Not Joe the Plumber, but SAHM

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-16-2008
Not Joe the Plumber, but SAHM
246
Thu, 10-16-2008 - 10:49am

My Open Letter:

Dear Senator Obama,

I am a stay-at-home mom living in the over $250k tax bracket. I want to ask you why you feel my family is not doing it's part to share the wealth in this country. Our family does well but we also pay taxes at the highest marginal rate. We do not have millions or the kind of lifestyle that would get us access to tax loopholes. We only get deductions for home mortgage interests, state taxes paid and charitable contributions. Last year those three deductions were capped because the government limits the deductions at our income level. In the past we have been stuck in AMT which ensures we do not underpay our fair share of taxes.

Because of our family's income level, our children will not qualify for student loans or other aid. Therefore we must save entirely for their college. We save as much as we can. In recent weeks lost 30% of those savings as well as a decent amount of our retirement savings and the few mutual fund investments we have are under water. The only other asset we have is our family home. We only have one. It would be really tough to sell it in this market, we've lost a large chunk of our equity.

We have never received a stimulus check, yet we do our part to donate to charities we believe in, invest in the market and spend to keep the economy going. And we pay our taxes. There is no question that the opportunities in this great country have allowed us to achieve the American Dream. For that I am grateful.

Your proposals will take an additional 12% out of our annual family budget by increasing the marginal tax rate and increasing payroll taxes. We aren't struggling yet but we will be if your tax proposals pass. We will have to stop or severely limit college savings, with one child only 3.5 years from college and the savings down 30%. Last year we paid enough in Federal Taxes to supply 240 individuals with a Bush stimulus check, similar to the stimulus plan you propose if you are elected (I guess that continuation of the same Bush economic polices is good). I have no doubt that some of what we paid went to wasteful government projects and earmark spending that did not help any struggling families. You say $18 billion in earmarks is not a lot of money to you but 12% of my family budget is a lot to me and my children. I do not begrudge what we already give the government, but I will argue that we are doing our share. I argue we are patriotic and we are neighborly.

We are upper middle class, we are not like your friends, Oprah and Warren Buffet. Our priorities are saving for our retirement, our kids college and paying off our house. We can comfortably do those three things now, though we are worried about the economy like everyone else.

I am a registered Democrat and have always believed in social programs for those who need them. I still believe in them. But I do not understand why when you speak that it sounds as though my family is getting something over on this country. That we aren't doing our part. That we don't pay enough tax. That we don't do enough to lift others up. I say we are doing a lot by not asking anything from the government. I say it is the government that is letting the American people down, not us.

If this economy gets worse my husbands job will be at risk. We could lose our home along with the remainder of our savings. The only good news I see coming from the Democrats is that maybe then we can have the government contribute to our children's college education, we'll get a tax cut and might finally see one of those stimulus checks. Then you'd finally get your chance to lift my family up.

Pennsylvania Mom
http://openlettertobarack.blogspot.com/

Pennsylvania Mom http://openlettertobarack.blogspot.com/

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-19-2004
Sun, 10-19-2008 - 10:53pm

I pay taxes. Essentially it is taxable income that funds State and Federal programs. Obviously, I don't pay my whole salary, nor directly, but it does come full circle. See?


I don't necessarily agree w/ funding new programs, some are needed perhaps, but the real issues is solidly funding existing programs. Don't you think it is a problem when a 1% cost of living increase got slapped down

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-16-2008
Mon, 10-20-2008 - 12:15am

>>>>You will have more plans to choose from under Sen Obama's plan and it will be affordable.<<<<

This is a big assumption. From Obama's site, notice the first sentence about PHASING IN:

Reduce Costs and Save a Typical American Family up to $2,500 as reforms phase in:

* Lower drug costs by allowing the importation of safe medicines from other developed countries, increasing the use of generic drugs in public programs and taking on drug companies that block cheaper generic medicines from the market
* Require hospitals to collect and report health care cost and quality data
* Reduce the costs of catastrophic illnesses for employers and their employees.
* Reform the insurance market to increase competition by taking on anticompetitive activity that drives up prices without improving quality of care.

