By Phoenix RISING Go To PostAh I misread. thanks.We all take L's in here.
Al Franken is not backing Bernie's bill. He'll get shit for it but I think it's the right thing to do
By HasphatsAnts Go To PostAl Franken is not backing Bernie's bill. He'll get shit for it but I think it's the right thing to do
Lots of Dem's are coming out in support of a public option and not backing Bernie's bill. I'm not sure why medicare can't be a service along other providers in the exchanges.
By Smokey Go To PostI've always wanted some CoD type shyt at the crib complete with a red Dot, extended mag, and a silencer tbh lolDon't you live in Texas? Don't you have friends?
By HasphatsAnts Go To PostAl Franken is not backing Bernie's bill. He'll get shit for it but I think it's the right thing to do
I was on Shaun King's twitter and he says Al Franken is backing.
I want to back up for second. What is this "healthcare for all" thing, and how is it different from Obamacare? Is this virtue signaling or are they trying to get it right this time? Why didn't they get it right the first time?
I now understand the single payer thing thanks to you guys. Just trying to wrap my head around all this.
I still have not been to the doctor for a general visit since I was 18.
It doesn't have a realistic chance of passing. I see it more as a statement of intention and as an aspirational goal.
Financing details will come in a later bill.
It's almost as if this is simply an opportunity for 2020 hopefuls to grandstand
It's almost as if this is simply an opportunity for 2020 hopefuls to grandstand
I dunno man. I think that having a UHC bill with 15 Senate co-sponsors is a big shift regardless. We have a bunch of powerful people from one of the two parties standing up and saying that health care is a right.
If that's what they want to "grandstand" about then I'm all for it.
If that's what they want to "grandstand" about then I'm all for it.
I'm fully against his plan and am irritated he's taking a "we will figure out how to pay for it later" track again.
You come after my kaiser plan and I'll refuse to vote for you. Including the people who've signed onto this garbage progressive litmus test.
Yup. Fuck this garbage. Unrealistic tripe.
You come after my kaiser plan and I'll refuse to vote for you. Including the people who've signed onto this garbage progressive litmus test.
By HasphatsAnts Go To PostFinancing details will come in a later bill.
It's almost as if this is simply an opportunity for 2020 hopefuls to grandstand
Yup. Fuck this garbage. Unrealistic tripe.
Damn, it's almost like you're more concerned for yourself than you are for the tens of millions of Americans who have nothing close to your level of medical coverage.
By KingGondo Go To PostDamn, it's almost like you're more concerned for yourself than you are for the tens of millions of Americans who have nothing close to your level of medical coverage.
Damn ... It's almost like you've never read a post of mine and instead would like to imply I'm a selfish asshole. I would tell you to go fuck yourself but I promised myself I wouldn't lash out at ignorant Bernie fans so I'll just spell out my views on healthcare again. Maybe next time you post you'll have sometime of substance to say and we can talk actual policy instead of toss insults at each other.
UHC is the goal. How we get there isn't as important as long as it's a more efficient system that covers everyone. There are multiple ways to do this. Single payer is one way. The government funds all healthcare via taxation AND is also the provider in a single payer system. The UK and Canada do this. We also have various quasi single payer systems to model after and we have multi-payer systems that work and do so much more efficiently than ours. Germany, France and Japan have all reached UHC under a multi-payer system. You'll notice in this graph that these system are indeed good systems. We've also discussed for profit insurance in Sweeden.
Now lets discuss our current system. The infrastructure surrounding our current system is generalizations old. We employ 2.5 million people in healthcare. It's a 3 trillion dollar yearly industry in a 19 trillion dollar economy. How do you think our economy would react to a 4 year transition out of this? It would fucking crash it. You're talking the total destruction of an entire private industry and a rebuild of that industry in 4 years lol. It's one of the things he never addresses in his proposals, along with never addressing how it's paid for. A 4 year transition into a single payer system isn't enough. If we extend that out longer, say ten years, we run the risk of the GOP mucking things up before they get rolling. Which is why there's merit to the baby steps approach. Pass a public option and offer it along side other providers in the exchanges. Expand the medicare age and expand the subsidy range for medicaid. By doing this you've gone a long way to accomplishing the goal in the first place. Interestingly enough, Pelosi had a public option through the house during the initial ACA deals that was killed in the senate by Max Baccus.
