which one is better for the economy?A healthy population.OrA sick population.And how does that effect productivity, absenteeism, and the economy?
Does extending coverage to another 40 million people create more demand for services and create jobs?
Do incentives for the wealthy to use their health care coverage and increase them result in more services and growth in the medical industry?
Do lowering health care cost result in people having more money to spend which stimulates the economy?
What is the cost or negative impact on the US economy when 1 million families go bankrupt a year?
What is the cost or negative impact on the US economy when a person dies from lack of coverage and what is the dollar value of a person’s life?
Is The root cause of health problems and increasing health care costs in the U.S. due to the U.S. diet (obesity epidemic, heart and stoke, cancer).
Does The deteriorating health of the U.S. population indicate that there has been some kind of failure by the medical community or some kind of contribution to it?
questions are alway a good way to start.
The reason I believe that high income earners should not have their health benefits taxed is because they may be inclined to refuse them or have them reduced.
If they can obtain high cost health care benefits for themselves without being penalized, and given incentives to use what's available to them, it can result in services and growth for the medical and health care industry.
Under the headwinds of the Bush administration’s tax cuts to the wealthy, the US economy went into a downward spiral until its final collapse.
The Bush administration added 4.9 trillion to the US Federal Debt through tax cuts to the wealthy and crashed the US economy in the process. Should the middle class and lower income families be paying for this?
January 20, 2009 Presidential Inauguration 10,626,877,048,913.08 - 5,691,725,335,190.51 November 2, 2000 U.S. elections = 4935 billion or 4.9 trillion
Comments are closed for this post.
