Taxes?

[merolpn]

I disagree with almost every policy of the United States government. I believe taxation is theft. What’s worse, the money I am forced to contribute goes towards murdering innocent people, as well as supporting despotic governments abroad. I view the leadership of the United States as a bunch of sociopaths and the government is no different than the mafia. I never agreed to be a part of this system and it has no authority other than the barrel of a gun.

Well, don't sugar coat it. Don't hold anything back. Just say how you really feel. Also, Ummmm.......there is no such thing as the "Mafia." With 310 million firearms in civilian hands within the U.S, no power in this country comes from the barrel of a gun. It comes from uneducated voters allowing the same policies to perpetuate from administration to administration, Democrat and Republican without any real change. Despite all of the "hope and change" you heard about, nothing has happened.

Just imagine the Dept. of Motor Vehicles running your hospital.

No, I don't want to imagine this. "Sir, you need to fill out these five forms. No, I don't have them here, they are on the back wall, just get back in line when you fill them out, we close in 30 minutes" ....."Sir, you need to fill out these five forms. No, I don't have them here, they are on the back wall, just get back in line when you fill them out, we close in 20 minutes" ......."Sir, you need to fill out these five forms. No, I don't have them here, they are on the back wall, just get back in line when you fill them out, we close in 10 minutes"......"Sir, we are now CLOSED"

Additionally, much of the bureaucratic inefficiencies in private hospitals is the fault of government and programs like medicare and medicaid. The government partially runs hospitals via regulations. One of the reasons private insurance has gone up so high is because hospitals and other provides are forced to pass along medicare/caid costs by raising what they charge private insurances to make up for underpayment from medicare/caid. There other option is to drop or not take anymore medicare/caid patients which they do as well.

Regulations are just your government looking out for your best interest, comrade.

[merolpn]

OE800_85....I hope you don't take me as argumentative. Even though I don't necessarily agree with all of your views, I like the way you write compelling arguments and I really enjoy taking the time to respond to them because it challenges me to get better at writing mine. (By the way, even if I did agree I try to write the other side for practice)

Maybe this forum should have a separate Debate section with different topic headings and make it subscriber only like the feedback section to keep these threads from becoming debates.

So, essentially they cannot give dividends to investors, but for some strange reason, they can offer multi-million dollar salaries to their administrators (while relatively giving little to doctors and nurses and other key staff)

This is called the "Labor Market" and the reasons are not "strange." Out of curiosity, what then, should be the maximum salary (you think) somebody working for a "non-profit" should be allowed to make? Does it occur to you that if employees of non-profits were bound to significant salary restrictions that they would seek employment elsewhere and all of the best employees would leave them? I happen to know many doctors and nurses (my mother for one)that work for non-profits and they are not underpaid. Everyone wants to earn more, but they earn a comfortable salary. The reason they stay is because they are paid fairly. If not, they would be working where the pay is better.

But this is a necessary service, one that should be nonprofit

Do you really believe healthcare should be non-profit or free? Again, if nobody could make a profit what would draw people to the healthcare industry? If no profit could be made,the collective health of U.S. society would suffer.

Estimates say (on prescription drugs alone) we would save as much as 40% simply by having the same laws and regulations of other developed countries in the world. Not to mention this disgusting culture of over medicating. One of the driving forces of this is the profit incentive pharmaceutical companies have in America. They make astronomical profits here while the margins are much much smaller abroad.

I love the other "Developed" or "industrialized" country argument. We commonly hear this but many of these other "developed" and "undeveloped" countries are better off due to our capitalist economy providing financial rewards to those who seek to find cures and create medicines. I know that there are scientists in other countries doing great work and I am sure they wish they could be here to profit from their ideas. The reason their profit margins are much smaller in other counties is because they are restricted by other governments. This is probably why 6 out of the top 12 pharmaceutical companies are based in the U.S. It makes perfect sense, they make money here. So, they earn a sizable profit here and not so sizable in other countries. Would it be better if they just didn't offer their products for sale to other countries instead of taking a reduced profit.