So where do we go from Baby Steps. You could transition into a single payer system easier now. More people will be on the public option and medicaid and medicare. It's still not what I think is ideal and still runs risks during transition. We could go from baby steps into a multi payer model too. Essentially we place price controls on the private insurance and subsidize everyone via taxation. You'll note that in this model, everything is still a majority of public funding but the government isn't the only provider ... and we still have a public option for people to choose from. We've also decoupled insurance from employment in this model too. We just didn't kick me off my Kaiser plan and upend a 3 trillion dollar industry because for some reasons liberals think single payer is the only way to UHC.
I'm surprised you're not poo pooing Pelosi right now too. The far left is. Which is hilarious. Pelosi's entire job is passing bills and keeping other dems employed. Her cosigning this garbage forces others to do the same when an election is coming up and various districts are in danger. What's frustrating to me is that a month or so ago it seemed like Bernie was giving more credit to a public option and now he's dropping this litmus test garbage. Why can't he address a multi payer model? Why does he not address a more realistic transition? Why does he never talk finance? That's always the first question. "Nice plan ... how do you pay for it?"
In the meantime Pelosi is out there trying to get a DACA bill passed while fighting against GOP tax reform and a GOP budget. If you want to drop litmus tests for the 2020 run at least do it after the 2018 midterms.
Baby steps are fine as long as you have health care, like your health care, or aren't in immediate danger of losing yours.
UHC is a moral imperative and we should be doing all we can to figure out how to make it happen as soon as possible. We are the richest country in the history of the world. I refuse to believe that there isn't a way to pay for it when every other major western nation does it already.
I'm also fully on board with helping those in the health insurance industry with subsidies or government job offers so that the there's as little disruption as possible. But forgive me for valuing the health and wellbeing of tens of millions of struggling people (and that's just the uninsured, to say nothing of the tens of millions on subpar employer-provided or private insurance) over the disruption of a fundamentally immoral industry.
Regardless, Bernie knows this has no chance of passing, but there is still huge political value in talking in big ideas instead of being a technocrat like Hillary. It is a statement of moral intent that has the chance to get people to the polls and get excited about voting for Democrats up and down the ballot. It is a statement of what the party can and should stand for, instead of "baby steps" or "we'll get there 10 or 20 years down the road as long as Republicans don't muck it up."
And forgive me for assuming you're selfish when you literally said "come after my kaiser plan and I'll refuse to vote for you."
UHC is a moral imperative and we should be doing all we can to figure out how to make it happen as soon as possible. We are the richest country in the history of the world. I refuse to believe that there isn't a way to pay for it when every other major western nation does it already.
I'm also fully on board with helping those in the health insurance industry with subsidies or government job offers so that the there's as little disruption as possible. But forgive me for valuing the health and wellbeing of tens of millions of struggling people (and that's just the uninsured, to say nothing of the tens of millions on subpar employer-provided or private insurance) over the disruption of a fundamentally immoral industry.
Regardless, Bernie knows this has no chance of passing, but there is still huge political value in talking in big ideas instead of being a technocrat like Hillary. It is a statement of moral intent that has the chance to get people to the polls and get excited about voting for Democrats up and down the ballot. It is a statement of what the party can and should stand for, instead of "baby steps" or "we'll get there 10 or 20 years down the road as long as Republicans don't muck it up."
And forgive me for assuming you're selfish when you literally said "come after my kaiser plan and I'll refuse to vote for you."
Man ... its almost like you didn't read a thing I posted
A public option, the expansion of medicaid subsidies and the age range of medicare is virtually UHC as is. So why then are you posting sob stories about those that don't like, don't have or are in danger of losing their healthcare? The baby steps approach covers these people!!!!!!!!
UHC healthcare is a moral imperative. Single payer isn't. What fucking good is providing healthcare to 10's of millions if we just sent out economy into a collapse that's going to negatively impact 10s of millions? It's not just job loss. What do you do with all the private infrastructure? Seize it? Dear God I'm visualizing everyone's 401K's going POOF.
There is political value in discussing these things. Which is why Bernie should be talking about UHC and NOT about single payer.
Also ... you're not forgiven. We've had this conversation before as well as countless others. You let one sentence color your entire perspective of who I am instead of paying attention to several years of posts in this politics thread. I want UHC. I want people to have healthcare. I don't want to lose my Kaiser in the process and I don't have to. My statement stands. Anyone cosponsoring this garbage loses my vote. Including Harris.
