Wow. Just Wow. I am now a huge Edwards supporter. (thanks benny05)

[BigBearJohn]

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/5/2/104825/2710

[medeak]

1. WAS a fan until reading this

My plan costs 90 to 120 billion dollars a year and I pay for it by getting rid of George Bush's tax cuts for people who make over $200,000 a year."

feck.

[snot]

2. Why "feck"?

I'm afraid I shouldn't bother asking . . .

[tkmorris]

3. You're gonna LOVE the answer.......

I've seen it before so I know what medeak's perspective is. I don't wish to speak for him so I'll let him tell ya but trust me, you're gonna love it.

[Wetzelbill]

4. ok now you made me curious...

:)

[ConsAreLiars]

5. I suspect, if medeak ever confesses,

that it is some variant of "I've got mine, fuck everyone else." That's the usual rationale for opposing economic justice and shared responsibility.

[medeak]

6. wow...didn't know I made such an impression

and btw..am not a man.

like posted on another thread...DU is not compassionate to small business people. Thanks for making my point. It's not fun to compete with enormous corporations to keep employees with health insurance and 401K's.

Not to mention employee had a million dollar baby born 10 yrs ago and held hostage by insurance company as her yearly surgeries will never be covered if we change coverage.

25 yrs of struggling to keep 70 employees employed and responsible for their families...taking risks every day for such...makes me evil I presume.

edited to say...can't be all that bad...most employees have been with me for 15 yrs plus.

[Zomby Woof]

17. Then if Edwards' plan would work

You could come out ahead, or at least break even. But the goal is to help you get ahead.

It's possible that if your tax cut is repealed, you'd make up the difference or more with reduced healthcare costs. That's the point of healthcare reform - to make it more accessible and affordable for everyone, including small business owners.

DUers in general have nothing against small business or small business owners - this is the site that rails against Wal-Mart precisely in defense of workers and small businesses.

[jsamuel]

19. Sometimes I wish we had a "Recommend Comment" ability here at DU.

Recommended.

[medeak]

23. that would be a utopia indeed

but am not that big of an optimist to think that insurance lobbies won't win out. :-(

My only goal is to get the same health insurance rates that larger groups do. Have considered being self insured for many decades.

[blm]

31. This may interest you - though corpmedia hasn't mentioned it.

This is some follow-through based on his plans from 2004 campaign. His plans were always to ease the burden on the small business owner.

Now that he chairs the small biz committee, he can push this through.


Kerry Health Care Plan Eases Cost Burden on Families, Businesses

Kerry Bill allows for broader coverage and lower premiums



WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, Senator John Kerry (D-Mass.) introduced the Healthy Businesses, Healthy Workers Reinsurance Act of 2007, which will tackle the growing crisis of health care costs for families and businesses. Under Kerry’s plan, the federal government will pick up part of the cost for the most catastrophic cases – and in turn, businesses will cover all their employees with quality, preventative coverage. Premiums for all Americans will decrease by up to 10%. Healthy Businesses, Healthy Families is co-sponsored by Senator Jack Reed (D-R.I.).


“The cost of health insurance premiums for families has risen 87 percent since 2000 – this is a huge contributor to the health care crisis in this country,” said Senator Kerry, Chairman of the Senate’s Small Business Committee and a member of the Finance Committee. “Part of the reason that businesses don’t cover their workers is an aversion to risk -- a fear that they will be saddled with a sick employee whose high premiums will bankrupt them. But there’s a way to fight these high costs – and it’s time Washington makes employers and healthcare plans an offer they can't refuse.”


One percent of patients account for a quarter of healthcare costs. And 2 out of 10 patients account for more than 80 percent of all healthcare costs. Under Kerry’s plan, the federal government would reimburse a percentage of these high cost cases if employers include preventative care and health promotion benefits in their health plans, make quality coverage available to all full-time workers, and implement practices proven to make care more affordable. This means lower costs and lower premiums for both employers and employees.


The Legislation establishes a Reinsurance Trust Fund, which would be administered by the Department of Health and Human Services. The fund would reimburse qualified employers and health plans for a portion of the catastrophic health costs of their active and retired employees, and their families.


“Reforming health care in this country requires us to address cost in a comprehensive and meaningful way,” Kerry added. “It’s time the government starts to shoulder some of the burden to help alleviate costs to large employers, small businesses, and families. This will lay the groundwork for achieving our ultimate goal: healthcare coverage for every single American.”

