It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Koch Brothers Attempt to Kill Single-Payer Health Care in Colorado

page: 3
9
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 25 2016 @ 10:13 AM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

Good morning, Ketsuko! I'm no spokesmodel for the campaign, but I'll try to answer the ones I can.

1) The argument for using pot taxes is a holdover from the 19th century concept of sin-taxes. There is certainly an element of coercion in that concept. Coercion is elemental in all tax strategies though. The operable concept here is least harm / greatest benefit. I make no claims to the rightness of either argument, but that is the framework. That said, the current ColoradoCare initiative does NOT attempt to use tax revenues from MJ. Current language calls for a %3.33 payroll deduction to fund this initiative. I misspoke earlier because I mistook this for a different initiative that was going around during the caucuses here in Denver.

2) The first GREAT question in the thread. Awesome!

3) Also a fantastic question. The operable notion here is pooling risk to realize a cost savings. There are arguments on both sides of this as well, and it definitely needs to be addressed.

4) Two answers: A) Tabor limits currently in place, combined with B) selling debt as a representation of faith for investors. Zero deficits at the national level = zero faith in our currency / treasury bills. That is a bad thing for global markets. There is no direct analogy to family or small business budgeting, according to this particular school of thought.

5) Pension liabilities are a major concern, primarily for pensioners, but also for investors. This is often mismanaged due to deficit spending. There seems to be two competing theories of fiscal management at play: tax and spend, versus borrow and spend. Legislators on BOTH sides of the artificial conservative versus liberal celebrity deathmatch are both terrific at talking out of both sides of their mouth on this issue. That is why we "can't afford" single payer healthcare, but we can borrow for 1 trillion in nuclear weapons systems upgrades over ten years. When a politician wants to pay for something on the company credit card, it is a matter of national security. When a politician wants everyone else to pay for something, it is an entitlement program. Neither explanation does the argument justice, but they are not designed to. They are designed to encourage ideological arguments within the population as a whole, as a distraction, so that legislators can deliver the goods to their patrons.

The short answer to your questions: Nobody knows, it's a ballot referendum. Like gay marriage and medical marijuana, it has a lot of work to do before it is ready for prime time.




posted on Mar, 25 2016 @ 10:20 AM
link   
a reply to: 0zzymand0s

Hmmm, but you didn't really answer the pension question. Colorado is not involved in purchasing nuclear weapons systems. The problem as I understand it is that public employees are, by contract, guaranteed a certain percentage of return in their pension annually. This rate of return is always based on the most optimistic outlook which seldom is what actually happens, but employees are told that their accounts have grown based on that rate, so they expect that amount will be what their pensions will return to them.

This is what unfunded liability means. A bunch of people are expecting to be paid certain amounts based on a false performance of their retirements funds.



posted on Mar, 25 2016 @ 11:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: 0zzymand0s
a reply to: Metallicus

We keep our Californian's on fairly short leashes or in special holding areas and camps.

Like Boulder.
i am a Californian refugee. i fled the stupid gun laws and ridiculous taxes. but they followed me......



posted on Mar, 25 2016 @ 11:45 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

I say good for them...the government should never have a monopoly on an industry that the private sector is fully capable of handling better (notice that I said "better," not "perfectly").



posted on Mar, 25 2016 @ 12:10 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

No, I get it, and I wasn't really trying to tangent. I know what pensions are. I had one 20 years ago, lol. I don't have any answers on unfunded liabilities and how CO is looking to pay for them, but we have a county convention tomorrow that I am covering, so I'll see what I can dig up.



posted on Mar, 25 2016 @ 12:11 PM
link   
a reply to: crustyjuggler27

It was just a joke. I fled CA in 1995. Born and raised in Los Alamitos / Long Beach.



posted on Mar, 25 2016 @ 12:38 PM
link   
a reply to: 0zzymand0s

yea man i get it. but colorado is starting to take a turn for the worst. the tax on pot is way too "high" housing is getting un-affordable, tons of street beggars, and no more high capacity magazines. bullocks!




top topics



 
9
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join