pyccku
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,817
Jun 27, 2014 23:12:07 GMT
|
Post by pyccku on Feb 28, 2019 17:36:40 GMT
Has anyone studied what we as Americans are already paying for healthcare every year? Wouldn't that money be essentially rolled into a universal healthcare program? I pay 800 a month and my employer also pays a portion, if you multiply that 800 by half the population, you get nearly 2 trillion dollars right off the bat. Have there been any numbers on how much could be saved by eliminating/regulating/streamlining the various insurance companies who are profiting from the healthcare industry? Why, yes. Yes there has.
|
|
schizo319
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,030
Jun 28, 2014 0:26:58 GMT
|
Post by schizo319 on Feb 28, 2019 17:55:53 GMT
Has anyone studied what we as Americans are already paying for healthcare every year? Wouldn't that money be essentially rolled into a universal healthcare program? I pay 800 a month and my employer also pays a portion, if you multiply that 800 by half the population, you get nearly 2 trillion dollars right off the bat. Have there been any numbers on how much could be saved by eliminating/regulating/streamlining the various insurance companies who are profiting from the healthcare industry? Why, yes. Yes there has.Thanks!
|
|
|
Post by sabrinae on Feb 28, 2019 18:01:19 GMT
maybe we could, oh, I don't know-- take some money from something NON-essential to the future of the planet, perhaps? wall, military, eliminate tax cuts so the richest can get richer... I can think of LOTS of ways. or, heck- declare a National Emergency (because it IS), and take money from wherever they want. Let's look at the costs and potential revenues: Medicare for all would cost $3 Trillion (doubling federal spending) If we guarantee $10,000 annually to all Americans, it would cost approximately $3 Trillion Total estimated costs: $6 TrillionLet's tax those earning $10 million or more at a 70% rate in order to raise $72 Billion annually The DoD budget is $686.1 Billion for 2019. Let's eliminate it entirely. Trump wanted $5 Billion for the wall. Let's take it all out. Total Estimated Savings: $763.1 BillionThis just takes into account two of AOC's specifics contained within her proposal. Doesn't include free universal college or building retrofits. I'm no mathematician, but I think that Trillion is bigger than Billion. Eliminating the entire DoD, raising taxes on the richest and eliminating the wall doesn't even begin to cover a fraction of either one of those proposals. None of those numbers take into account what we are already spending on health care through the current insurance premium system. My employer and I spent more than $ 22,000 on insurance premiums alone in 2018. That doesn’t account for co-pays, co-insurance payments, or prescription costs. I payed several thousand more in those expenses over 2018. Copays for pediatric cardiologists, echocardiograms and ekgs aren’t cheap. Even with those amounts I feel lucky that we have pretty good coverage
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jun 24, 2024 13:39:45 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 28, 2019 18:11:46 GMT
Has anyone studied what we as Americans are already paying for healthcare every year? Wouldn't that money be essentially rolled into a universal healthcare program? I pay 800 a month and my employer also pays a portion, if you multiply that 800 by half the population, you get nearly 2 trillion dollars right off the bat. Have there been any numbers on how much could be saved by eliminating/regulating/streamlining the various insurance companies who are profiting from the healthcare industry? Why, yes. Yes there has.Since conservatives are often called on the carpet for getting their facts straight, politifact judged the claims in the article linked above to be half-true. Politifact
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jun 24, 2024 13:39:45 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 28, 2019 18:15:14 GMT
Let's look at the costs and potential revenues: Medicare for all would cost $3 Trillion (doubling federal spending) If we guarantee $10,000 annually to all Americans, it would cost approximately $3 Trillion Total estimated costs: $6 TrillionLet's tax those earning $10 million or more at a 70% rate in order to raise $72 Billion annually The DoD budget is $686.1 Billion for 2019. Let's eliminate it entirely. Trump wanted $5 Billion for the wall. Let's take it all out. Total Estimated Savings: $763.1 BillionThis just takes into account two of AOC's specifics contained within her proposal. Doesn't include free universal college or building retrofits. I'm no mathematician, but I think that Trillion is bigger than Billion. Eliminating the entire DoD, raising taxes on the richest and eliminating the wall doesn't even begin to cover a fraction of either one of those proposals. None of those numbers take into account what we are already spending on health care through the current insurance premium system. My employer and I spent more than $ 22,000 on insurance premiums alone in 2018. That doesn’t account for co-pays, co-insurance payments, or prescription costs. I payed several thousand more in those expenses over 2018. Copays for pediatric cardiologists, echocardiograms and ekgs aren’t cheap. Even with those amounts I feel lucky that we have pretty good coverage From the article on the study I linked above: "It's showing that if you are going to go in this direction, it's going to cost the federal government $2.5 trillion to $3 trillion a year in terms of spending," said Thorpe. "Even though people don't pay premiums, the tax increases are going to be enormous. There are going to be a lot of people who'll pay more in taxes than they save on premiums." Thorpe was a senior health policy adviser in the Clinton administration.