His first point - what does this mean? Don't we already increase the use of generic drugs? Everywhere I turn I'm getting a generic alternative. Does this not already happen in public programs? The one drug I take that isn't generic, it's because it was an incredibly expensive drug to develop and thank goodness someone created it, I have no problem with them being able to recoup their costs and make a profit. In Obama's detailed plan he suggests people outside the US are paying less than my insurance company is being charged. But if I can now buy it from outside the US the company is going to see their US sales going down and other sales going up, and they'll equalize the prices so they still make the same profit.

I used to work a little bit in the healthcare industry, the business side. I can't see how requiring the reporting of more data is going to save money? I realize there might be data behind his analysis here, but it doesn't make sense to me. Any hospital that gets money from Medicare has to do very detailed reporting of information already. In his detailed plan he says they have to report how much of their costs are administrative, but that doesn't mean they can be forced to reduce administrative costs, or that administrative costs are necessarily excessive. I volunteer for a small non-profit that provides healthcare, their problem with costs is not administrative costs, it's malpractice.

Reducing catastrophic costs - who pays for it then? Oh the government. In his detailed plan he says the government will reimburse companies for catastrophic losses that increase their premiums, as long as the company promises to use it to pass the savings along to the employees. Does he know the cost to the government for monitoring that this actually happens?

Reforming the insurance market, if only it were so easy wouldn't we have already done it? I'm all for regulation and reform, but the government can't get social security, medicare or Fannie/Freddie right, how are they going to reform the private healthcare industry? How does this result in me saving $2,500? It seems like a lot of big "ifs" and a long time in the future before we'd see any savings.

In the detailed plan he says he will "challenge the medical system to eliminate inequities...." That's going to translate into real, quantifiable savings?

In the detailed plan Obama says he will limit the amount insurers can charge for malpractice - which won't work unless you reduce what can be collected by an injured person on a malpractice claim. Otherwise you'll just encourage insurers to leave the malpractice business lest they end up like AIG (a similar approach to pushing mortgage companies to offer more subprime loans that the economy can't handle).

He's going to promote patient safety - as if hospitals, doctors and insurers aren't already motivated to do this in order to reduce malpractice costs which are killing them right now. In my state patient safety factors have to reported quarterly to the state. This is already going on in the industry.

I'm all for requiring the pre-existing conditions be covered but there is an increased cost to health insurers for doing this, and that cost is going to be passed along somewhere. Providing more care to more people is not going to cost less.

He says the new exchange program will be affordable, but that's relative. How affordable? How much? There is no information to know. From what I can tell uninsured people or those who opt into the new plan they will not have tax-free benefits - so they are buying the new coverage with after-tax dollars - the same criticism he has of McCain's plan (that it's unfair and "new" to charge employees tax on their healthcare benefits).

He's going to simplify paperwork but most of the paperwork I fill out when I go to the doctor is so they have the information they need, and a lot of it is required by regulations enacted to protect people.

It's going to be easy to enroll in, but I've never signed up for coverage that was hard to enroll in, have you?

My favorite is the end where he says American's need to eat better and make more healthy choices, smoke less (didn't he smoke until recently, or is he still smoking), restrict the advertising of tobacco and alcohol to children (we don't do this?), and that healthy "environments" have sidewalks, biking paths and trails and grocery stores with fruits and vegetables. He will have community programs that help us all make these better choices. What happens when people still choose to not be healthy? Obama's plan will ensure they get access to coverage at the SAME cost as everyone else, but they'll be more expensive to treat, who picks up this cost? I think the government, which then saves us money how? The government just prints more money to cover the costs so we can spend more and still balance the budget?

Pennsylvania Mom http://openlettertobarack.blogspot.com/
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-11-2006
Mon, 10-20-2008 - 7:23am

>>Maybe you can be one of the 33 people I send $500 to when Obama gets elected. <<

I don't think you'll be giving the money to someone who makes under 250,000, the extra money you pay will be going to Wall Street and war debt.

uCruiser.com Ticker
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-09-2007
Mon, 10-20-2008 - 8:17am

http://sefora.org/2008/10/17/for-the-record-just-what-is-the-average-cost-of-health-care-insurance/


According to this online both Sen Obama and Sen McCain are over/under estimating the cost of healthcare.

