Massachussetts mandated universal health coverage -- how's it going?

[imported_Lothar]

Originally posted by: xenolith

Originally posted by: Lothar

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

How are things in the state of Taxa-, er, Massachussetts? As I understand it, the state is trying to implement a universal health plan by requiring everyone to obtain health insurance (similar, perhaps, to how drivers need to obtain auto insurance).

How's it going? Is the middle class getting screwed? Is the upper class getting screwed? Who's paying for the poor and the lower classes?

Is this system really more efficient than socialized medicine?

Real quick and moderately off topic... Massachusetts gets a bad rap for having high taxes, but that's actually a lie. In fact, Mass. isn't even in the top half of states for tax burden (percentage of your income paid to taxes).. it's ranked 28th, well ahead of those bastions of low taxes such as Kansas (15th), Kentucky (20th), Nebraska (9th) and a lot more deep red states.

Just figured I'd save the poor guys from an undeserved bad rap.

As shown here.

Yeah...I never understood that either.
http://money.cnn.com/2006/04/10/pf/taxes/taxfriendly_states_2006/index.htm

We can call Taxine(Maine), Taxsas(Kansas), and Taxeorgia(Georgia) but since the Senators in charge there are Republican that would be mean

Senators are in charge of state tax legislation?

What's funny is, your link shows my state as #1 in highest % tax burden. And over the past 30+ years, guess what party has actually been "in charge" of my state's tax legislation?

Democrats! :laugh:

So what does that have to do with the name "Tax"achusetts?
Our point was the name Taxachusetts is unwarranted unless you add the "Tax" syllable to all other states with a greater % tax burden before it.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: xenolith

Senators are in charge of state tax legislation?

What's funny is, your link shows my state as #1 in highest % tax burden. And over the past 30+ years, guess what party has actually been "in charge" of my state's tax legislation?

Democrats! :laugh:

While you are of course right that federal senators don't affect state taxes, why is it funny that a state run by Democrats has higher taxes? Do they claim as a part of their party platform the same sort of tax cutting things that Republicans do? I don't think so.

That is why Republicans being in charge of those state's legislatures (except for Maine maybe?) is ironic, as the tax burden of "conservative" states is higher then "liberal" Mass.

 

[AAman]

ummm....but how is the system working (or not)?

 

[ProfJohn]

Taxachusetts was a term referring to the state of Massachusetts primarily during the 1980s to reflect its high taxation rate as compared with the rest of the nation. The increased taxes were primarily blamed on the ruling Democrats at the time. However, in subsequent years, Massachusetts managed to pass several tax cutting legislation that has made the term Taxachusetts obsolete.

According to Tax Policy Center and the Tax Foundation, Massachusetts has a combined state and local rate of around 5.6%, ranking it the 34th highest out of the 50 states.

link

I think that sums it up rather well.
I also believe that other states raised taxes at the same time MA cut theirs.

 

[imported_Lothar]

Originally posted by: AAman
ummm....but how is the system working (or not)?

I haven't heard anything bad about it yet.
But you know what they say..."No news" is good news.