|
|
|
Post by pierkiss on Feb 28, 2019 18:17:27 GMT
I agree with the bolded part, but not the reasoning. We will suffer an economic calamity because there won't be enough tax-paying citizens to carry the burden of government-funded programs such as Social Security and Medicare. Those programs are already sagging because of the size of the baby boomer generation relative to the taxable bodies living in the US. Adding more individuals that don't pay taxes doesn't solve that dilemma. If we change the immigration laws so they can come here legally more easily, we have new tax payers and everyone is happy, right? That's the opportunity Trump (and every president/congress before him) has missed. YES!!!
|
|
|
Post by sabrinae on Feb 28, 2019 18:25:41 GMT
None of those numbers take into account what we are already spending on health care through the current insurance premium system. My employer and I spent more than $ 22,000 on insurance premiums alone in 2018. That doesn’t account for co-pays, co-insurance payments, or prescription costs. I payed several thousand more in those expenses over 2018. Copays for pediatric cardiologists, echocardiograms and ekgs aren’t cheap. Even with those amounts I feel lucky that we have pretty good coverage From the article on the study I linked above: "It's showing that if you are going to go in this direction, it's going to cost the federal government $2.5 trillion to $3 trillion a year in terms of spending," said Thorpe. "Even though people don't pay premiums, the tax increases are going to be enormous. There are going to be a lot of people who'll pay more in taxes than they save on premiums." Thorpe was a senior health policy adviser in the Clinton administration. The latest numbers I could find was 1 trillion in premiums in 2014 by American public. That number has went up every year since then. So at least 1/3 of the 3 trillion would be covered by existing premiums. I suspect though I can’t find any numbers that a much higher portion of that would be covered by current premiums. I’m already paying over $6000 a year out of my paycheck (not counting employer contribution). I’ve paid substantially more than that in the recent past. Current premiums will cover a big chunck of increased spending for universal healthcare.
|
|
|
Post by kernriver on Feb 28, 2019 19:15:40 GMT
She rubs me the wrong way. I hate Trump and am for anyone who is against him but I just wish she would keep her mouth shut and do her job. It’s kinda like the woman who screamed ‘we’re gonna impeach this motherfucker’. Just keep your mouth shut and do your job.
|
|
MizIndependent
Drama Llama
Quit your bullpoop.
Posts: 5,836
Jun 25, 2014 19:43:16 GMT
|
Post by MizIndependent on Feb 28, 2019 19:24:12 GMT
So, you may have missed this, but the way it works in America is YOU work for US. The last time somebody told Americans to sit down and shut up was 1776. If you ever learn to read, look it up. You are not only a idiot, you’re an arrogant idiot, and there is nothing more dangerous t.co/5Hn8IoHFn8
— James Woods (@realjameswoods) February 23, 2019
|
|
|
Post by thundergal on Feb 28, 2019 19:31:05 GMT
James Woods is a cruel, broken piece of shit. Even the words "I love puppies" coming from his disgusting mouth-hole would make me cringe.
|
|
MizIndependent
Drama Llama
Quit your bullpoop.
