to ten dollars over the old minimum wage would not be happy being back at minimum wage no matter what it was, so you would have to pay them even more. Then your skilled workers would have to make $34.00 per hour and up. Even your non-skilled workers would have to earn at least $26.00 per hour. How could you stay in business?

Eliminate all business subsidies (deductions/write-offs/write-downs) except for employee expenses which are deducted dollar-for-dollar on all city, state, and Federal taxes and fees with the Feds refunding city, State, and fees.

-Companies with 500 employees or less, employee expenses above the deduction are subsidized at 100% with funds usually give back to the States.

My plan reduces all employee costs as well as State/local taxes and fees to 30% gross.

Example:

A company that grosses $100K will have a $30K federal tax. Typical employee expenses, State/local taxes and fees are $55k, the federal tax is off-set and a subsidy check for $25K is issued.

I don't have time to address your laundry list, but I will address a few:

You can't compare today to 1970. The 70's is when we began to inflate ourselves out of the world market. It was a bad strategy. It got worse as time went on and eventually chased jobs out of our country.

You can't freeze anything in a free country. It doesn't and can't work like that. The only possible way for that to happen is if we decided we wanted to live in a dictatorship. If you freeze the price of my widgets to $20.00 a piece, and it costs me $40.00 a piece to make them thanks to your new minimum wage, I go out of business just like everybody else in this country.

Subsides are tax write-offs which can't be eliminated. Government doesn't give money to anybody, government can only take less. Tax write-offs are not what you think they are. When you have a tax write-off, you only escape paying taxes on that money you spent which is only a few cents on the dollar. Many people think that when you write off one dollar, the government will remove that dollar from what you owe to them. No truth to that at all.

 

[OnePercenter]

Insurance companies didn't vote on it or sign it into law. That means those who passed it, the Democrats, are to blame.

Medical insurance companies which have no formattable competition (a form of monopoly) set the rates, ACA tells the companies that they have to spend most of the premiums collected on claims.

 

[OnePercenter]

I don't have time to address your laundry list, but I will address a few:

You can't compare today to 1970. The 70's is when we began to inflate ourselves out of the world market. It was a bad strategy. It got worse as time went on and eventually chased jobs out of our country.

You can't freeze anything in a free country. It doesn't and can't work like that. The only possible way for that to happen is if we decided we wanted to live in a dictatorship. If you freeze the price of my widgets to $20.00 a piece, and it costs me $40.00 a piece to make them thanks to your new minimum wage, I go out of business just like everybody else in this country.

Subsides are tax write-offs which can't be eliminated. Government doesn't give money to anybody, government can only take less. Tax write-offs are not what you think they are. When you have a tax write-off, you only escape paying taxes on that money you spent which is only a few cents on the dollar. Many people think that when you write off one dollar, the government will remove that dollar from what you owe to them. No truth to that at all.

I don't have time to address your laundry list, but I will address a few:

You can't compare today to 1970. The 70's is when we began to inflate ourselves out of the world market. It was a bad strategy. It got worse as time went on and eventually chased jobs out of our country.

You really need to reinvest yourself with history. In the 70's, the effect of Nixon allowing Japan to product dump for an agreement to build air bases in Southern Japan.

The mistake of moving America into the world economy happened with Regan.

You can't freeze anything in a free country. It doesn't and can't work like that. The only possible way for that to happen is if we decided we wanted to live in a dictatorship. If you freeze the price of my widgets to $20.00 a piece, and it costs me $40.00 a piece to make them thanks to your new minimum wage, I go out of business just like everybody else in this country.

Sure you can. You write a law.

If your widgets currently cost twice a much as the sales price you're already in trouble.

My plan reduces all taxes and government fees as well as employee costs from 50% - 60% of gross, to 30% of gross, which equates to higher net.

Subsides are tax write-offs which can't be eliminated. Government doesn't give money to anybody, government can only take less. Tax write-offs are not what you think they are. When you have a tax write-off, you only escape paying taxes on that money you spent which is only a few cents on the dollar. Many people think that when you write off one dollar, the government will remove that dollar from what you owe to them. No truth to that at all.

