this post was submitted on 15 Aug 2024
320 points (96.8% liked)

politics

19170 readers
4538 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
320
Little-Known Project 2025 Policy Would Tax Benefits for More Than 15 Million Workers (www.commondreams.org)
submitted 2 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
15 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Project 2025, the right-wing policy blueprint spearheaded by the Heritage Foundation and co-authored by more than 100 former Trump administration staffers, has been denounced for several of its tax proposals, including slashing the corporate tax rate and the capital gains tax to benefit wealthy Americans—but a research group on Wednesday warned that one economic policy that hasn't gotten much attention could "greatly increase" financial hardships for millions of working families.

EPI Action, a nonpartisan research and advocacy organization affiliated with the Economic Policy Institute, published an analysis of a proposal that appears on page 7 of Project 2025's section on the Treasury Department—whose authors include at least two people who served on Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump's campaign and transition team for his term in office.

The proposal calls to tax employers on workplace benefits that exceed $12,000 per worker annually—which would undoubtedly "lead to employers cutting back on these benefits," wrote Josh Bivens, chief economist for EPI Action.

Based on health insurance benefits that are provided to more than 150 million Americans through their employers, Bivens found, more than 15 million workers would see their benefits taxed under the Project 2025 plan.

Those workers would collectively pay over $12 billion more in taxes if their employers shifted away from providing benefits as a cost-cutting measure.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 months ago (1 children)

These people are so fucking stupid and greedy. They are so busy chasing ways to steal more money that they haven't even thought out all the possible outcomes of their actions. They want to gut employee sponsored healthcare by removing tax benefits that companies enjoy by providing healthcare all while taxing the average person for paying for healthcare. But unless they can do away with ACA people will just start moving to public options. I mean why stick with the shitty plan your company provides if you're just going to get taxed on it all anyways. So the working people get screwed and companies will lose the largest bit of leverage they have over employees. Sounds like a winning plan to me! (/s)

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)

If you get stuck with a public option, but are over the income threshold, you will be much more reliant on being employed.

They are devastatingly expensive. The plan I'm on is more than all my other bills combined including my mortgage.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I believe it. I looked into it this past year because the company I currently work for has mediocre health insurance. I honestly don't know how anyone can afford any of the current public options. In theory these options should be better but in practice they're just as rigged as everything else.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

Honestly, it's a blemish on Obama's legacy. It's not sustainable. We need Universal Healthcare or Single Payer.

The ACA is just dragging out the vampism of big health.