In article ,
 Rob Perkins  wrote:


> And to that end, I've got other thoughts too! About the Alternative Minimum
> Tax, which if my income keeps growing will likely hit me in the face in the
> next six years. The same factions which want that repealed also call for
> flatter tax policies! Well... The AMT *is* a flatter tax policy so maybe it
> should simply be left in place as the middle class grows into it!

     AMT problems would largely go away if they did with AMT like they 
did for the rest of the tax code and index it to inflation. An 
interesting case study to remind of what happened pre-Reagan with 
bracket creep. 

> If such a mechanism is more efficient than the Byzantine and somewhat
> capricious systems of private health insurance, which would be out of reach
> in any case for most of these Wal-Mart employees, then I'd argue (with
> tongue somewhat in cheek) that it is actually a *virtue* that Wal-Mart
> mistreats! Woo hoo!
     
    Of course most of the problems with health insurance arise from the 
fact that most of the money isn't paid by those who consume the 
services. Out-of-pocket expenditures by patients (including the O-o-P 
part of the premiums) runs to only about 19% of all expenditures. When 
you get a product that is subsidized 80% by others, it is real hard to 
wonder why demand and thus costs go through the roof. 
   This is probably made worse by the fact that buyer of the services is 
not the same as the consumer. Thus you got a heavily subsidized consumer 
wanting to consumer as much as they can because it largely ain't their 
money and the employer and government wanting to find ways to get people 
to consume less because they are tired of paying for it. No wonder there 
is a chasm in the system. 
     I, personally, would suggest that we try free market systems before 
we dis them, because we certainly don't have them now.




> 
> Rob, opposed to the President's veto of SCHIP
--- SBBSecho 2.12-Win32