Subsidies are a benefit given by the government to groups or individuals usually in the form of a cash payment or tax reduction. When you talk of big box stores, it can also be free (or reduced cost) land and buildings.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Insurance companies didn't vote on it or sign it into law. That means those who passed it, the Democrats, are to blame.

Medical insurance companies which have no formattable competition (a form of monopoly) set the rates, ACA tells the companies that they have to spend most of the premiums collected on claims.

Which is one of the largest failures of Commie Care.

Unlike our social medical care systems where the government takes money and sticks it under a virtual mattress, insurance companies used premiums to make investments. The profits from those investments went to offset claims by customers. Some of that premium money was used for investigation purposes to nab those trying to make false claims.

By forcing insurance companies to use 80% of their money for claims only, it's the exact similar business plan of our social programs all of which are a failure or soon to be one.

Commie Care was designed to put medical insurance companies out of business. Yes, they may be having a party now, but by being forced to follow the same failed plan of our social programs, they will likely see the same results; except unlike government plans, government borrowing will not be an option. They will simply close down as many of them have already.

 

[1stRambo]

Interesting piece written about how Obama can lie, and now Mrs. Clinton, and they get away with their lying. Really, no matter what side of the aisle you have to see how amazing it is what Obama has gotten off Scot free.

BLACK REPUBLICAN BLOG

If we were living in normal times, the following scandals and failures — without going into foreign policy — would have ruined a presidency to the point of reducing it to Nixon, Bush, or Truman poll ratings.

Think of the following: the Fast and Furious scandal, the VA mess, the tapping of the communications of the Associated Press reporters, the NSA monitoring, Benghazi in all of its manifestations, the serial lies about Obamacare, the failed stimuli, the chronic zero interest/print money policies, the serial high unemployment, the borrowing of $7 trillion to no stimulatory effect, the spiraling national debt, the customary violations of the Hatch Act by Obama cabinet officials, the alter ego/fake identity of EPA head Lisa Jackson, the sudden departure of Hilda Solis after receiving union freebies, the mendacity of Kathleen Sebelius, the strange atmospherics surrounding the Petraeus resignation, the customary presidential neglect of enforcing the laws from immigration statutes to his own health care rules, the presidential divisiveness (“punish our enemies,” “you didn’t build that,” Trayvon as the son that Obama never had, etc.), and on and on.

So why is there not much public reaction or media investigatory outrage?

Yo, they are true aspiring Leaders for the young people of America? NOT! They are the "Biggest Losers" who ever held Office!!!

"GTP"

 

[OnePercenter]

Which is one of the largest failures of Commie Care.

Unlike our social medical care systems where the government takes money and sticks it under a virtual mattress, insurance companies used premiums to make investments. The profits from those investments went to offset claims by customers. Some of that premium money was used for investigation purposes to nab those trying to make false claims.

By forcing insurance companies to use 80% of their money for claims only, it's the exact similar business plan of our social programs all of which are a failure or soon to be one.

Commie Care was designed to put medical insurance companies out of business. Yes, they may be having a party now, but by being forced to follow the same failed plan of our social programs, they will likely see the same results; except unlike government plans, government borrowing will not be an option. They will simply close down as many of them have already.

Here we go with the 'commie' bullshit again!

The problem is insurance companies and no formattable competition.

Also, insurance companies have been using a large chunk of their collected premiums to by hospitals and Doctor systems. Take the top three medical insurance companies in the US. Their ownership of hospitals and Doctors is staggering.

ACA wasn't put in place to replace insurance companies, only to make them more responsible.

AGAIN! If Reagan hadn't screwed with the HMO act, we'd not be discussing this.

 

[Indeependent]

Which is one of the largest failures of Commie Care.

Unlike our social medical care systems where the government takes money and sticks it under a virtual mattress, insurance companies used premiums to make investments. The profits from those investments went to offset claims by customers. Some of that premium money was used for investigation purposes to nab those trying to make false claims.

By forcing insurance companies to use 80% of their money for claims only, it's the exact similar business plan of our social programs all of which are a failure or soon to be one.