EDIT: You also just couldn't help yourself with the Hillary comment too. Never mind she tried for get UHC in the past.
The far left is a mistake.
A public option, the expansion of medicaid subsidies and the age range of medicare is virtually UHC as is. So why then are you posting sob stories about those that don't like, don't have or are in danger of losing their healthcare? The baby steps approach covers these people!!!!!!!!
UHC healthcare is a moral imperative. Single payer isn't. What fucking good is providing healthcare to 10's of millions if we just sent out economy into a collapse that's going to negatively impact 10s of millions? It's not just job loss. What do you do with all the private infrastructure? Seize it? Dear God I'm visualizing everyone's 401K's going POOF.
There is political value in discussing these things. Which is why Bernie should be talking about UHC and NOT about single payer.
Also ... you're not forgiven. We've had this conversation before as well as countless others. You let one sentence color your entire perspective of who I am instead of paying attention to several years of posts in this politics thread. I want UHC. I want people to have healthcare. I don't want to lose my Kaiser in the process and I don't have to. My statement stands. Anyone cosponsoring this garbage loses my vote. Including Harris.
EDIT: You also just couldn't help yourself with the Hillary comment too. Never mind she tried for get UHC in the past.
The far left is a mistake.
Morality? In a country that enjoys profiteering from the misery of others? lol.
The crash of a 3 trillion dollar industry is exactly what needs to happen, IMO. Just had to pay out-of-pocket just shy of $1,000 for my wife to have a preventative outpatient procedure. Really? Pay $1000 now so you don't have to pay $50,000 later and maybe not even live?
Yeah, screw the healthcare "industry". The people who work in it, though, are another thing entirely.
The crash of a 3 trillion dollar industry is exactly what needs to happen, IMO. Just had to pay out-of-pocket just shy of $1,000 for my wife to have a preventative outpatient procedure. Really? Pay $1000 now so you don't have to pay $50,000 later and maybe not even live?
Yeah, screw the healthcare "industry". The people who work in it, though, are another thing entirely.
By Phoenix RISING Go To PostMorality? In a country that enjoys profiteering from the misery of others? lol.
The crash of a 3 trillion dollar industry is exactly what needs to happen, IMO. Just had to pay out-of-pocket just shy of $1,000 for my wife to have a preventative outpatient procedure. Really? Pay $1000 now so you don't have to pay $50,000 later and maybe not even live?
Yeah, screw the healthcare "industry". The people who work in it, though, are another thing entirely.
We really in a rush for another 2007? Did you even think before you posted?
By KingGondo Go To PostWon't someone think of the 401Ks?
We pretending people's retirement isn't important now? We pretending people's 401K's going poof won't lead to a massive swing to the right politically?
The far left is a mistake.
You still haven't addressed a public option or a multi payer plan. If you're not going to respond in good faith I'm done with you.
We're pretending that you aren't in an already incredibly privileged position if you're worried about your fucking kaiser plan and your 401K?
Try telling that sob story to someone who has no retirement plan or health insurance.
Try telling that sob story to someone who has no retirement plan or health insurance.
By KingGondo Go To PostWe're pretending that you aren't in an already incredibly privileged position if you're worried about your fucking kaiser plan and your 401K?
.
Not at all. If you would read and pay attention you wouldn't have posted this. You still haven't addressed anything of substance policy wise. Just plea's to emotion and hyperbole. I'm done with you. Good luck with with Trump in 2020 ...
I do think cost based reform is sorely needed in the health care industry. There's no reason in the world why the average dentist in the US makes $150K a year while that same dentist would make $90K in the UK. All these costs flow down to the consumer.
By HasphatsAnts Go To PostI do think cost based reform is sorely needed in the health care industry. There's no reason in the world why the average dentist in the US makes $150K a year while that same dentist would make $90K in the UK. All these costs flow down to the consumer.So much of that $150K goes to malpractice insurance, though.
By KingGondo Go To PostWon't someone think of the 401Ks?Wait, what? I feel like you're being morally ambiguous right now to suit your own argument. What other retirement options are there at the moment? Who do you actually know that has a pension waiting for them? Social Security? LOL
By Kibner Go To PostSo much of that $150K goes to malpractice insurance, though.