I do agree on the fact we over medicate but this is a personal choice someone needs to make with their doctor and take responsibility. We could do a much better job at this than we are.

[NumberSix]

With 310 million firearms in civilian hands within the U.S, no power in this country comes from the barrel of a gun. It comes from uneducated voters allowing the same policies to perpetuate from administration to administration, Democrat and Republican without any real change.

"If voting changed anything, they'd make it illegal"

[merolpn]

"If voting changed anything, they'd make it illegal"

This is exactly why the framers of the Constitution did not frame a pure democracy.

This sums it up.

"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter" Winston Churchill

[quasarvs]

"If voting changed anything, they'd make it illegal"

On this I'd like to say, PLEASE take heart!

Our best reaction against ignorance and stupidity in the electoral system is to educate.
Being an informed and educated voter has to be a life-style of the culture that is PASSED down to future generations.
Unfortunately, with our affluent culture we neglect tradition and beliefs that are both more valuable than "stuff".
But we should look at the big picture and our frustration doesn't have to be so overwhelming.

Comment on the Full Thread:

VERY Interesting and complicated thoughts here in this discussion on Taxes and Healthcare!

[OE800_85]

I have no problem debating on this thread, I think it's engaging and stimulating. Perhaps we don't agree, but I want to hear your views.

This is called the "Labor Market" and the reasons are not "strange." Out of curiosity, what then, should be the maximum salary (you think) somebody working for a "non-profit" should be allowed to make? Does it occur to you that if employees of non-profits were bound to significant salary restrictions that they would seek employment elsewhere and all of the best employees would leave them? I happen to know many doctors and nurses (my mother for one)that work for non-profits and they are not underpaid. Everyone wants to earn more, but they earn a comfortable salary. The reason they stay is because they are paid fairly. If not, they would be working where the pay is better.

I emphasized the word "relatively" in my post. In that the staff doing this work is always getting a relatively smaller and smaller piece of the pie. It's a microcosm of the world today. The world is becoming extremely top heavy. So much so, that in America, a family that makes minimum wage can starve (and no, i'm not talking about drug addicts and people who make bad choices with money). You said the doctors keep working because they get a comfortable, fair salary. So, are you saying administrators can't be happy with a fair, comfortable salary? The only reason they make so much, is because they're holding all the cards. They make the decisions, so of course they will pay themselves handsomely. If you were in charge, you'd give yourself as much money as possible. For a non-profit institution, that is supposed to be helping the community, it's sickening.

Do you really believe healthcare should be non-profit or free? Again, if nobody could make a profit what would draw people to the healthcare industry? If no profit could be made,the collective health of U.S. society would suffer.

I didn't make that decision. The hospitals made that decision when they chose to be non-profit enterprises. If they disagree they can go back to being for-profit and face the same rules as every other business. Again, many for-profit hospitals exist. However, they're not as insanely profitable because they can't take advantage of the system so well.

I love the other "Developed" or "industrialized" country argument. We commonly hear this but many of these other "developed" and "undeveloped" countries are better off due to our capitalist economy providing financial rewards to those who seek to find cures and create medicines. I know that there are scientists in other countries doing great work and I am sure they wish they could be here to profit from their ideas. The reason their profit margins are much smaller in other counties is because they are restricted by other governments. This is probably why 6 out of the top 12 pharmaceutical companies are based in the U.S. It makes perfect sense, they make money here. So, they earn a sizable profit here and not so sizable in other countries. Would it be better if they just didn't offer their products for sale to other countries instead of taking a reduced profit.

This is one of the biggest contradictions the pharmaceutical industry has given. R&D is an investment, one that will pay off with success. That's capitalism. They choose to go down this road and develop these drugs, why should we pay for that? You talk of free markets and somehow we should be giving these companies, a handout?

I do agree on the fact we over medicate but this is a personal choice someone needs to make with their doctor and take responsibility. We could do a much better job at this than we are.

