I think this is what the AMA is asking for..

What the American Medical Association wants from health care reform:

•A tax on the value of employer-sponsored health benefits. The revenue would fund tax credits to buy insurance for individuals and families earning up to 500 percent of the federal poverty level ($110,000 for a family of four).

•Reform of Medicare payment guidelines, including repeal of a formula that requires steep cuts in physician fees and compensation for coordinating patient care with hospitals and specialists.

•Exemption from malpractice lawsuits if physicians show they followed medical best practices, also known as evidence-based guidelines.

•National standards that would extend Medicaid to all persons below the poverty line.

•Higher taxes on alcohol, high-sugar beverages such as sodas, and fatty foods.

What the AMA opposes:

•Any new government-run insurance program that would replace private insurance.

•Large cuts to Medicare and Medicaid reimbursements.

•A tax on the value of employer-sponsored health benefits. The revenue would fund tax credits to buy insurance for individuals and families earning up to 500 percent of the federal poverty level ($110,000 for a family of four).


More than enough reason right there to stop it dead in its tracks.


•Higher taxes on alcohol, high-sugar beverages such as sodas, and fatty foods.


Here comes the nanny state looking out for us again. Will we ever get past this banal Villain Food Theology? What constitutes a "fatty" food? Can we look forward to a tax on 25% fatty foods, but 24% are exempt because they're so much healthier??

•Higher taxes on alcohol, high-sugar beverages such as sodas, and fatty foods.
Who has the larger lobby? The AMA or the HFCS industry, namely ADM who has many legislators of both parties in their pockets.

Sin taxes are nothing new.

Luckily I'm somewhat sinless..lol

Luckily I'm somewhat sinless..lol

Sadly, me too.

> sodas, and fatty foods.

I'm a hugely sinful person, and all that implies. Danged meddlers
8^)

Gotta do something so it makes sense to me...Just wondering what the poor folks will eat though since grazing healthy is a helluva lot more expensive

Surely you aren't stereotyping poor people?

gotta do something so it makes sense to me...

i don't suppose i understand where you're coming from... regarding higher taxes on certain types of food and drink, why do we have to do something?

-M

Not sure exactly what Easy meant, so I'm not here to defend him. However, I think it is obvious that the typical "healthy" alternatives usually come with a price premium over the mass produced unhealthy stuff. Unfortunately what I can see happening is that certain products will get taxed more, raising their price...and manufacturers will just end up degrading the products even more to keep the price point low and provide an even worse product.

I'm the first one that tries to load up on the healthy stuff as much as I can, but when it comes time to pinch some pennies...it is hard to turn away from the better bargains - even though you are paying for it with the extra weight that'll follow. I guess it comes down to, we can have a gazillion sin taxes, it won't push people away. Companies will always find ways to adjust their product to make the price point fit.

So if you're going to tax highly sugared and high fat foods, then doesn't that mean that they will have to tax what you eat at ANY restaurant? I mean, lets face it, the Chimichanga at Laredo's or any other Mexican restaurant is pretty darn fatty. How are they going to distinguish between the fat in a steak at the Cattlemans with all that butter on top of it vs. a bag of Doritos? They can't just put a tax on McDonalds without putting it on Johnnies or Mickey Mantles.

ok lets do it...fat and high calories...leads to questionable health choices, better to pay that up front, so we can pay for the quadruple heart by pass you brought on..

between the malpractice insurance and the health insurance...chink chin...

i don't suppose i understand where you're coming from... regarding higher taxes on certain types of food and drink, why do we have to do something?

-M

Walk around the fair for an hour or so mmm

Just saying it might be worth a try and could possibly make a decent long term impact if it slowly changes purchasing habits over the next few decades

Walk around the fair for an hour or so mmm

Just saying it might be worth a try and could possibly make a decent long term impact if it slowly changes purchase habits over the next few decades
Just so Taco Bell could win the franchise wars? No thanks...

So how is this to be practically done? Are they going to tax Dr. Pepper but NOT tax Diet Coke? Are they going to tax McDonalds but not Chili's? Are they going to tax Doritos but not Pretzels? I don't see how this can be practically done unless you do it at the commodity level.

I think its based on sugar or "empty" calorie content based of percentage of that ounce.