Posts: 5,836
Jun 25, 2014 19:43:16 GMT
|
Post by MizIndependent on Feb 28, 2019 19:35:38 GMT
James Woods is a cruel, broken piece of shit. Even the words "I love puppies" coming from his disgusting mouth-hole would make me cringe. Maybe, but that doesn't make him wrong in this case. AOC is supposed to be working for us, not telling us what to do.
"Until then, we’re in charge - and you’re just shouting from the cheap seats." Fuck that noise! She's more offensive, IMO, than James Woods' in this case.
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Feb 28, 2019 20:44:04 GMT
I find James Woods, the vocal Trump supporter, calling ANYone an arrogant idiot, ironic in the extreme.
Not impressed.
|
|
|
Post by peano on Feb 28, 2019 20:51:22 GMT
Let’s see. Republicans elected the cesspool beast currently occupying the WH on the refrain that they wanted to—what was it again? Oh yeah, drain the swamp. They demanded change to the system.
So here we have a freshman senator actually formulating ideas and working to make changes that benefit Americans (See panel on campaign finance reform linked up thread) and you guys want her to shut up. How is change accomplished by AOC sitting mutely in a chair? What exactly is it that you want? How should a freshman representative act to your satisfaction? FFS, Marie Antoinette! That’s not just you—that’s all the other complainers and kvetchers out there.
Maybe she is a bit of a bull in a china shop, but I’ll take that over that bumbling crowd of climate change denying, asylum-seeking family traumatizing, and lying Supreme Court justice appointing Republicans any damn day!
|
|
|
Post by lucillebluth on Feb 28, 2019 20:54:48 GMT
I find James Woods, the vocal Trump supporter, calling ANYone an arrogant idiot, ironic in the extreme. Not impressed. Not to mention that he seems to have misinterpreted her tweet, which was in response to a tweet critical of Sen. Feinstein. AOC was challenging her fellow members of Congress to come up with plans, not telling Americans to sit down and shut up. Oddly, no one seems to have a problem with anyone telling AOC to sit down and shut up.
|
|
|
Post by iamkristinl16 on Feb 28, 2019 21:01:31 GMT
Let’s see. Republicans elected the cesspool beast currently occupying the WH on the refrain that they wanted to—what was it again? Oh yeah, drain the swamp. They demanded change to the system. So here we have a freshman senator actually formulating ideas and working to make changes that benefit Americans (See panel on campaign finance reform linked up thread) and you guys want her to shut up. How is change accomplished by AOC sitting mutely in a chair? What exactly is it that you want? How should a freshman representative act to your satisfaction? FFS, Marie Antoinette! That’s not just you—that’s all the other complainers and kvetchers out there. Maybe she is a bit of a bull in a china shop, but I’ll take that over that bumbling crowd of climate change denying, asylum-seeking family traumatizing, and lying Supreme Court justice appointing Republicans any damn day! I agree, although some of her comments are off-putting. Such as saying she is the boss or people are in the cheap seats. That wasn’t necessary and she could have made her point in a more effective way if she had worded her statement differently. In general, I am more of a “be strong, but be observant” when starting a new job. One of my graduate professors said that the more you know, the more you realize that there is a lot you don’t know. I have found that to be true in a lot of situations. When we get a new employee that is fresh out of college or grad school, we want them to be confident, yet not cocky and assuming that they know everything. They need to pay attention to the politics and procedures of the agency and the agencies that we work with. How to interact with clients to be most effective. I think that AOC could benefit from doing more observing and paying attention to how her words are being taken. She has some good ideas, but the more negative parts of her message overtake the positive in some cases.