I have no idea why there are so many pharmaceutical ads in this country. I believe they should be illegal. The only person who should be recommending medicine (and who has the skills to do so) is your doctor. However, these ads encourage people (who know nothing of medicine) to "ask their doctor" and push them to medicate them. Doctors realize this, as well as the added incentives and bonuses we know they're receiving for doing so, and we end up dosing the masses.

As an added note, I personally believe there should be no profit from healthcare. We, as healthcare consumers, have a raw deal. We don't see bills before we pay them, we can't negotiate with pharmaceutical companies and hospitals over prices (while medicare/medicaid can), and we end up getting forced to buy something we need at an inflated price. America has the worst public health of any developed country in the world, and often it's worse than many developing/under developed nations. There's a reason for this, and it all boils down to issues like these.

[quasarvs]

Pardon my butting in on the middle of this debate, but

I was curious if anyone had any thoughts regarding getting degrees from TESC
and getting tax credits for school.

I want to get the most tax credit I can, but because I only took 2 courses with TESC, my tax
people want to call me a half-time student, yet I'm earning a full B.A. Shouldn't I get credit as a full-time student?

[Publius]

Pardon my butting in on the middle of this debate, but

I was curious if anyone had any thoughts regarding getting degrees from TESC
and getting tax credits for school.

I want to get the most tax credit I can, but because I only took 2 courses with TESC, my tax
people want to call me a half-time student, yet I'm earning a full B.A. Shouldn't I get credit as a full-time student?

On page 42 of Publication 970 the IRS defines a "half time student" as the following: Publication 970, Tax Benefits for Education

Half-time student. A student is enrolled “at least half-time” if he or she is enrolled for at least half the full-time academic work load for the course of study the student is pursuing, as determined under the standards of the school where the student is enrolled.

Our school's standards accept CLEP, DSST, SL, etc. so those forms of credit are valid. TESC accepts them, you earned them. That's the way I see it. So, I'd take the total number of credits you've earned this year into consideration, not just the classes.

However, that's just my opinion and people's opinions are going to vary. Submit a ticket to TESC explaining what your situation. Get in writing whether you're a full or part time student. If they say you're a full time student, print it out and keep it for your records since claiming a tax credit may make you more likely for an audit (odds are still VERY low, but it does raise it for a bit).

[EI2HCB]

On page 42 of Publication 970 the IRS defines a "half time student" as the following: Publication 970, Tax Benefits for Education

Our school's standards accept CLEP, DSST, SL, etc. so those forms of credit are valid. TESC accepts them, you earned them. That's the way I see it. So, I'd take the total number of credits you've earned this year into consideration, not just the classes.

However, that's just my opinion and people's opinions are going to vary. Submit a ticket to TESC explaining what your situation. Get in writing whether you're a full or part time student. If they say you're a full time student, print it out and keep it for your records since claiming a tax credit may make you more likely for an audit (odds are still VERY low, but it does raise it for a bit).

Meanwhile at Excelsior they only count the credits you gain through their classes and your GPA through their classes for aid, which I presume also applies to the tax situation, someone better versed in tax law may be able to argue that CLEP exams are eductional costs and therefore deductable as an expense.

[EI2HCB]

On page 42 of Publication 970 the IRS defines a "half time student" as the following: Publication 970, Tax Benefits for Education

Our school's standards accept CLEP, DSST, SL, etc. so those forms of credit are valid. TESC accepts them, you earned them. That's the way I see it. So, I'd take the total number of credits you've earned this year into consideration, not just the classes.

However, that's just my opinion and people's opinions are going to vary. Submit a ticket to TESC explaining what your situation. Get in writing whether you're a full or part time student. If they say you're a full time student, print it out and keep it for your records since claiming a tax credit may make you more likely for an audit (odds are still VERY low, but it does raise it for a bit).

Meanwhile at Excelsior they only count the credits you gain through their classes and your GPA through their classes for aid, which I presume also applies to the tax situation, someone better versed in tax law may be able to argue that CLEP exams are eductional costs and therefore deductable as an expense.