|
joether -> RE: The ‘New Gestapo’? (7/9/2012 12:17:55 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: xBullx
Wow, if that number is correct and assuming that most of these "agents" will live in cities, or in Govt. Terms "high cost" areas that would mean that in the bottom end with benefits they would cost tax payers 35,000 to 40,000 dollars per person each year. And that is a rather low estimate because the wages I'm estimating would be entry level.
The number (16,500 IRS Agents) is Not Correct Nor Accurate. Its a bogus number developed by people that knew those they were targeting with this information (i.e. conservatives) would NEVER question what they are told. In fact, that this thread has gone 3.5 pages long, and the conservatives on it are STILL clueless about the facts; should be enough to lend credibility by itself. Shouldn't 'reason' and 'common sense' take over when you hear a wild number, from a wild source? Don't you possess the ability to say "ok, this sounds just alittle...crazy. Lets check the information first...".
quote:
ORIGINAL: xBullx
So 16,500 folks a year at 37,500 bucks would be about $618,750,000, or in Governmental terms $6,187,500,000 over a ten year period with a 3 percent per year COLA assesment that could add as much as another 2.5 billion to the budget to take additional taxes to pay the health care costs of 30,000,000 people, that don't appear all that worried about their own health care as it is.
Your calculation is flawed. Besides the fact that the '16,500' is not true, your assumption of pay is nor accurate. It generally costs an organization 1.15-1.25 the pay someone makes in actual gross pay. If a company is paying someone $40,000/year with benefits included, the HR folks figure it costs the company about $55,000/year. Not a hard number but more like a guideline. I would take an educated guess that the goverment runs to about the same level. But for the hell of it, let's ask ourselves the real question, based on your numbers. The US Goverment's budget is about $3.4 trillion dollars. How much is $2.5 Billion to that number? Less than 1% of the budget. Your getting all excited over something that would cost us considerably LESS than what we pay out in Foreign Aid to other countries.
quote:
ORIGINAL: xBullx
Ok this is just me throwing some numbers and not a lot of facts around, but the point remains. There has to be a better way. I perfer a better way of providing for the general health of our nation. But I don't believe that the ACA is the answer. I do believe it has some answers in it, though I rather doubt these 16,500 agents are going to help our problems, but rather add to them.
Yes, the better way is for you to get your facts correct! If your going to bitch about the US Goverment, at least have the decency to get your numbers straight. You may not know this (being conservative), but it is getting down right annoying, having to correct.....EVERY...SINGLE....DUMD....conservative that babbles useless and incorrect information like it was 100% factual and true. That these folks couldnt take a mere 30 seconds of (www.google.com) to check the information out fully. Worst still is that a couple of posts later (regardless of the thread) they or some other conservative idiot is spewing the same damn crap that was just corrected. Would you get tired of having to correct someone else, all the time, who makes mistakes to which they could have checked themselves before making the post? Most people that argue against the ACA (but are not super rich and would benefit handsomely if it died), really do not understand what is in and not in the bill itself. That they bitch about the high cost of health care, double digit increases every year, and the ERs being full of patients; yet dont realize the ACA lowers their long term costs, prevents the double digit increases AND makes it possible for patients to see doctors. Its just.....silly....the arguements I've seen from those against the bill. Why not go read all 934 pages yourself?
The ACA was a watered down document. Its fair, but should have been better. Why wasn't it? Well, the simple answer is "Republicans". The complicated answer is: The President asked the Congressional Republicans from both the House and Senate back in 2010 (I believe it was Feb or March) a point blank question "What would it take for you to vote in favor of this bill?" He did it on national TV (every station including FOX News saw it). Those Republicans gave the Democrats a list of eight things. If those things were part of the final bill, it would get approve.
Now, if you make a deal with another person to say, redo your roof on your house. And it would cost $2000 for the job. The guy goes and doest he work exactly as you want and comes to collect. At which point you say the deal is off and tell him to get lost or else; how should the other guy feel? Cus, the Republicans voted against the ACA AFTER the changes were made. If Democrats knew then what they know now of the Republicans.....treachery....would they have made the changes before the vote? Of course not! The ACA would be much better. So again, get your frakking facts straight, true, and right, before arguing something.
|
|
|
|
