But we wouldn’t be sacrificing ours nor our family’s health care, and that is where the fear mongering comes in. Right now, with no consumer protection, no oversight, and no competition, our health care is the most expensive in the world. If I did not have my employer paying for a large portion of mine, I could not afford it, and I make a decent salary. Private health care may continue to be the solution, but not in its present form. It is completely unsustainable. Shit, just recently in the news I heard about a woman whose health insurance provider had cut off her coverage IN THE MIDDLE OF BREAST CANCER TREATMENT. What the fuck kind of inhuman shit is that? I can tell you that if that had happened to my mom during her treatment, there would be one less health insurance bureaucrat making people’s lives miserable. Subhuman filth.

Republican lawmakers were annoyed Pawlenty was gone in D.C. for days during the critical override. Sure, he worked the phones. But on those phone calls the recipients say it was a pretty soft sell, telling them to just “vote their conscience.” Then there’s the now famous comment in caucus that if some Republicans did decide to override to do it on the first attempt.

So, apparently you can’t take Gov. Tim for his word.

But you’re not sure, right? You want to sacrifice your health care, or more importantly, the health care of the people you love? The people who might rely on you?

The Hillary Clinton plan says: If you have a health care plan you like, keep it. Is that acceptable to you?

That doesn’t seem to be written very clearly. When I read it, it seems to me they may be talking about an 80% marginal rate. Which would be very different.

It seems one of the biggest difficulties here is that some or many people will accept higher tax rates if they can associate it with services received.

If I had a job that didn’t provide health insurance, I could easily accept a higher tax rate for universal health coverage. The increased taxes will be much less than what I would pay to buy my own personal coverage (assuming I can find someone to even issue me a policy to begin with).

More services is not the measure of a states greatness. The quality of life is. Some services will add to the quality of life in the state, others may not. It matters very much what services are provided.

A program that provided every citizen with a free puppy isn’t likely to have much influence on the quality of life.

Programs that maintain public infrastructure, provide for educating the population, protect the environment, or look after the health of the population will have a major influence on the quality of life.

I simply reject the rhetorical premise that we are undertaxed and underserviced, and that there are quanitifiable gains in quality of life to be had from funding provided by small tax increases. I just don’t buy it.

Many others disagree. It’s not so much that they believe we’re “undertaxed,” it’s that they see value to the services that are and might be provided. If those services are going to be provided, they need to be paid for.

Panic evoking propoganda has often been guised as prudent or conservative, but the result is always the same; the parties hijacking the terminology are neither prudent nor conservative.

The same can be said of the word “liberal”. E.g. How has term “Power to the People” worked out so far?

Aren’t the rights to that song defended by the RIAA?

I simply reject the rhetorical premise that we are undertaxed and underserviced, and that there are quanitifiable gains in quality of life to be had from funding provided by small tax increases. I just don’t buy it.

Now on to the serious discussion, no I probably wouldn’t want to turn over 80% of my income in taxes, especially if I didn’t receive any services in return. On the other hand if my taxes were to go up say 10-15% (on some progressive scale, and I admit I’d be on the higher-rate end of things) to cover such benefits/services as single-payer healthcare for all (and free for the poor). And significant or free post-secondary education for all I think that would be a bargin.

In the interest of full disclosure I live in a state that has significantly lower individual tax rates than Minnesota and equal corporate tax rates. And let me tell you, it shows. The infrastructure is falling apart and there’s no money to do anything about it. There are large swaths of the city dotted with burned-out houses and abandoned cars and there’s no money to do anything about it.

I’m not trying to claim that taxes are a magic bullet, though I’m sure someone will say I am. However you cannot expect to provide services if you don’t tax. And in my personal, although anecdotal experience, you get what you pay for.