So again, do you tax Dr. Pepper but don't tax Diet Coke? Do you tax Red Bull but don't tax Ensure?

So again, do you tax Dr. Pepper but don't tax Diet Coke? Do you tax Red Bull but don't tax Ensure?

Better NOT tax Ensure unless you want a riot. ...of sorts. :tiphat:

LOL USG you made me think of the Simpsons episode where the Senior Citizens took back the City...

Better NOT tax Ensure unless you want a riot. ...of sorts. :tiphat:

It would just be all of those right wing loonies paid by the Ensure corporation. Part of the new Laxative Party Movement.

It would just be all of those right wing loonies paid by the Ensure corporation. Part of the new Laxative Party Movement.

And who says the Republican party isnt inclusive..lol

i don't suppose i understand where you're coming from... regarding higher taxes on certain types of food and drink, why do we have to do something?

-M

It looks like we'll still have to do something, such as learn to develop a cold heart and turn to people without medical insurance or money that they will have to do the best they can to live with their expensive health problem because we are too poor of a country to pay for their needed medical care, such as heart surgery, cancer treatment, or joint replacement, and etc.

> Laxative Party Movement.

Three words that really ought not be combined.

It looks like we'll still have to do something, such as learn to develop a cold heart and turn to people without medical insurance or money that they will have to do the best they can to live with their expensive health problem because we are too poor of a country to pay for their needed medical care, such as heart surgery, cancer treatment, or joint replacement, and etc.

Well, just maybe those that haven't gone to pot ( the OLD meaning of the term) will see people with the maladies you mentioned turned away from the medical facilities and think, "Oops, I better start living differently." And if they are incapable of learning from such things, I'm sorry, but I won't mind having them out of the gene pool. It does sound cold on the surface, Bunt, but as a species we will be better off in the long run with some REALLY TOUGH love.

I heard this elderly couple who lament about having to pay into the healthcare.
I asked them how long ago did you retire...20 plus years ago..Social Security retirement age should be raise, retirement benefits for over 20 years wasnt never envision by FDR.

Significantly pushing back the age of social security really makes it worthless for most people. I'm just saying.

I am 45 and I do not expect to have a retirement like my parents, I just don't think it will be possible due to many factors. I don't know that I would want to fully retire anyway, I would like to retire like my former boss. He does a few projects a year usually with someone else doing the CD/CA phase of projects like I did for him when he still had the firm in Austin (he has since sold out to a Phoenix based firm about a year after I left). He lives on a channel in Kemah and sails in the gulf the rest of the time. That would be my kind of retirement.

When "retirement" was set at 65 the average life span was, I think, 62. If it had been moved up along with the increase of life expectency, retirement would be eighty something now. Before the great medical leaps of the last 50 years one was expected to work til he dropped dead. That was the way "God" made things work and there is nothing evil about it. Retirements natural beginning is when your kids say "hey, look, we'll take care of your support from now on, you just enjoy living." Anything else is a governmental construct and is "unnatural."

I understand that a person who is a physical demanding job may need to retire sooner.
Compared to a office worker, but with advancements in life spans, treatments for those same physical demanding jobs, we should consider raising the retirement age.

Oh lets expand the school year ..just trying to be even handed lol

I liked the idea of year round school when I was teaching because it would give me vacation time in different seasons. However, a lot of teachers were against it because they had summer jobs that interfered with, or they were trying to go to school during the summer. I think if we extended the school year, we'd lose a lot of teachers. Many people are willling to work for peanuts because they are getting that big time off in the summer and the Christmas vacation. If they have to work nearly year round, anyway, they'll go someplace where they can make real money.

I understand that a person who is a physical demanding job may need to retire sooner.
Compared to a office worker, but with advancements in life spans, treatments for those same physical demanding jobs, we should consider raising the retirement age.
I think that has probably been one of the biggest changes in the retirement "perspective", as USG stated, when the age was set the life expectancy was much shorter and much of that may have also been due to more physically demanding work back then. I know that my father-in-law spent his life working in the oil fields of West Texas, even though he and my father are around the same age (71/72) my father seems to be in better health for the most part. My dad has had some back/knee issues but they are not as severe as some of the health problems that my father-in-law has endured.