|
|
|
Post by peano on Feb 28, 2019 21:14:23 GMT
Let’s see. Republicans elected the cesspool beast currently occupying the WH on the refrain that they wanted to—what was it again? Oh yeah, drain the swamp. They demanded change to the system. So here we have a freshman senator actually formulating ideas and working to make changes that benefit Americans (See panel on campaign finance reform linked up thread) and you guys want her to shut up. How is change accomplished by AOC sitting mutely in a chair? What exactly is it that you want? How should a freshman representative act to your satisfaction? FFS, Marie Antoinette! That’s not just you—that’s all the other complainers and kvetchers out there. Maybe she is a bit of a bull in a china shop, but I’ll take that over that bumbling crowd of climate change denying, asylum-seeking family traumatizing, and lying Supreme Court justice appointing Republicans any damn day! I agree, although some of her comments are off-putting. Such as saying she is the boss or people are in the cheap seats. That wasn’t necessary and she could have made her point in a more effective way if she had worded her statement differently. In general, I am more of a “be strong, but be observant” when starting a new job. One of my graduate professors said that the more you know, the more you realize that there is a lot you don’t know. I have found that to be true in a lot of situations. When we get a new employee that is fresh out of college or grad school, we want them to be confident, yet not cocky and assuming that they know everything. They need to pay attention to the politics and procedures of the agency and the agencies that we work with. How to interact with clients to be most effective. I think that AOC could benefit from doing more observing and paying attention to how her words are being taken. She has some good ideas, but the more negative parts of her message overtake the positive in some cases. When AOC first came on the scene she totally rubbed me the wrong way. I also thought (and still do) she would benefit from sitting back a little and learning from her elder colleagues. There’s no doubt in my mind that she’s going to have several more “foot in mouth” episodes this year, although what she said in this case doesn’t bother me in the least. But every time I hear her doing her job, as in the Michael Cohen hearing yesterday, I am impressed, particularly with her communication skills. With a little tempering and refinement, she will be extremely effective.
|
|
|
Post by verdepea on Feb 28, 2019 21:20:50 GMT
So, you may have missed this, but the way it works in America is YOU work for US. The last time somebody told Americans to sit down and shut up was 1776. If you ever learn to read, look it up. You are not only a idiot, you’re an arrogant idiot, and there is nothing more dangerous t.co/5Hn8IoHFn8
— James Woods (@realjameswoods) February 23, 2019
My Texas Senators DO NOT hold time slots open to meet with their constituents and here our concerns. Read their twitter accounts, it is full of partisanship; it is their or the highway. And once upon a time, my JR Senator shut down the government and read his children a bed time story on the house floor. So these people calling out AOC can sit down. Yes she is green, yes she will make mistakes. AND??? She's smart, innovative, has a lot of support around her, and I bet she is open to listen more than my Senators. How about the arrogant Florida House member, whose had 6 DUI's, with a law degree who went after Cohen on twitter. The next day he showed up for oversight hearing, grinding his jaw like he was on coke. Matt set the stage on how the Republicans were going to behave during the hearing loud and obnoxious. There is two examples of ignorant arrogance. YES, I do find them dangerous to our country.
|
|
MizIndependent
Drama Llama
Quit your bullpoop.
Posts: 5,836
Jun 25, 2014 19:43:16 GMT
|
Post by MizIndependent on Feb 28, 2019 21:31:47 GMT
Let’s see. Republicans elected the cesspool beast currently occupying the WH on the refrain that they wanted to—what was it again? Oh yeah, drain the swamp. They demanded change to the system. So here we have a freshman senator actually formulating ideas and working to make changes that benefit Americans (See panel on campaign finance reform linked up thread) and you guys want her to shut up. How is change accomplished by AOC sitting mutely in a chair? What exactly is it that you want? How should a freshman representative act to your satisfaction? FFS, Marie Antoinette! That’s not just you—that’s all the other complainers and kvetchers out there. Maybe she is a bit of a bull in a china shop, but I’ll take that over that bumbling crowd of climate change denying, asylum-seeking family traumatizing, and lying Supreme Court justice appointing Republicans any damn day! So, by your logic...because the big Cheeto Buffoon is sitting in office no one is allowed to criticize a freshman Democrat for being offensive in her twitter remarks, is that it?
