It's not mine opinion but you can set there and stew in your ignorance and convince yourself that you are right by making up silly straw man arguments all day but the facts are that everyone competent in the subject disagrees with you. You try and bring it back to me but it is the experts that say that your one dumb r3dn3ck muther fucker!
hahahahaah
"If you walk out, on your own, and attempt to give your friendly neighborhood health insurer a dollar, you're taxed on that dollar. If your employer gives the health insurer that dollar on your behalf, that dollar is not taxed. As a result, getting health insurance through your employer became -- and remains -- a much better deal than purchasing it with your wages."
"The third reason is that the subsidy -- and that's what this is, a subsidy to employers who offer health care -- is very big, and quite hidden. In March 2007, the Joint Committee on Taxation estimated that ending all employer-related tax breaks for health care would raise $1.23 trillion between 2009 and 2012. That's more than $300 billion a year. That's much more than you'd need to pay for health care."
"But the importance of the employer tax exclusion is simple enough: The hinge question in health care reform is "where do you get the money?" And the main -- and most controversial -- pot of money in health care reform comes from the employer tax exclusion."
T"he first is that it's regressive. This is intuitive enough: The people who enjoy the tax break are employed. The people who enjoy the biggest tax break have employers buying them extremely comprehensive health benefits. Both types of people tend to be richer than people who are unemployed."
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezr...inners_th.html
"Tax Subsidies to Employer-Provided Health Insurance
NBER Working Paper No. 5147 (Also Reprint No. r2060)
Issued in June 1996
NBER Program(s): AG HC PE
Jonathan Gruber, James Poterba
This paper investigates the current tax subsidy to employer- provided health insurance, and presents new evidence on the economic effects of various tax reforms."
"The net tax subsidy to employer-provided insurance is substantial, with tax factors generating an average reduction of approximately thirty percent in the price of this insurance."
http://www.nber.org/papers/w5147
National Bureau of Economic Research
The NBER is the largest economics research organization in the United States.[2] Many of the American winners of the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences were NBER Research Associates. Many of the Chairmen of the Council of Economic Advisers have also been NBER Research Associates, including the former NBER President and Harvard Professor, Martin Feldstein.
The NBER's current President and CEO is Professor James M. Poterba of MIT.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Bureau_of_Economic_Research
Um, Dr Poterba wrote the paper cited above that studies the tax subsidies that you get. He is the president of EBER. I can now see the reason why you have to hide away in some low rent southern city and flog pharma. You couldn't get a real education because you can't read and interpret anything more than a detail sheet written for you by someone else.
