The Dernogalizer

October 9, 2008

Healthcare and Taxes

Filed under: Energy/Climate,National Politics — Matt Dernoga @ 2:49 am
Tags: , , , ,
My Plan...(or not)

My Plan...(or not)

I ordinarily wouldn’t have much to say about Healthcare. However, the topic seemed to be a high point of contest during last night’s debate, and it got me thinking into which candidate’s plan would be more effective, and which would be more expensive. The independent Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center has looked over both candidate’s tax plans which include the healthcare programs. Here’s the link:

McCain’s program is estimated to cover 5 million of the uninsured and increase the deficit by 1.3 trillion dollars over 10 years. Obama’s will increase the deficit by 1.6 trillion and cover 34 million uninsured. I consider Obama’s plan under these very simple standards to be far more effective.

However, theres something else you should notice from not only the healthcare plans, but from the tax proposals of both candidates. Both tax plans put us much further into the red. Trillions of dollars further! Interestingly, for all the flack Obama gets about his plan, McCain’s plan actually puts us even further in debt. But, the point is, both tax plans are clearly wrong. Both are bad. Both will increase our debt. I’m not an expert on taxes and on all of our government spending, but I see simple glaring problems with both.

Obama’s middle class tax cut, while it sounds nice and people would like it, just isn’t affordable. All we’re doing is borrowing from our children that way, cause that’s who is paying for that “tax cut”.

It’s easy to see why McCain puts us further in debt than Obama. We’re already greatly increasing our deficit, yet McCain wants to give out more tax cuts to corporations, businesses, etc. It’s hard to fix the budget when all you’re going to do is give out taxes. His solution is to reduce the 18 billion we spend on earmarks? I don’t need to calculator to cry foul. The idea of a spending freeze, while extreme sounds interesting until McCain follows it with “except for this, this, this, and other high priorities”.

So how do you fix our gigantic deficit. A few of my ideas quite frankly are straight-talk that if either if these candidates spoke of, it would NOT go over well. But then again that’s why we’re in the hole that we’re in. Because people can’t stand to make the necessary cuts to bail us out of our problem.

So I know after my rant I should problem go back to my area of expertise, energy and environmental issues. But I’ll embarrass myself further. We can’t afford either Obama’s middle class tax cut, or McCain’s tax cuts for anything and everyone. That’s hundreds of billions of dollars that we DON’T have. Cut Iraq, really at this point, I think we’ve got Iraq in the bag, and certainly a troop draw down in 16 months is plausible. 10 billion a month in Iraq is 120 billion a year. Our economy is in ruin right now, we need that 120 billion here whether you like it or not.

And I can finally jump on stuff I know very well.

Obviously everyone by now knows we spend 700 billion dollars a year on foreign oil. Uhhh, then quit buying SUVS geniuses. But look, people who complain about our economy being tanked by dependence on foreign oil and then burning as much of it as they can are just plain hypocrites who don’t get it, or don’t want to get it. I’m not going to point fingers at anyone who has the car they have, and can’t afford to buy a new one. I’m talking about people who go and buy a new car and buy a Hummer or an F-150, or any SUV. I don’t want their poor choices bringing down my country and our economy.

So say to our automakers “okay we bailed your dumbasses out, now we mandating that you can’t make anymore SUVS or trucks”. 2009 was the last model, too bad for you. Funny thing is, we’d be doing them a favor by solving the problem that get them into their ruin in the first place. So say, from now on, all cars are either 30 mpg or higher, or you’re putting out hybrids. That right there would cut down on the money leaving our economy by billions of dollars within years. These head in the sand companies would also perform better by selling quality fuel economy cars.

Think I’m being crazy? Hell I say take some of that 700 billion dollars for our bailout, and pump it into massive tax credits for hybrids. The whole bailout involving seizing all these assets is socialist anyways, so quit crying foul. I like capitalism too, but since we’re throwing that notion out with the window with the bailout, might as well do it right. Pump billions into tax credits for hybrids and massive overhauls in energy efficiency of buildings. Especially ones owned by all these financial institutions we’re bailing out. This would significantly lower costs to business and consumer, and pump more many back into our economy because of the energy savings.