Which would be problem solved if we had nationalized health care.
By reilo Go To PostI feel like you're being morally ambiguous right now to suit your own argument.
That's exactly what he's doing. All while not addressing one policy point I brought up (accept agreeing that we should be cognizant of jobs). Healthcare is important. So is retirement. So is jobs. So is the economy. They're all interconnected and he's pretending like he can treat one as though it's in a vacuum. He embodies all that's wrong with the left right now. No intention to think policy. NO intention to think what works. No strategy. No intention to understand how government functions. Just reactionary bullshit
By HasphatsAnts Go To PostI do think cost based reform is sorely needed in the health care industry. There's no reason in the world why the average dentist in the US makes $150K a year while that same dentist would make $90K in the UK. All these costs flow down to the consumer.
Yes. Pricing controls are severely needed. It's something all the multi payer systems do. Including Germany.
By Phoenix RISING Go To PostMorality? In a country that enjoys profiteering from the misery of others? lol.
The crash of a 3 trillion dollar industry is exactly what needs to happen, IMO. Just had to pay out-of-pocket just shy of $1,000 for my wife to have a preventative outpatient procedure. Really? Pay $1000 now so you don't have to pay $50,000 later and maybe not even live?
Yeah, screw the healthcare "industry". The people who work in it, though, are another thing entirely.
US healthcare crashing would go like the banking crisis. Regular folks get screwed, people making the decisions would still be rich. I understand the resentment though. The stories that come out of the US about crippling healthcare costs are terrifying. Nobody has that kind of money.
By Fenderputty Go To PostWe really in a rush for another 2007? Did you even think before you posted?
I don't understand what you mean, so you'll have to explain it to me. In 2007, I was completely immune to the recession because I was in graduate school, already on subsidized living, food stamps, medicaid.
Now, my wife and I both work in "bubble" industries that would turn a profit on the back of a recession, if that is what you are referring to.
So you'll have to spell it out for me.
By HasphatsAnts Go To PostWhich would be problem solved if we had nationalized health care.
This is why, again, I say FK the healthcare "industry." We don't need it.
As for the 401k question, IDK. I'm not even contributing to mine. I don't have a retirement "plan." Retirement sounds like such a foreign concept to me. I'm more focused on paying off school loans. Maybe that's where all my 401k money is going.
I lost my first job two months in due to the recession. And since I had just moved out of state for that job, I hadn't lived there long enough to become a resident and qualify for state financial unemployment aid. Also, since it was my first job, I didn't have any savings to live off of. And it was hard to get a new job because people were being more picky about their hires and I had all of two months experience. I also had a six month lease and newborn puppy that I had to take care of.
It took six months of constant searching and applying to get a job. I was lucky in that I didn't have any student debt (went to school on scholarship) and my mom had an extra bedroom in her house and could afford to feed me and I didn't have any medical conditions.
It was shitty and I was thinking of going back to school largely because I could get financial aid to at least do something and feel like I'm not a useless sack of shit.
It took six months of constant searching and applying to get a job. I was lucky in that I didn't have any student debt (went to school on scholarship) and my mom had an extra bedroom in her house and could afford to feed me and I didn't have any medical conditions.
It was shitty and I was thinking of going back to school largely because I could get financial aid to at least do something and feel like I'm not a useless sack of shit.
By Phoenix RISING Go To PostI don't understand what you mean, so you'll have to explain it to me. In 2007, I was completely immune to the recession because I was in graduate school, already on subsidized living, food stamps, medicaid.
Now, my wife and I both work in "bubble" industries that would turn a profit on the back of a recession, if that is what you are referring to.
So you'll have to spell it out for me.
This is why, again, I say FK the healthcare "industry." We don't need it.
As for the 401k question, IDK. I'm not even contributing to mine. I don't have a retirement "plan." Retirement sounds like such a foreign concept to me. I'm more focused on paying off school loans. Maybe that's where all my 401k money is going.
I'm saying that wrecking the healthcare industry and rebuilding that over 4 years will do enough damage to our economy that it counters the positive effects of gaining healthcare in the first place. You helped millions of people but negatively impacted millions more in the process. I'm saying that people's 401ks crashing prevents them from retiring. Meaning they don't leave the industry and more jobs aren't open for young people trying to climb the labor ladder. I'm saying that if Dems attempt this, we will be kicked out of power for our hubris in 2 years and healthcare will be set back 30 after the GOP comes in and destroys what we did, and voters will be happy they did it.
