http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/09/17/clinton-health-plan-has-no-answe rs-for-undocumented-immigrants/

They just havent thought about if their plan will cover illegals. What else have they not thought about?

Newsflash: Whether or not there is a health plan in place, YOU pay for illegals no matter what. Of course the plan shouldn't cover illegals, however, I see a moral obligation to treat them if they show up to the emergency room needing aid. So, what's the solution?

And this $110 Billion (yes with a B) is going to come from where?

AND DON'T SAY "Quit the war in Iraq and use that money" because all I've heard is pissing and moaning about how we are borrowing that money.

So....We borrow money for health care? I doubt it.

Can you say Raise Taxes?

Edit: That being said, I do agree with Vitalogy. If someone shows up at an emergency room with a life or death situation, they should be treated even if they are an Illegal Alien. Arrested, deported and the medical bill sent to thieir home country (which would never get paid), but treated.

Taxes will be raised for those that make more than $250K per year, which is only about 1.5% of the population. I'm willing to bet that you, along with every single poster hear, is not in that 1.5%.

As for Iraq, if given the choice, would you choose war in Iraq or healthcare for fellow Americans? The price is the same, and I'm willing to bet what the majority will vote for in 2008. Hint: It won't be war!

Everybody says that the tax cuts were only for the wealthy. I disagree.

I don't make anywhere near even 1/2 of the figure you quoted ($250,000) and my takes went down.

Also,

Why should the wealthy pay more in taxes than you or I? Should they pay more because they are smart business men and women?

The $ figure should be more than you or I pay, but it should be based on a percentage of their income.

I'm big time in favor of a flat tax. Across the board, no deductions, no filing tax returns. Set a minimum $ figure so that the low income are not over burdened or maybe a two tier system.

Say, if you make up to $35K you pay X%, $35,001 and up you pay X%. I don't know what the % should be, but I'd bet maybe 8% and 12% would work.

Corporations have to pay the same %. I bet the Infernal Revenue Service would love to have had 12% of Exxon's gazillion dollars of profit they made last year!

Why should corporations pay tax at all?
Corporations can only do 3 things with money they receive. Pay operation expenses, pay for expansion, or return money to stockholders who then pay tax on the dividends.

If they spend 12% on taxes, thats 12% fewer jobs available.

A flat tax would be a tax increase for about 80% of taxpayers, including yourself and me as well. The top 20% would receive a windfall.

Look at your Federal tax return and see for yourself what your "effective tax rate" was. I'm not talking "marginal rate" I'm talking "effective rate". I'm willing to bet that it's between 11-14%. In order for you to do better under a flat tax, the flat tax would have to be BELOW your current effective tax rate, otherwise it's a tax increase for you.

Here's the 2006 tax bracket for single person:

10%: from $0 to $7,550
15%: from $7,551 to $30,650
25%: from $30,651 to $74,200
28%: from $74,201 to $154,800
33%: from $154,801 to $336,550
35%: $336,551 and above

After looking over the tax brackets do you really think a flat tax won't increase taxes for those on the bottom and decrease them for the top?

As far as the wealthy paying more, they should pay more as they have benefited from our collective society more so than others and have an obligation to fund a larger part of operating what has allowed them to be where they are. If you look at the tax brackets over the years, taxes have gone down for the wealthy more than anyone else. The top earning bracket has gone down from 39.6% in 2000 to 35% in 2007.

Personally, I'm open to eliminating all income taxes in favor of a national consumption tax. Between the savings by eliminating the IRS and the capture of all the underground business and the wealthy paying more when they buy their toys, it seems like a good solution. But, it's probably too radical for most to understand.

Those are the brackets, after standard deductions. A person making 7550 pays tax only on that part over 5150+2000.
Plus he/she probably gets an earned income tax credit, which means he/she pays no tax, but gets a tax credit.

$10,300 if married filing jointly or a qualifying widow(er);
$7,550 if filing as a head of household;
$5,150 if single; and
$5,150 if married filing separately

Nwokie, you can spin until you're dizzy. The math says a flat tax means a tax increase for most all taxpayers except the top, who will receive a windfall. There's no other way for it to work. In fact, your response further proves my point, as people that are getting an earned income tax credit would be hit the hardest.

Actually, I wasn't making an argument for or against a flat tax, I was just pointing out that those at the lower end of the pay scales, pay no federal income tax.

Currently those in the lower 25% of wage earners essentially pay no Fedral income tax, those from 25-75 pay about 20% of federal taxes, and the top 25% pay the other 80% of federal income taxes.
http://www.heritage.org/research/features/BudgetChartBook/charts_T/t4.cfm