▲ 1093 ▼ Saint Luigi (i.imgur.com) submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) by TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone to c/lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world 172 comments fedilink hide all child comments Cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/34117495 [OC] Original still created by @gedogfx (IG). Title source: "Inkl" Edit: I'm not on any other social media platforms, so feel free to share this elsewhere if you want
[–] Dragon@lemmy.ml 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) How so? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] LandedGentry@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Dragon@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child) I'm conceding that it might not always be the case. I don't have an answer to your question because I don't feel like doing the research and math to figure out what the top earners would pay in any given state under universal health insurance. It seems to me obvious that it would represent a large tax increase, and that that increase would disproportionately effect top earners. If you have reason to believe it would universally save people money, I'm all ears for a reason or argument. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] LandedGentry@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Dragon@lemmy.ml -2 points 2 years ago I never said it wouldn't be cheaper overall, I'm aware that's true. I'm saying for top earners, it won't. Insurance costs the same for everyone, taxes don't. The only way around that entirely is a regressive tax. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] LandedGentry@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Dragon@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child) I'm conceding that it might not always be the case. I don't have an answer to your question because I don't feel like doing the research and math to figure out what the top earners would pay in any given state under universal health insurance. It seems to me obvious that it would represent a large tax increase, and that that increase would disproportionately effect top earners. If you have reason to believe it would universally save people money, I'm all ears for a reason or argument. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] LandedGentry@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Dragon@lemmy.ml -2 points 2 years ago I never said it wouldn't be cheaper overall, I'm aware that's true. I'm saying for top earners, it won't. Insurance costs the same for everyone, taxes don't. The only way around that entirely is a regressive tax. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Dragon@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child) I'm conceding that it might not always be the case. I don't have an answer to your question because I don't feel like doing the research and math to figure out what the top earners would pay in any given state under universal health insurance. It seems to me obvious that it would represent a large tax increase, and that that increase would disproportionately effect top earners. If you have reason to believe it would universally save people money, I'm all ears for a reason or argument. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] LandedGentry@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Dragon@lemmy.ml -2 points 2 years ago I never said it wouldn't be cheaper overall, I'm aware that's true. I'm saying for top earners, it won't. Insurance costs the same for everyone, taxes don't. The only way around that entirely is a regressive tax. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] LandedGentry@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Dragon@lemmy.ml -2 points 2 years ago I never said it wouldn't be cheaper overall, I'm aware that's true. I'm saying for top earners, it won't. Insurance costs the same for everyone, taxes don't. The only way around that entirely is a regressive tax. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Dragon@lemmy.ml -2 points 2 years ago I never said it wouldn't be cheaper overall, I'm aware that's true. I'm saying for top earners, it won't. Insurance costs the same for everyone, taxes don't. The only way around that entirely is a regressive tax. permalink fedilink source parent