While you’re at it, impose a carbon tax, and lower the income tax accordingly. Tax what you burn not what you earn.

Okay you know what, explaining a carbon tax takes too long, so thats for another post, so forget I mentioned that. I stand by the rest of my rant. If we want to get serious about our economy, make serious investments and serious overhauls. None of the wimpy bs I’m seeing. Not with these jokes that my candidates call tax plans.



  1. Since the bush tax cuts the gov’t has actually seen a 20% increase in tax revenues so to say that cutting taxes for business puts us farther in the red isn’t quite right. Also 100 economists both democratic and republican leaning just came out with a study of both plans and like you said both candidates would put us more in the red however they said that obama would put us in the red between 27 to over 100 billion more than McCain.

    As for Health care, Universal Health care is just a horrible idea for so many reasons as explained here:

    And Obama’s middle class tax cut will actually hurt the middle class:

    Comment by nmorton — October 10, 2008 @ 8:47 pm | Reply

  2. Thanks for commenting Nmorton, I just wanted to point out a couple of things. First and foremost, I think the disagreements we have are just a matter of ideology, with you having a Republican perspective and I have a Democrat’s perspective. This is an argument thats probably never going to be solved.

    The sources you provided me were talking points from your blog, or you didn’t provide any sources at all. Do you have any independent studies or analysis that backs up your arguments, particularly about the Bush tax cuts and the 100 economists.

    I also wanted to point out that Obama’s plan is not a Universal Healthcare Plan.

    Finally, we’ll probably never agree on taxes. You’ve got your 8 years of Bush’s tax plan to go off of. I was too young to pay attention during the Clinton era where the tax on the wealthy was slightly higher. From what I hear though, the economy in the 1990’s did better, and the Democrats didn’t ruin the economy. Of course as I pointed out in my previous post, if you’re going to cut taxes, you need to have a surplus or you need to cut spending. I have seen no indication that Republicans have figured that out yet.

    Comment by Matt Dernoga — October 12, 2008 @ 3:55 pm | Reply

  3. Hey Matt, you are probably right we won’t agree on some of these issues, but here is a link to the 100 economists thing:

    Tax revenue increased since Bush tax cuts:

    or this from NYT (obviously not independant haha) in 2005:

    The thing is you can’t definitively say that tax cuts always equal increased revenues and you could argue that increased taxes would increase revenue. The problem with assuming that increased taxes equals increased revenues is that you’d have to assume the businesses will continue to run their business like they did before the tax increase and this is almost universally not the case.

    The problem with increasing taxes on business, in my opinion, is that businesses are always going to do their best to keep their money from the government. So when taxes are increased the businesses will slow growth, slow spending, etc. This growth and spending is taxed and so the more these businesses grow and spend the more money the govt will get. That’s the idea anyways.

    But you are right, it is not a cut and dry issue.

    Also like you said, it’s not universal health care but it is still mandated and government run. My personal experience with government run health care has been very very negative and I feel it often does a disservice to both the patient and the practitioner.

    Lastly, I cannot defend Bush on his spending policies. I do feel his tax policy is the right one. It is true that he had to increase spending once we were into the war in Iraq but he has also increased spending in so many other places. He had a legitimate chance to decrease the budget by decreasing his spending along with his tax cuts. Clinton actually decreased spending versus GDP by some where around 2% while Bush has increased by about 4%. A 6% swing is huge when we are dealing with trillions of dollars. I believe that McCain will cut spending because he’s based his whole campaign on that issue and has no one to answer to at this point in his political career. At least I know he won’t be taxing the crap out of businesses too. If he’s lying he’d be a lame duck president right away.

    Hope that all makes sense even if ya don’t agree. Have a good one.


    Comment by nmorton — October 12, 2008 @ 4:59 pm | Reply

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at

%d bloggers like this: