Atrios, by way of Kevin Drum, has posed a few questions for lefty bloggers, to see who's a liberal. A lot of folks on the right are also answering, so here goes my take:
Um, no. Let's see how it plays out first. Bankruptcy should be hard and a bit painful.
No. At least not without a $10 million exclusion. I'd also add a big increase in the gift tax exemption, at least among close family members. The gift tax limits are stuck in the 1960's.
No and hell no.
The devil is likely to run it. The real problem with this is that it always ends up being a government monopoly, with competition banned by law. I could maybe go with something like this: Each state offers basic, limited, medical coverage. Generic drugs, HMO service, some procedures unavailable (e.g. no heart transplants, but no one dies from tuberculosis). No practitioner need participate. Any citizen or legal immigrant may chose to be covered. People who opt for private plans get a state subsidy of the average patient cost in the government system.
I'd rather see states impose weight fees, as one-size-fits-all isn't a good idea. What's good for New York might not be good for Nebraska. The real problem with all of this is that the market cycle is too long. The other problem is that the problem isn't just demand-side. We need to start building refineries, drilling and investing in solar and nuclear. Whether we move to hydrogen or batteries, both are electric and we don't have nearly enough.
How about we find the middle ground that 60% of voters want, rather than this stupid battle between the fringes? Overturn Roe, allow abortion in the first 3 months, then after only in dire situations. How about teaching responsibility?
Considering that the top quartile of households pay more than 83% of income taxes, I'd say it's pretty progressive already. But I'll trade you an increase on the top rates in exchange for an opt-out year. High marginal rates impede upward mobility, so people who have a life-altering income event shouldn't get taxed like Rockefellers.
This sounds good, but freezing out religious organizations is itself discriminatory.
Is someone giving away corporations?
How about just killing the current plan entirely?
No, but you might require them to privately insure the pensions. While we're at this, limit government worker's pensions to some market average, and require universal social security participation.
How is this going to prevent fraud? Mayor Daley had paper ballots. It will all be electronic in 10 or 20 years anyway. I'd be more interested in banning the gerrymander -- make counting the votes matter again.
So do costs. Reduce taxes and the government burden and more families can have a parent at home. Encourage marriage. Encourage employer funded/supplied daycare where needed. But let's not create whole new government monopolies.
OK, if you increase the cap on benefits proportionately. And retroactively.
Make marriage a private matter. Don't know about the immigration thing enough to comment, except that I don't want it so quick that sham marriages become more common.