Worst Tax Ever
The AP writes on the current state of negotiations in the 6 member Baucus Bipartisan ad hoc committee. Their plan includes an idea that is worse than I imagined possible. I mean that literally.
Officials also said a bipartisan compromise would not subject companies to a penalty if they declined to offer coverage to their workers. Instead, these businesses would be required to reimburse the government for part or all of any federal subsidies designed to help lower-income employees obtain insurance on their own.
This would be the most regressive tax ever. If I am an employer and I don’t provide health insurance then my tax liability is higher if the family income of my employee is lower. More regressive than a poll tax (Baroness Thatcher must be put out that she didn’t think of it). What’s worse it depends on family income.
Let’s say I don’t provide insurance and have two job applicants, one who is a single mother and the other a man with a low salary but a high income wife (say Bill Clinton when he was working as governor of Arkansas for $30,000 per year). I hire the guy, because he can’t get subsidized health insurance, so I don’t have to give him insurance or pay him a dime.
This is the Baucus Grassley jobs only for people who don’t need jobs preliminary draft bill of 2009.
I swear even if I tried, I couldn’t come up with an policy proposal that bad.
Oh gracious conference committee save us from the idiocy of these Northmen (and Snowe).