|
|
|
Post by peano on Feb 28, 2019 21:46:34 GMT
Let’s see. Republicans elected the cesspool beast currently occupying the WH on the refrain that they wanted to—what was it again? Oh yeah, drain the swamp. They demanded change to the system. So here we have a freshman senator actually formulating ideas and working to make changes that benefit Americans (See panel on campaign finance reform linked up thread) and you guys want her to shut up. How is change accomplished by AOC sitting mutely in a chair? What exactly is it that you want? How should a freshman representative act to your satisfaction? FFS, Marie Antoinette! That’s not just you—that’s all the other complainers and kvetchers out there. Maybe she is a bit of a bull in a china shop, but I’ll take that over that bumbling crowd of climate change denying, asylum-seeking family traumatizing, and lying Supreme Court justice appointing Republicans any damn day! So, by your logic...because the big Cheeto Buffoon is sitting in office no one is allowed to criticize a freshman Democrat for being offensive in her twitter remarks, is that it? Nope, that's not my point at all. Let's try again. People wanted change. People wanted legislators who actually work for their interests, rather than those of special interest groups. People are getting sidetracked by her histrionic media coverage rather than watching what she is actually doing. Which so far, is quite good work. Obviously you are free to criticize her all you want. And I am free to say that in this instance, I agree with her.
|
|
|
Post by hop2 on Feb 28, 2019 21:50:21 GMT
So, you may have missed this, but the way it works in America is YOU work for US. The last time somebody told Americans to sit down and shut up was 1776. If you ever learn to read, look it up. You are not only a idiot, you’re an arrogant idiot, and there is nothing more dangerous t.co/5Hn8IoHFn8
— James Woods (@realjameswoods) February 23, 2019
Well, not all of America, but Chris Christie said literally ‘sit down & shut up’ to New Jerseyans and at a town hall. Not sure how that worked out for him 😜
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jun 24, 2024 13:39:45 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 28, 2019 23:02:58 GMT
So these people calling out AOC can sit down. I don't think so. We have just as much right as you do to stand up and object when someone gets it so wrong. Which she does all too often. She stopped Amazon from coming in and paying taxes, so now she thinks she has newfound money to invest for the city because of that tax discount they won't be giving to Amazon. It seems to be totally over her head that there's now none of that tax money coming in to invest. She still doesn't get it, her twitter/billboard war shows her doubling down on that claim. That kind of ignorance is scary given that she thinks "she's in charge" and "the boss". She doesn't understand the word "representative". She thinks that somehow makes her the boss and in charge. She doesn't seem to know that ICE and the Border Patrol are 2 different agencies and she can't even keep track of what she thinks. Less than a week after she voted for DHS to keep funding ICE and the U.S. Border Patrol at current levels, she condemned the president for funding ICE at all.
|
|
|
Post by mollycoddle on Feb 28, 2019 23:41:36 GMT
Oh, I don’t know. She’s new to the job, but she seems bright; I have high hopes for her. She asked excellent questions yesterday during the Cohen hearing.
Plus, when compared to, say, Jim Jordan, Mark Meadows, Louie Gohmert, or that idiot who kept asking about evidence boxes yesterday-she’s a keeper.
