The Democratic plan for a 42% national sales tax

fl2007rn

Well-Known Member
Single payer 'coverage for all' would lead to Euthanasia. Take me for example; There is no way the medical board governing National Health Care would approve me for any of my medications as I'm already considered terminal. Without a doubt, there would be a board who determines at what point treatment stops for people, whether it's Stage Four Cancer, or a very expensive surgery, this would lead to life having a value. If your medical bills are $2 million dollars (due to overpriced hospitals, pharmacy companies and doctor rates), you would be considered a drain on the system and no longer treated, or at the least, it would be made impossible for you to schedule an appointment. Life is priceless. In this case, it no longer would be. You would be a walking profit margin, nothing more. The Elderly would be the ones to lose out first, although they would also be the most likely to vote for this as they will be led to believe it will benefit them. It won't.
You are absolutely correct and this already happens in many countries with socialized medicine. If a person with a terminal condition goes to the hospital they are not transferred to the ICU for treatments, surgeries, and procedures. The terminal patient is sent to hospice for palliative care by the ER doctors. I am a retired ICU nurse and worked with many foreign nurses, and was told this is how they do it in their countries.
 
Last edited:

athenasius

Well-Known Member
Sadly I believe you're right, I think that's why the liberals are trying to desensitize us to that agenda by making the "right to die" movement a socially acceptable thing.
That is EXACTLY how it is working here in Canada!

Our government approved the Dr Assisted Suicide laws (we already have an overloaded medical system) and in the space of the last 2 years my dad took that method and it was delicately asked if we all wanted GEORGE’s Dad to go that way.

In both cases the pressure was on, the propaganda was working to “ease our fears” and my unsaved Dad took the bait.

George’s dad didn’t because the hospice care worker (who didn’t give much help anyway) hinted to us that the “service “ was available if we thought he was ok with her bringing it up to him.

We all said NO! Grandpa was in the bathroom and out of earshot at the time. He died in GODS TIME.

YEAH that folks is how single payer healthcare works.

And you can bet yer bottom dollar that’s why all the propaganda is going on for euthanasia.
 

tuco22

Member
I really wonder how they plan on collecting that tax when no one will be able to buy anything? When even food becomes too expensive to buy, folks are going to try turning to "other means", leaving the left with not even nearly the money they think they will gain, and a loss of all the money they had with the current taxes.
Given over to reprobate thinking, they wouldn't even be entertaining that idea.
 

tuco22

Member
Whether or not Warren or one of the Democrats win, I'm thinking of starting up a believers-only co-op where we can still buy, sell, and trade with each other. I'm hoping that when the Tribulation and the Mark of the Beast comes, it can still be of use (will leave instructions to those left behind who become believers).
If you do, do it surreptitiously, or if the PTB find out about it, even before the SHTF, they'll move to take it away from you or try to prevent it.
 

tuco22

Member
Single payer, Medicare for all would be a disaster. Care would be rationed. It always is. Resources are not unlimited and nothing is free. Someone always pays.
I’m not suggesting the system doesn’t need fixed, it does.
The idea is to get everyone on board so they can suck their money to pay for it, because rest assured, they WILL have to pay for it, and then kill them slowly, incrementally to achieve that magical 500 million on the Georgia Guidestones. American medicine hasn't been about healthcare for a long time.
 

tuco22

Member
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/the-democratic-plan-for-a-42-national-sales-tax-202549219.html

If you’re a Democrat who supports “Medicare for All,” pick your poison. You can ruin your political career and immolate your party by imposing a ruinous new sales tax, a gargantuan income tax hike or a surtax on corporate income that would wreck thousands of businesses.
This is the cost of bold plans.
Supporters of Medicare for All, the huge, single-payer government health plan backed by Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and several other Democratic presidential candidates, say it’s time to think big and move to a health plan that covers everyone. Getting there is a bit tricky, however. A variety of analyses estimate that Medicare for All would require at least $3 trillion in new spending. That’s about as much tax revenue as the government brings in now. So if paid for through new taxes, federal taxation would have to roughly double.
The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB) has done voters a favor by spelling out what kinds of new taxes it would take to come up with that much money. Warren justifies many of her programs by saying all it would take is “two cents” from the wealthy. That’s a reference to her 2% wealth tax on ultra-millionaires. But Medicare for All would be so expensive that if you taxed top earners at 100%—that’s right, if you took all the income of couples earning more than $408,000 per year—you’d still fall far short. And everybody getting taxed at 100% would obviously stop working.
Okay, that won’t do it. So what will? CRFB outlined a variety of options. A 42% national sales tax (known as a valued-added tax) would generate about $3 trillion in revenue. But it would destroy the consumer spending that’s the backbone of the U.S. economy. A tax of that magnitude would be like 42% inflation, wrecking consumer budgets and the many companies that depend on them, from Walmart and Amazon to your local car dealer

Other options include a 32% payroll tax split between employers and workers or a 25% income surtax on everybody. Or, the government could cut 80% of spending on everything but health care, which would include highways, airports and the Pentagon. Or here’s a good one: Just borrow the money and quadruple Washington’s annual deficits.
The best idea might be charging every enrollee in the new program $7,500 per year, so they’d be paying directly for the coverage they’re getting. Some people pay more than that now for health care, by purchasing insurance outright or sacrificing pay raises in exchange for employer coverage. It would still be a nifty trick to propose that to voters.
The upside to these impossibly draconian scenarios is that nobody would pay anything for health care, except in the $7,500 example. And it’s possible that Medicare for All would cover health care for more people at a lower total cost than we spend now, meaning the average cost per person would go down. The problem is transitioning from what we have now to whatever Medicare for all would be. And it’s a giant problem, like crossing the Mississippi River without a bridge or a boat. The other side might look great but you’ll die before you get there.
Warren, Sanders and others tout the virtues of this magical health care program without explaining what it would cost. Sanders has at least suggested some possible ways to pay for it, including premiums paid by enrollees, a wealth tax on millionaires and income tax rates as high as 52%. Warren has been cagier, saying only that under her plan “costs” would go down for middle-class families. Under pressure to explain, Warren has pledged to come up with a financing plan soon. Now, maybe she doesn’t have to.
The destruction of your country any way you slice it. But let's concentrate on Roger Stone.
 

Endangered

Well-Known Member
Taking over heathcare is not all the Dems want. Lets not forget the Obamarama wanted to outlaw charities and take them over. That would make millions more of people dependent on the gov.
The more dependent on the gov you are the more susceptible you will be to the AC when he climbs up on the podium.
 

Sojourner414

Well-Known Member
They do not understand how an economy works, plain and simple. In trying to implement this "tax", they will shatter the American Economy and then they will be sitting there, screaming "why isn't this working??!!". Meantime, riots and outright disaster would be breaking out everywhere, with nowhere to turn.

The liberals are a generation of veritable "children", trying to prolong their childhood by getting other people to buy them their toys and meals. Undisciplined parents raised these undisciplined children, and now they are creating an undisciplined mess.
 

antitox

Well-Known Member
They do not understand how an economy works, plain and simple. In trying to implement this "tax", they will shatter the American Economy and then they will be sitting there, screaming "why isn't this working??!!". Meantime, riots and outright disaster would be breaking out everywhere, with nowhere to turn.

The liberals are a generation of veritable "children", trying to prolong their childhood by getting other people to buy them their toys and meals. Undisciplined parents raised these undisciplined children, and now they are creating an undisciplined mess.
They'll wreck the joint an blame it on conservatives.
 
Top