I've also clarified that I think trying to extend the transition range isn't ideal either. It would be better to not shock and economey this way, but it leaves the door open for political swings before the plan gets started.
I'm saying this is complicated as all hell and some thought would be appreciated instead of emotional reactionary bullshit. Put some fucking effort into understanding what UHC is and how it's accomplished globally. I'm saying lets try and choose a system that works with what we've built for the last 60 plus years.
All Gondo sees is single payer. That's it's. Nothing else will work and nothing else matters and we need to do it now consequences be damned. I want the same things he wants, but because I've put some thought into it and want to accomplish the same goal in a different way I"m selfish technocrat. I'm being demonized by a person I largely agree with and largely want to see helped. It's fucking maddening.
By DY_nasty Go To PostGrandstanding behind a doomed bill never hurt anyone
Until the bill is no longer doomed. Which is what the GOP is dealing with regarding the repeal.
This is a legitimate discussion though. How do you sell UHC and the essential tax raise to people who reflexively hate taxes and government involvement. Do you over sell and under deliver like the GOP is doing? Do you go in honestly and discuss things as they should be?
.
.
These graphs are an interesting visual for this issue we have to deal with. 55% of the people wants a single payer system. Until you tell them government gets too much control or we all pay more in taxes. Conversely, people who oppose change their minds to support if you explain administrative costs are saved and private insurance roll is diminished.
Basically it paint a completely confused populace that doesn't know what the fuck it wants, it just knows status quo sucks ass. It also shows the populace will be highly susceptible to political attacks ads.
"Democrats want to raise taxes so they can kill babies with your money!!!!!"
This shit is not going to be easy and if we fuck it up I fear it will be for decades.
healthcare needs to be decommodified 100%.
thank goodness every major player for the 2020 nomination sees the writing on the wall
thank goodness every major player for the 2020 nomination sees the writing on the wall
By Fenderputty Go To PostUntil the bill is no longer doomed. Which is what the GOP is dealing with regarding the repeal.I get where you're coming from, but there is no reality where this bill isn't doomed.
This is a legitimate discussion though. How do you sell UHC and the essential tax raise to people who reflexively hate taxes and government involvement. Do you over sell and under deliver like the GOP is doing? Do you go in honestly and discuss things as they should be?
.
.
These graphs are an interesting visual for this issue we have to deal with. 55% of the people wants a single payer system. Until you tell them government gets too much control or we all pay more in taxes. Conversely, people who oppose change their minds to support if you explain administrative costs are saved and private insurance roll is diminished.
Basically it paint a completely confused populace that doesn't know what the fuck it wants, it just knows status quo sucks ass. It also shows the populace will be highly susceptible to political attacks ads.
"Democrats want to raise taxes so they can kill babies with your money!!!!!"
This shit is not going to be easy and if we fuck it up I fear it will be for decades.
Feels and looks good to support but its nothing more than a gesture and possible momentum point.
Hey, some more petty bullshit from the White House: http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/350509-white-house-espn-anchor-that-called-trump-racist-should-be-fired
ESPN is fake news now lol.
The coates peice is taking souls.
I do appreciate that the convo that is happening as a result of Bernie's 2016 run and subsequent time in the Senate. I just wish the conversation was more grounded in reality. This selfish technocrat actually wants to see viable healthcare in this country for everyone.
Also some plan details came out (minus how to actually pay for this)
Yeah ... how many of the 153 million Americans want to have their employer plans ripped from them? How does he plan to make sure those who lose their insurance still get that portion of their companies contribution to help pay for that new tax?
The coates peice is taking souls.
By DY_nasty Go To PostI get where you're coming from, but there is no reality where this bill isn't doomed.
Feels and looks good to support but its nothing more than a gesture and possible momentum point.
I do appreciate that the convo that is happening as a result of Bernie's 2016 run and subsequent time in the Senate. I just wish the conversation was more grounded in reality. This selfish technocrat actually wants to see viable healthcare in this country for everyone.
Also some plan details came out (minus how to actually pay for this)
Yeah ... how many of the 153 million Americans want to have their employer plans ripped from them? How does he plan to make sure those who lose their insurance still get that portion of their companies contribution to help pay for that new tax?