###

[Naturyl]

24. Oh boo-hoo. World's smallest fiddle.

Isn't it possible that DU is "not compassionate toward small business people" because small business people don't need much compassion? It's business, and there's a cost involved in doing it. I love how business people who are usually the first to preach about "hard work" and "personal responsibility" act like they are going to go under if they don't get a tax-break welfare handout from the government.

What we need is less talk about "personal responsibility" and more about "social responsibility." And we needn't waste much time worrying about the poor, downtrodden, benighted plight of those making over $200k a year.

[1932]

27. Small business people are getting screwed by big business every

bit as badly as working individuals.

[ConsAreLiars]

30. First, I never said you were a man or even alleged you were human.

Secondly, the fact that you oppose reform of the health care system because you think it would take money out of your ample pockets proves my point.

Third, your "success" at stealing from your employees does not make you a better person.

Fourth, as for your worthiness and righteousness being evidenced by the longevity of your business, don't think that makes you "special." Exxon and the banks have a much longer history. I helped start up a worker owned and managed co-op that has survived longer than your pride and joy, and has the added moral value of benefiting the people who do the work and the community at large, rather than some one individual.

Fifth, I am not DU. Don't take my words, or any one else's, as representative of whatever broad brush label happens to be constraining your mind at the moment.

(edit because a word was skipped while typing.)

[medeak]

10. what exactly is my perspective?

have you ever been in business for yourself and responsible for families besides your own?

[The Backlash Cometh]

13. Um, there's no law that says you can't make more than $200,000, it

just says that you have to pay more in taxes.

Or, we can go another route, and all those tax breaks you get when you spend money in ways that no one else can, should be dispensed with?

As for Devil's Advocate: I do believe the Democrats need to do better to reel in the small business owner, but I don't know if whatever they do will be enough, because the ones that I do know, are Republican and mean son's of bitches.

[hfojvt]

29. I have been in business for myself

but in seven years of retail, my gross sales were probably around $100,000. I imagine I would have had it alot tougher if I had made over $200,000 a year.

[gipper66]

7. living modestly

I make well over 400K a year (mostly due to my wife). We pay almost 50% tax despite future tax rises. We would willing pay more if it didn't go to superfilous pork. I want our contribution targeted to local community and poverty programs. FAT Chance.

[medeak]

8. highest tax bracket is 35%?

how pray tell do you pay 50%?
edited to say....see you live in CA...state income tax? I have none thank gawd.

[jsamuel]

14. Using Diebold's version of TurboTax?

[Naturyl]

25. Good for you

You have a conscience. That's a good thing to have.

[saltpoint]

9. I kinda don't like going to the Dkos site but I admit that this piece

was pretty darn good.

Some very strong supportive comments in the reply section, also.

Very useful information, and very pro-Democrat. Edwards continues to set the pace for ideas in this campaign.

[silverojo]

11. Edwards kicks ass

If he walks even half his talk, he'll be the greatest president since FDR.

[phillysuse]

12. I am a Clark supporter but I will support Edwards

if Clark does not run (and it looks like he will not, in my opinion).

Edwards is starting to sound a lot like Bobby Kennedy in 1968.

I can remember that some of us felt that Bobby Kennedy only got into the race and began to speak out against the VietNam War AFTER Eugene McCarthy had shown that Johnson was vulnerable and had withdrawn from the race. In the same way, Edwards did not speak out in 2002 when he voted for the IWR and also when he co-sponsored the Patriot Act.

Nonetheless, seeing this speech with the intensity against the War in Iraq and his coupling the War with the domestic urgencies for health care for all and ending poverty has the emotional whammy that neither the mechanized Hillary nor the vague aloofness of Obama has achieved. And given that he is more explicit about what he will do, I am finding myself leaning to support Edwards.

My heart, however, still belongs to General Clark.

[youthere]

16. Sigh..

Pining for Clark myself.

[Clark2008]

18. I will NOT support Edwards - but it has nothing to do with

Clark.

I think Edwards is a pure politicians - willing to change his mind, ideology and purpose for a vote. I've seen him do it all throughout his short career and don't care to see it again.

Bobby Kennedy my ass.

Sorry, to be so blunt.