Commie Care was designed to put medical insurance companies out of business. Yes, they may be having a party now, but by being forced to follow the same failed plan of our social programs, they will likely see the same results; except unlike government plans, government borrowing will not be an option. They will simply close down as many of them have already.

Here we go with the 'commie' bullshit again!

The problem is insurance companies and no formattable competition.

Also, insurance companies have been using a large chunk of their collected premiums to by hospitals and Doctor systems. Take the top three medical insurance companies in the US. Their ownership of hospitals and Doctors is staggering.

ACA wasn't put in place to replace insurance companies, only to make them more responsible.

AGAIN! If Reagan hadn't screwed with the HMO act, we'd not be discussing this.

You're being way too kind to the Health Insurance Industry.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Which is one of the largest failures of Commie Care.

Unlike our social medical care systems where the government takes money and sticks it under a virtual mattress, insurance companies used premiums to make investments. The profits from those investments went to offset claims by customers. Some of that premium money was used for investigation purposes to nab those trying to make false claims.

By forcing insurance companies to use 80% of their money for claims only, it's the exact similar business plan of our social programs all of which are a failure or soon to be one.

Commie Care was designed to put medical insurance companies out of business. Yes, they may be having a party now, but by being forced to follow the same failed plan of our social programs, they will likely see the same results; except unlike government plans, government borrowing will not be an option. They will simply close down as many of them have already.

Here we go with the 'commie' bullshit again!

The problem is insurance companies and no formattable competition.

Also, insurance companies have been using a large chunk of their collected premiums to by hospitals and Doctor systems. Take the top three medical insurance companies in the US. Their ownership of hospitals and Doctors is staggering.

ACA wasn't put in place to replace insurance companies, only to make them more responsible.

AGAIN! If Reagan hadn't screwed with the HMO act, we'd not be discussing this.

Wrong. Commie Care was not put into place to keep an eye out for insurance companies nor to make sure everybody is covered. Commie Care was invented to make more people dependent on the federal government.

You have to understand that each party wants to expand their base. They have to attract more voters. Government dependents heavily vote Democrat, so the object of the Democrat party is to make as many people government dependent as they can. The more government dependents--the more likely Democrat voters in the future.

Insurance companies did have competition. Competition is what keeps prices as low as possible. You on the left think government actually does that.

 

[Wildman]

The RW is a funny lot. To listen to them, everything a Democrat says or does is either a lie, or a scandal, or both.

it is now your duty to prove the RW is wrong!! try it, i'll bet you can NOT!!!

 

[Conservative65]

Which is one of the largest failures of Commie Care.

Unlike our social medical care systems where the government takes money and sticks it under a virtual mattress, insurance companies used premiums to make investments. The profits from those investments went to offset claims by customers. Some of that premium money was used for investigation purposes to nab those trying to make false claims.

By forcing insurance companies to use 80% of their money for claims only, it's the exact similar business plan of our social programs all of which are a failure or soon to be one.

Commie Care was designed to put medical insurance companies out of business. Yes, they may be having a party now, but by being forced to follow the same failed plan of our social programs, they will likely see the same results; except unlike government plans, government borrowing will not be an option. They will simply close down as many of them have already.

Here we go with the 'commie' bullshit again!

The problem is insurance companies and no formattable competition.

Also, insurance companies have been using a large chunk of their collected premiums to by hospitals and Doctor systems. Take the top three medical insurance companies in the US. Their ownership of hospitals and Doctors is staggering.

ACA wasn't put in place to replace insurance companies, only to make them more responsible.

AGAIN! If Reagan hadn't screwed with the HMO act, we'd not be discussing this.

AGAIN! If you lefties would quit making excuses for your black boy, you might get some respect.

 

[Conservative65]

Insurance companies didn't vote on it or sign it into law. That means those who passed it, the Democrats, are to blame.

Medical insurance companies which have no formattable competition (a form of monopoly) set the rates, ACA tells the companies that they have to spend most of the premiums collected on claims.

Hey you stupid motherfucker, what do you not get about the insurance companies didn't write it and pass it. If the piece of shit legislation wasn't written so poorly, they don't get a chance to do a single thing.