A good article from the economist on looking to Europe to find a solution that works for us:
https://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21726124-policymakers-should-take-close-look-fix-american-health-care-can-be-found
https://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21726124-policymakers-should-take-close-look-fix-american-health-care-can-be-found
By Fenderputty Go To PostESPN is fake news now lol.
The coates peice is taking souls.
I do appreciate that the convo that is happening as a result of Bernie's 2016 run and subsequent time in the Senate. I just wish the conversation was more grounded in reality. This selfish technocrat actually wants to see viable healthcare in this country for everyone.
i get the challenges but i don't believe they are insurmountable--the fact that there are 15 co-sponsors demonstrates the momentum.
politics is a moral/values project which the technical aspects are in service of. dont be like those dipshits at poligaf who are high on their own supply and are so obsessed with pragmatism that they dont even know what they're being pragmatic about anymore.
By Red Blaster Go To Posti get the challenges but i don't believe they are insurmountable.
I don't think they are either. However, failing to recognize the challenges and then work withing those boundaries isn't helping. I don't think any of the proposals or things I've brought up are overly pragmatic either.
I know you're further to the left than I am, but do you honestly see a problem with adopting a Germany style UHC system as long as it's effecient and we achieve UHC? Do you think adding a public option and expanding Medicaid and medicare ranges before we take the next step is overly prudent?
This conversation will gain steam and god willing in 2020 we will have an opportunity to effect change. I would like that change to be lasting and something that doesn't bring on Trump 2.0 in 2024.
By Red Blaster Go To Posti get the challenges but i don't believe they are insurmountable–the fact that there are 15 co-sponsors demonstrates the momentum.
politics is a moral/values project which the technical aspects are in service of. dont be like those dipshits at poligaf who are high on their own supply and are so obsessed with pragmatism that they dont even know what they're being pragmatic about anymore.
I 100% agree that it's valuable to have a wishlist of all the things you'd want in an ideal world. But only if you message it that way and not in a "We'll build a wall and make Mexico pay for it" kind of way. You know?
And let's not forget that the other side is going to be on the offensive on this.
By HasphatsAnts Go To PostAnd let's not forget that the other side is going to be on the offensive on this.
Which is why I posted those Kaiser graphs above. People are super fickle about this.
The easiest way is probably to do the Bernie route and go full populous ignoring all the details, but what's the fall out if it's a poorly thought out implementation after the fact?
By Fenderputty Go To PostWhich is why I posted those Kaiser graphs above. People are super fickle about this.
The easiest way is probably to do the Bernie route and go full populous ignoring all the details, but what's the fall out if it's a poorly thought out implementation after the fact?
We haven't seen the financing bill yet. What if it says 10% payroll tax increase and a 15% VAT? Now you just signed up for some seriously damaging attack ad materials in 2018 and 2020 for your gen election candidates.
Like, I really wish this is a consequence-free "marketplace of ideas" but it rarely plays out that way.
By HasphatsAnts Go To PostWe haven't seen the financing bill yet. What if it says 10% payroll tax increase and a 15% VAT? Now you just signed up for some seriously damaging attack ad materials in 2018 and 2020 for your gen election candidates.
Like, I really wish this is a consequence-free "marketplace of ideas" but it rarely plays out that way.
Yup ... which is why I was kinda surprised people jumped on board before details even came out.
Speaking of which .... how do you pay for this?
One route that seems to be common is to do a payroll tax to the employer with small raise in income tax, if any. I don't like this route though. It doesn't decouple the employer from the healthcare. It's also just a hidden cost. Most employees don't know how much their company pays in pay roll costs to keep them employed. Ballooning payroll costs help suppress real wages too. Like maybe if it became mandatory for those costs to be shown on a paycheck. I think this is the easier route though. Mostly because Americans are tax adverse.
Say we go with the Bernie plan, but we pay via a progressive income tax instead. I think this would be the ideal. You've decoupled healthcare from the employer and can set a progressive range. How do we make sure the employer's contribution to healthcare is passed onto the employee as taxable income though? If it's not, 153 million just started paying more for the healthcare then they currently do. Which isn't what's been promised. this is also the more challenging route as people hate income taxes.
All sales taxes and VAT taxes should be off the table.