How about raising the payroll tax? But Rs don't want to do that. But keep pretending that Republican policies have nothing to do with this.
Mike Johnson is coming for the Boomer generation
- Thread starter PabloNole
- Start date
There hasn’t been a single decent argument on this board that shows that I, or someone like me, doesn’t pay my fair share in taxes.
We shouldn’t further penalize hard-working, high tax paying, low healthcare utilizers due to the reckless spending habits of our swampy politicians. We should limit the spending.
These ******** have shown they can’t manage our money responsibly. So your answer is to send them more of it? Goodness.
Yea, BMI isn’t the right measure. There would have to be a different model.
A model run by whom? The healthcare companies that are already over medicating us? That’s a no for me and I would assume a large majority of people.
Healthcare lost a lot of credibility during COVID and no one is ready to turn over their rights for a subjective measurement.
It’s a good idea, but I don’t see a practical way of enforcing it.
More worthless posts from somebody with money telling the working class that they should eat it.
I didn't say you don't pay your fair share, I'm just saying that you can't make a dent in the debt without raising taxes. Even if we fired every single govt. employee, we would only save 1% of the yearly budget.
Raising premiums on fats and cutting waste won't be enough. So how do we do it without eliminating or severely curtailing entitlements for future recipients?
Well, I would severely curtail entitlements.
How about we curtail the military and ICE and rich tax cuts instead of going after programs that working class people have spent their entire lives paying into?
I’m with you on healthcare companies. And the traditional medical approach of over-medication.
But I’m sure there’s an algorithm incorporating height, weight, age, gender, body fat %, etc that AI can run to accurately capture elevated, obesity-related health risk.
Let’s trim the fat! Boomers over a certain net worth shouldn’t get any social security
No way. If you contribute, you receive the benefit. Otherwise it’s just stealing. But everyone is going to have to accept less of a benefit.
that's a problem with democracy, every politician wants to get votes, you do that by giving people things. Once you get 51% of the voters on the dole, you're screwed.
I am contributing and being told I won’t get the full benefit. How is that not stealing from me! Boomers raided the trust fund. Time to live with the consequences.
I guess if you can demonstrate high correlation to substantial medical spend increase over a broad population. During covid, obesity was a far better predictor of complications and costs, however.
And we know with certainty that obesity has a major, broad financial impact. In fact, after refreshing myself on these figures, I’m even more annoyed at these people running up our health insurance rates and Medicare/Medicaid costs. We all should be.
Individual Annual Costs by BMI
The financial burden increases sharply alongside the severity (class) of obesity: [1, 2]
- Class 1 Obesity (BMI 30–34.9): ~$1,700 to $1,860 more per year.
- Class 2 Obesity (BMI 35–39.9): ~$3,000 more per year.
- Class 3 Obesity (BMI 40+): ~$5,850 more per year. [1, 2]
Total U.S. Economic Burden
- Aggregate Spending: Obesity-related medical care costs contribute hundreds of billions of dollars annually to the U.S. healthcare system, with some estimates exceeding $260 billion per year. [1, 2]
- Public vs. Private: Costs vary by coverage type. A study of privately insured large employers noted an average spend of $12,588 for patients diagnosed with obesity, compared to $4,699 for those without. Public insurance (like Medicare and Medicaid) incurs even higher excess costs due to older populations and complex comorbidities.
Read that last line again. And read it twice the next time you suggest tax increases based on income. High earners paying already high taxes aren’t the problem. The problem is written right there for you.
PS - not all directed at you. This is for everyone.
Last edited:
who's telling you you won't get the full benefit? That's what the debate about "fixing" the problem is about.
Tell me that I lose benefits above based on my net worth, I start moving more money into my grandchildren's trusts. Problem solved
Ya don't say? Incredible insight!
Thanks for the comment. I will stand by while Congress gets ready to actually do their jobs for the first time in 20 years.
Social Security is telling me I won’t get the full benefit. They send me a letter every year. It’s a Ponzi scheme and I am paying for those older than me and unfortunately there won’t be enough people to pay for me.
Whatever you do, please don't expect the party you voted for to actually address a real issue. Well done.
Are you not at higher risk for hospitalization? I look at it like a driver with speeding tickets. They are higher risk, just as you are with obesity.
Perhaps. But you have to look at lifetime cost impact. What percent of people are hospitalized due to lack of vaccines? Less than 1%? And that’s a one-time cost.
Look at the numbers above. Obese people are costing thousands extra on average every year. Not once. And it gets worse with time and age, ie when Medicare (taxpayers) kicks in and starts paying.
And over 40% of the country is obese. It’s a massive, massive problem. And we’re all paying for it. Higher health insurance premiums (because the normal folks subsidize the obese). Higher Medicaid costs. Higher Medicare costs.
It’s an epidemic.
I know a way. We need to give billionaires more tax cuts.
I like the speeding ticket analogy though. We charge bad drivers higher premiums. We charge higher home owners premiums for high-risk homes. We charge higher life insurance rates for poor health.
Why in the world do we not rate people based on controllable health conditions for health insurance? I’m totally fine eating the premium risk for a kid with leukemia. Or a mom with breast cancer. But not a 45 year old fat who crushes fast food every day, doesn’t exercise and has lifestyle- induced diabeetus.