|
|
|
Post by verdepea on Feb 28, 2019 23:43:04 GMT
So these people calling out AOC can sit down. I don't think so. We have just as much right as you do to stand up and object when someone gets it so wrong. Which she does all too often. She stopped Amazon from coming in and paying taxes, so now she thinks she has newfound money to invest for the city because of that tax discount they won't be giving to Amazon. It seems to be totally over her head that there's now none of that tax money coming in to invest. She still doesn't get it, her twitter/billboard war shows her doubling down on that claim. That kind of ignorance is scary given that she thinks "she's in charge" and "the boss". She doesn't understand the word "representative". She thinks that somehow makes her the boss and in charge. She doesn't seem to know that ICE and the Border Patrol are 2 different agencies and she can't even keep track of what she thinks. Less than a week after she voted for DHS to keep funding ICE and the U.S. Border Patrol at current levels, she condemned the president for funding ICE at all. Just so you know when I read your description, I have the same complaints about my Republican state officials and Congressional senators. They don't know the word representative and act like bosses who are in charge. They support the fake national emergency. Houston wanted Amazon too. The thing of it is, the state and cities have to give up so much money that its not really worth it to have them. Corporations are used to receiving so many freebies, that often the Return on Investment to the community is not worth it. Does Amazon HQ offer a good ROI. One example she has picked up on is the City gave so many incentives for Trump's Golf Course that it doesn't property taxes. The members pay local sales taxes on purchases. But in the case of Amazon, not only would they not pay property taxes, since there is no internet taxes on sales, there is no sales taxes. The tax burden is once again on the community members. NYC was willing to give double the incentives than any other city. AOC helped kill the Amazon Deal The million dollar question is would that have really benefited the community on long term basis? AOC advocated it would not have long term benefits and other leaders shared her feelings. But she did not do it alone.
|
|
|
Post by mollycoddle on Feb 28, 2019 23:43:58 GMT
Let’s see. Republicans elected the cesspool beast currently occupying the WH on the refrain that they wanted to—what was it again? Oh yeah, drain the swamp. They demanded change to the system. So here we have a freshman senator actually formulating ideas and working to make changes that benefit Americans (See panel on campaign finance reform linked up thread) and you guys want her to shut up. How is change accomplished by AOC sitting mutely in a chair? What exactly is it that you want? How should a freshman representative act to your satisfaction? FFS, Marie Antoinette! That’s not just you—that’s all the other complainers and kvetchers out there. Maybe she is a bit of a bull in a china shop, but I’ll take that over that bumbling crowd of climate change denying, asylum-seeking family traumatizing, and lying Supreme Court justice appointing Republicans any damn day! So, by your logic...because the big Cheeto Buffoon is sitting in office no one is allowed to criticize a freshman Democrat for being offensive in her twitter remarks, is that it? They are certainly free to do that. They are not, however, free from rebuttals from folks who disagree with them.
|
|
|
Post by SockMonkey on Feb 28, 2019 23:51:46 GMT
I don't get why people think AOC isn't "doing her job" or should "shut up."
She won her congressional district with nearly 80% of the votes. I think her constituents, who she IS representing, knew exactly what they wanted in her.
What a take to say she should "do her job."
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jun 24, 2024 13:39:45 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2019 0:00:10 GMT
I find James Woods, the vocal Trump supporter, calling ANYone an arrogant idiot, ironic in the extreme. Not impressed. Not to mention that he seems to have misinterpreted her tweet, which was in response to a tweet critical of Sen. Feinstein. AOC was challenging her fellow members of Congress to come up with plans, not telling Americans to sit down and shut up. Oddly, no one seems to have a problem with anyone telling AOC to sit down and shut up. James Woods gets the wrong end of more sticks than you need to make the wrong end of a forest.
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Mar 1, 2019 0:00:49 GMT
Not to mention that he seems to have misinterpreted her tweet, which was in response to a tweet critical of Sen. Feinstein. AOC was challenging her fellow members of Congress to come up with plans, not telling Americans to sit down and shut up. Oddly, no one seems to have a problem with anyone telling AOC to sit down and shut up. James Woods gets the wrong end of more sticks than you need to make the wrong end of a forest. I just snorted in the airport.
|
|
sassyangel
Drama Llama
Posts: 7,456
Jun 26, 2014 23:58:32 GMT
|
Post by sassyangel on Mar 1, 2019 0:14:39 GMT
Let’s see. Republicans elected the cesspool beast currently occupying the WH on the refrain that they wanted to—what was it again? Oh yeah, drain the swamp. They demanded change to the system. So here we have a freshman senator actually formulating ideas and working to make changes that benefit Americans (See panel on campaign finance reform linked up thread) and you guys want her to shut up. How is change accomplished by AOC sitting mutely in a chair? What exactly is it that you want? How should a freshman representative act to your satisfaction? FFS, Marie Antoinette! That’s not just you—that’s all the other complainers and kvetchers out there. Maybe she is a bit of a bull in a china shop, but I’ll take that over that bumbling crowd of climate change denying, asylum-seeking family traumatizing, and lying Supreme Court justice appointing Republicans any damn day! So, by your logic...because the big Cheeto Buffoon is sitting in office no one is allowed to criticize a freshman Democrat for being offensive in her twitter remarks, is that it? While I think she could use some tempering of her approach sometimes, and politically im pretty moderate compared to her, I'm having a really hard time even characterizing these particular Twitter remarks as offensive. Especially with how low the bar has been set for offensive, from the Tweeter in Chief. Its relative.