[Blackhatjack]

21. your observation of his 'short career' does not trump those of us who followed his entire career...

You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but you are admittedly basing it on your observation of John Edwards' 'short career'(your phrase, not mine).

I have followed John Edwards for over 22 years and I can tell you know nothing about him, his integrity, and his contributions to the betterment of his fellow citizens over this span of time, which includes the period of time before he entered politics.

Who do you get your information from? Do you(or they) live in North Carolina?

IF you are presenting a thoughtful and researched decision about Edwards and his proposals, please tell us which of these Edwards positions you disagree with:

Edwards is in favor of ending this war now, and immediately bringing home 40-50,000 troops, and the rest within 12-18 months.

Edwards is favor of providing healthcare coverage immediately for the 55 million uninsured citizens of this country, and has put forth a plan with specifics as to how this can be done.

Edwards is in favor of addressing the shame of poverty in this country. (He did help found and fund an Anti-Poverty Center at UNC-Chapel which is presently addressing this problem full-time).

Edwards is proposing a 'roll back' of the Bush tax cuts for those earning $200,000/yr or more.

Bonus question: Do you have a difference of opinion with John Edwards that does not involve your attacking his character or him personally?

Please respond. We all will benefit from understanding where you are coming from.

[w4rma]

34. I think Edwards will be the next FDR. He's got the policy and he's got the charisma. (nt)

[bobbolink]

35. RFK is a very good example of "conversion"!

He certainly wasn't very likeable early one.
Edwards can never be accused of not being "likeable". :)

RFK changed his mind and his heart and his life, and became so important to this country that he was killed for his efforts.

Given the attacks on Edwards and *his* life, I'm seeing some parallels.

"emotional whammy" -- good way to put it....

Thanks for your thoughts.

[Blackhatjack]

15. How many here are in favor of making Bush's tax cuts for $200,000/yr and up PERMANENT?

I have no problem with people earning $200,000/yr or more, as long as it is earned legitimately and not at the expense of the health and well-being of others and the environment.

However, it seems to be a bit hypocritical to say we oppose Bush and his policies that have dismantled so many social programs needed to help those in the middle and lower classes, and then complain that someone like John Edwards will 'roll back' Bush's tax cuts for the rich earning $200,000/yr and up.

If that is your position, then I guess you would trade the budget surplus that Clinton handed over to Bush with a growing economy for the present huge budget deficits and the shambled economy we have today.

The Bush tax cuts should never have been implemented. They were a failure for the country, and a windfall for the rich. They were inequitable and unfair, and have led to all kinds of government regulatory failure and reduction in public assistance caused by these budget cuts.

I think Democrats can make lots of headway in targeting the very important costs(like healthcare insurance coverage) visited upon small business owners which affect all of their employees. But the fact that small businesses presently have costs they cannot offset is no reason to allow Corporations and the richest citizens of this country to pay almost no tax whatsoever.

Edwards is right, and if he is elected President there will be no better friend of the people, and that includes small business owners.

[ripple]

20. I like Edwards- in fact he's my second choice of those running

Yet I definitely think it's important to take what he says about what Congress should and should not do with a huge grain of salt. He won't be in a position to be voting on these measures, so it's easy for him to quarterback from the couch, so to speak. When he was in a position to make such decisions, he made a profoundly irresponsible choice.

[eridani]

22. With single payer, it isn't necessary to raise taxes at all

Everybody just pays their insurance premiums into a common pool whose purpose is to spend it to take care of sick people, instead of into a bunch of cherry-picked pools of private insurance whose purpose is to spend as little of it as possible on actual care. If you want to call such a premium a "tax", it's just nitpicking, IMO.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

26. There's a problem there paying if you don't have a job.

I got no job, my SO got no job, we can't get jobs. We have three college degrees each so are unemployable. I have medical chronic conditions and have to pay for my own medications.

No preventive screenings, etc. Maintenance only.

How in the hell are those who are lucky enough to have jobs and can't pay the bills as it is supposed to pay for insurance premiums.

[eridani]

28. Premiums would be paid entirely by the government or subsidized under single payer

My point was that the money we are NOW PAYING collectively as a society for health care could be easily redirected to a public trust fund. Or as Kucinich keeps saying, "We are already paying for universal health care--we just aren't getting it."

[Rosemary2205]

32. Bingo. nt.

[Cameron27]

33. Dennis is right about this.