You are either being obtuse, or a complete moron. Either way, kudos to you for keeping me guessing up to this point.
Neither party is willing to raise the payroll tax just like neither party is willing to reduce benefits. The only exception is that democrats would be more than happy to increase taxes and take benefits away from billionaires. It's always good politics to tell 98% of the people that the top 2% are the problem.
I don't pretend anything. You're the one in denial. Politicians get elected by promising more free stuff and they lose elections by threatening to take stuff away. That's just how it is. You seem to think it's a republican problem but neither Obama or Biden were willing to address it.
Here's another clue. Democrats talk about the BBB being tax cuts for billionaires but that's hardly true. No tax on tips, no tax on OT, no tax on SS, higher standard deduction, increased child credits, etc don't apply to billionaires or anybody making more than a few hundred thousand. I'll guarantee you that democrats won't reverse those things.
Democrats would never agree to those things either.
- The SS tax cap goes up every year and is now $184,500. Is that what you call a billionaire?
- The original SS tax rate was 2.0%. Now it's 12.4%. Do you really think either party is willing to make that 14.4% for all income levels? Not a chance.
- There's already a supplemental tax on investment income if you earn more than $250k.
Here we go again. What tax cuts? You know, those that went to billionaires. Which ones? All of them. Why didn't Obama or Biden take care of the debt? Trump sucks. Your thoughtful analysis never ceases to amaze me. SMH
At the end of Obama's term, the economy was doing fine and we didn't need the TCJA to juice the economy, so when we drastically cut taxes at that time anyway, because that's what Republicans do without regard to the consequences, the decision added 2 trillion dollars to the debt. Not to mention that when they passed it, it had a sundown provision for individuals that was supposed to expire in 2025. Of course that's when they decided to make them permanent despite the damage they had already done to the deficit/debt.
And let's not forget that Obama entered office during one of the worst economies on record following a Republican administration.
And let's not forget that Biden entered office during another bad economy exacerbated by hysterically bad pandemic management following another Republican administration.
Obama and Biden did attempt to address the deficit despite the sh*tty hands they inherited, so feel free to look it up but how about we quit passing along the sh*ttiest hands possible in the first place? Republicans are the biggest issue here despite your anxiety when I speak the truth about them. Stop being a b*tch and demand better fiscal responsibility from your side first before whining about what Dems had to do to clean up Republican messes.
Missed this. Comments:
- Federal spending on ICE will be $18.7B annually over the next 4 years. Federal budget is $7.4T, so ICE is 0.25% of federal spending for 2026. That's not moving the needle.
- As I've said before, please identify those not paying their fair share and propose tax legislation that only goes after them. Find those billionaires paying 8% effective rates on actual income. Find those rich guys paying less than their secretaries. Get their effective rates up to where the rest of us are. But leave people actually paying a high rates - and far more that 98% of the country - the **** alone.
- Take a look at the military if you want too. That's actually a large spend category. I wouldn't reduce our effectiveness, but I bet there's a **** load of waste in our military contracts.
- Entitlements account for $3.5T of our federal budget, or 47.3%. We simply can't get out of this without reducing spending here. And reducing the general mentality of government dependence.
I just took a look…9.7% have BMI of 40? Wow.
Admittedly, I’ve not flown much (used to fly 30-40 times a year) since I retired in 2024, but in flying back to South Carolina two weeks ago, even I was surprised by the number of excessively heavy people I saw. Technically, I’m Class 1…which is laughable, but I get it.
Epidemic, indeed.
How did Biden attempt to address the deficit? He entered office with a bad economy? Beside Covid lockdowns there was nothing wrong with the economy when Biden took over.
* Where did I say $184,500 constitutes a billionaire? If it was raised to $250,000, 90% of Americans would be unaffected.
* Your percentage is a bit misleading. 12.4% is for the self-employed. The rate is 6.2 % for 90% of Americans.
* 3.8% for a married couple filing jointly. Adding .5% to go to the Social Security fund, again, would only affect 4-5% of Americans.
I become eligible in 2034. Which will mean I am sure after myself and my employers both paid 100’s of thousands into it, I am going to get screwed. I know one thing, the boomers did not get screwed by it…
No serious talk about items like balancing the budget, reducing our debt and fixing social security and healthcare can happen until we as a nation demand we stop being the world police and cut our military spending by 50 percent or more. The trillions we pay for defense is why all the other countries in Europe and Asia are leaving us behind. Many of who benefit by us being their useful idiot.
No serious talk about items like balancing the budget, reducing our debt and fixing social security and healthcare can happen until we as a nation demand we stop being the world police and cut our military spending by 50 percent or more. The trillions we pay for defense is why all the other countries in Europe and Asia are leaving us behind. Many of who benefit by us being their useful idiot.
Last edited:
This guy reminds me of @TJ8869 on steroids. Teej, we may have met a long lost brother of yours? Your dad travel to Baltimore for work when you were a kid?
well since this issue has been known since 1989, it might be that the party any of us voted for hasn't fixed it.
might really be accurate if social security trust wasn't paid for differently. But you know that already.