|
|
|
Post by Sharon on Mar 1, 2019 0:17:07 GMT
I don't think so. We have just as much right as you do to stand up and object when someone gets it so wrong. Which she does all too often. She stopped Amazon from coming in and paying taxes, so now she thinks she has newfound money to invest for the city because of that tax discount they won't be giving to Amazon. It seems to be totally over her head that there's now none of that tax money coming in to invest. She still doesn't get it, her twitter/billboard war shows her doubling down on that claim. That kind of ignorance is scary given that she thinks "she's in charge" and "the boss". She doesn't understand the word "representative". She thinks that somehow makes her the boss and in charge. She doesn't seem to know that ICE and the Border Patrol are 2 different agencies and she can't even keep track of what she thinks. Less than a week after she voted for DHS to keep funding ICE and the U.S. Border Patrol at current levels, she condemned the president for funding ICE at all. Just so you know when I read your description, I have the same complaints about my Republican state officials and Congressional senators. They don't know the word representative and act like bosses who are in charge. They support the fake national emergency. Houston wanted Amazon too. The thing of it is, the state and cities have to give up so much money that its not really worth it to have them. Corporations are used to receiving so many freebies, that often the Return on Investment to the community is not worth it. Does Amazon HQ offer a good ROI. One example she has picked up on is the City gave so many incentives for Trump's Golf Course that it doesn't property taxes. The members pay local sales taxes on purchases. But in the case of Amazon, not only would they not pay property taxes, since there is no internet taxes on sales, there is no sales taxes. The tax burden is once again on the community members. NYC was willing to give double the incentives than any other city. AOC helped kill the Amazon Deal The million dollar question is would that have really benefited the community on long term basis? AOC advocated it would not have long term benefits and other leaders shared her feelings. But she did not do it alone. There is tax on internet sales. I pay sales tax when I order from Amazon. I'm also in Texas.
|
|
sassyangel
Drama Llama
Posts: 7,456
Jun 26, 2014 23:58:32 GMT
|
Post by sassyangel on Mar 1, 2019 0:28:52 GMT
Just so you know when I read your description, I have the same complaints about my Republican state officials and Congressional senators. They don't know the word representative and act like bosses who are in charge. They support the fake national emergency. Houston wanted Amazon too. The thing of it is, the state and cities have to give up so much money that its not really worth it to have them. Corporations are used to receiving so many freebies, that often the Return on Investment to the community is not worth it. Does Amazon HQ offer a good ROI. One example she has picked up on is the City gave so many incentives for Trump's Golf Course that it doesn't property taxes. The members pay local sales taxes on purchases. But in the case of Amazon, not only would they not pay property taxes, since there is no internet taxes on sales, there is no sales taxes. The tax burden is once again on the community members. NYC was willing to give double the incentives than any other city. AOC helped kill the Amazon Deal The million dollar question is would that have really benefited the community on long term basis? AOC advocated it would not have long term benefits and other leaders shared her feelings. But she did not do it alone. There is tax on internet sales. I pay sales tax when I order from Amazon. I'm also in Texas. Yeah there was a supreme court ruling in 2018 on internet sales tax. Lots of online places I buy from who never used to charge ND sales tax, now do. Amazon has charged me sales tax forever. As soon as they set up a distribution center in Grand Forks, because they a "presence" here, and we automatically had to pay it then.
|
|