then it does in backwoods of Mississippi?
The cost of living is higher up here.
ANOTHER THING. IS THE COST OF LIVING IN MEXICO CHEAP BECAUSE IT IS MORE "EFFICIENT"?
I DON'T THINK SO.
====================================
The clash over the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) is being fought largely between members of Congress from high-income states, such as Maryland, versus members from low-income states, such as South Dakota and Mississippi, which rank near the bottom in median household income.
In South Dakota, where the median household income is only $42,791, giving such a benefit to a family with an income of more than $61,000 seems excessive, according to Sen. John Thune, R-S.D.
“Low-cost, efficient states such as South Dakota... end up subsidizing higher costs in inefficient states,” complained Thune during the Senate debate.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21066498/
2007-10-03
08:41:54
·
17 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Politics & Government
➔ Politics
PROBLEM: NYC has a high cost of living.
SOLUTION: Move!
.
2007-10-03 08:51:05
·
answer #1
·
answered by Chad 5
·
4⤊
1⤋
Yes we understand that living in New York City is expensive. So for that city it should be adjusted. But this was up for failure to begin with. Here is why:
The $35 billion, bipartisan plan aims to bring an additional 3.3 million children into the SCHIP program over the next five years. To pay for it, senators propose increasing the federal tax on a pack of cigarettes from 39 cents to $1 and a jump in the tax on cigars from 5 cents to up to $10.
1) Aren't we trying to get people to stop smoking? So if the number of smokers decreases due to death or stop smoking programs each year, where is the money coming from? Not very well thought out.
According to your MSNBC Article - Smokers, many of whom are low-income people, are the ones who would have paid the cost of CHIP expansion under the bill that Bush vetoed.
2) So you are raising taxes on the people you are trying to help. Is that stupid or what?
According to your MSNBC article - the Bush administration rejected New York’s plan to provide CHIP to families who have incomes of four times the federal poverty level — or nearly $82,000 for a family of four
3) $82,000 in New York City is quite a large income. So these people are not working at McDonald's. Why does this number have to be so high? Most of the poor people who this is for make far less than this. So it sounds like a give away.
2007-10-03 09:02:06
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Taxi Driver is a Great Movie but It's not on my favorite 25 Movies List :P Taxi was HILARIOUS,I Love Queen Latifa
2016-03-19 05:05:23
·
answer #3
·
answered by Erica 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
See, NYC has high taxes. It's a blue state / city. Move to somewhere with lower taxes if you only make 60 grand. It's just common sense.
2007-10-03 08:48:34
·
answer #4
·
answered by Pfo 7
·
1⤊
2⤋
That is only in New York City. the rest of the state is pretty depressed. Very few people in Western New York make the $82k limit that Spitzer proposes. Those that do live in large homes in exclusive neighborhoods and certainly don't need health care from the government........
2007-10-03 08:46:29
·
answer #5
·
answered by Brian 7
·
6⤊
1⤋
So we should treat NYC as if it's the center of the country and go by it's standard of living. Cry me a river... if it's so bad, move where it's better. That's a ridiculous argument when you consider that 61k puts the vast majority of Americans smack dab into the middle of the middle class. Stop looking for a handout from uncle sam.
2007-10-03 08:58:11
·
answer #6
·
answered by Scott B 7
·
3⤊
2⤋
that's a good point...
Cost of living and healthcare vary from state to state... but most of the federal programs available only take into account your net income.
Maybe if they just included a handicap point (plus or minus) system, depending on the cost of living estimate in your state, they would eliminate people who don't need it and provide it to more people who do...without changing the amount of funding.
Unless they did something like that, i'm still in favor of taxing cigarettes....(and i'm a smoker)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok , I have to add a comment for the people who suggested someone move as a solution...
So if everyone who can't afford to live in higher cost areas simply moved.... tell me please... Who is going to mop the floors at your kids private school ?, who is going to teach your kids in the public school ?..who is going to do your oil changes and cut your grass ?
So they move someplace else, and only the upper class are left standing....and nothing gets done.
That's the dumbest thing i've ever heard.
We need affordable healthcare for all citizens..especially children.. PERIOD !..REGARDLESS OF WHERE YOU LIVE !
2007-10-03 08:52:17
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋
If you choose to live in a high cost area, don't expect others to subsidize your choice.
If you were in Missouri you could make it on your own without welfare at 40K live very well on 60K a year and the cap on that garbage bill is 80K.
2007-10-03 08:58:47
·
answer #8
·
answered by sprcpt 6
·
2⤊
1⤋
Then move. If you can't afford to live there, move to where you can. Why should others subsidize someone's choice to live beyond their means. It's like whining that it costs more in electricity to heat your mansion so people who live in smaller houses that require less energy should help pay your bills.
For the record, liberal policies in NY are the reason why it costs so much to live there.
2007-10-03 08:51:01
·
answer #9
·
answered by VoodooPunk 4
·
3⤊
2⤋
If there was some HUGE difference it might even matter. Mediam household income, 2004:
New York - $45,343
US Average - $44,334
The differnce is not as HUGE as you imply.
2007-10-03 08:49:10
·
answer #10
·
answered by davidmi711 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
yeah, and the SCHIPS cap is 80,000...but that's only for a family of 4 or more.
2007-10-03 08:47:04
·
answer #11
·
answered by Free Radical 5
·
2⤊
0⤋