Jess


Photobucket
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-09-2007
Mon, 10-20-2008 - 8:36am

His first point - what does this mean? Don't we already increase the use of generic drugs? Everywhere I turn I'm getting a generic alternative. Does this not already happen in public programs? The one drug I take that isn't generic, it's because it was an incredibly expensive drug to develop and thank goodness someone created it, I have no problem with them being able to recoup their costs and make a profit. In Obama's detailed plan he suggests people outside the US are paying less than my insurance company is being charged. But if I can now buy it from outside the US the company is going to see their US sales going down and other sales going up, and they'll equalize the prices so they still make the same profit. Generic drugs are not as freely available as you state.

Jess


Photobucket
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-16-2008
Mon, 10-20-2008 - 8:54am

>>>I don't think you'll be giving the money to someone who makes under 250,000, the extra money you pay will be going to Wall Street and war debt.<<<<

That's not his plan, his plan is to spread the wealth around by taxing those over $250k in order to afford a middle class tax cut/give-back (since it goes to those who don't even pay income tax). That is what Obama said - spread the wealth around, the middle class needs it more than the top 5% do.

Pennsylvania Mom http://openlettertobarack.blogspot.com/
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-16-2008
Mon, 10-20-2008 - 9:11am

Where does all that anger come from? What did I ever do to you? Did I take food from your table?

FWIW I am a Democrat, I voted for Gore and Kerry and I detest Bush and disagree with almost everything he's done in office.

I always believed the "rich" don't pay as much tax as I did. Now I know that is simply not true. Our deductions are capped, so we only "write-off" part of what we donate. And I am NOT complaining about that at all. I'm saying where is the line, how much should be taken from me to give to you? Tell me, how much of my income do you deserve? It's a fair question and does not necessitate calling me selfish and spoiled. Just answer how much.

I don't mind paying taxes to do my part, and we do. We pay taxes at the highest marginal rate. That is perfectly fine. I agree with a progressive tax system. If rich people are finding loopholes to get out of paying tax, I say close the loopholes! Do it yesterday! I don't get any loopholes so I don't care. I would rather pay my share of tax than find creative ways to get out of it.

Just because my husband makes a lot doesn't mean I haven't been in your shoes. I spent the first 36 years of my life in the lower or middle class, I put myself through college, I worked hard to build something with my education and training. I've been the mom who couldn't afford to SAH, I've been the single mom struggling to afford basic expenses. I know.

I am only attempting to discuss political views, not whine. I used my current situation as a point of discussion and you can have whatever opinion you want. So aside from your anger and disgust towards me, what is your opinion on how much of my family's 2009 income the middle class deserves to get?

Pennsylvania Mom http://openlettertobarack.blogspot.com/
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-16-2008
Mon, 10-20-2008 - 9:15am

I used the link provided to me (I think it was here) for Obama's detailed plan. It's also linked on his website.

People would be buying coverage with after-tax dollars because Obama has not proposed (not that I have seen anyway) a tax deduction for non-employee health related benefits. If you are aware of such a deduction he has proposed, let me know and I'll revise my opinion on that.

Pennsylvania Mom http://openlettertobarack.blogspot.com/
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-09-2007
Mon, 10-20-2008 - 9:28am
  • Ensure everyone who needs it will receive a tax credit for their premiums.

  • http://www.barackobama.com/issues/healthcare/

    Jess


    Photobucket Photobucket

    Photobucket

    Photobucket
    Jess


    Photobucket
    iVillage Member
    Registered: 10-16-2008
    Mon, 10-20-2008 - 9:46am
    That is a tax credit, not an income deduction. Everyone who needs it is subjective, it implies to me that those who can't afford the premiums would get a credit toward them. That's different than saying premiums are not taxable the way they are for those who have employer provided benefits.
    Pennsylvania Mom http://openlettertobarack.blogspot.com/

    Pages