Washington State "Doctor Tax"

[Birdstrike]

Note that not a single of of the above sources are right-wing sources. In fact, they're all middle of the spectrum or left leaning: CNN, Politico, Slate, NY Times, New Yorker, ABC News. The other's are the candidates' own words.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Matthew9Thirtyfive]

Note that not a single of of the above sources are right-wing sources. In fact, they're all middle of the spectrum or left leaning: CNN, Politico, Slate, NY Times, New Yorker, ABC News. The other's are the candidates' own words.

But democrats are less racist. How could any of that be true?

 

[thegenius]

Yup. Why haven't all of those posts been banned? It's getting silly. And those coronavirus threads have totally derailed too and I haven't even looked at them in the past 3 weeks.

And for the record...if someone were to do the same thing maligning Trump, there would be 84.6x the number of posts.

 

[southerndoc]

I've tried to be very lenient with the political banter. I'm about to start closing threads and issuing warnings.

Please limit discussions to medicine and stop with the political posts.

 

[turkeyjerky]

It's a horrible system and a pyramid scheme. But old people vote, and they want "what they deserve". A better system is in Australia. The government requires all employers to put aside 9.5% of their gross salary in an approved 401K type plan. This way people have a REAL account that they control and direct, not fake money like our system.

Austrailia also has a minimum wage of 20 bucks an hour (and a real safety net)

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

Austrailia also has a minimum wage of 20 bucks an hour (and a real safety net)

Their Medicare is interesting. It assigns a value for every service just like ours but unlike ours lets doctors bill more than that and collect the difference from the patient. This is apparently quite common.

 

[emergentmd]

Disclaimer - I agree with Birdstrike but I really hate to talk about politics b/c 95% of people are unreasonable, do not want to listen to opposite views, bring emotion to it. Seriously, can't we all just listen to opposing views without needing at all costs to change their minds.

I will tell you that MOST politicians on all sides are the same. No one is more just. no one is more crooked. No one really cares about the american people. They all want to continue to keep power and get paid. Hell, if I was a politician, I would do t he same and I feel I have morals which would likely decay 4 yrs into being a politicians.

I vote on policies. That is it. I don't care how nice they are, how good looking they are, how rich they are, where they came from. Tell me you will push my policy and I will vote for you regardless if you are dem or rep. This is why I don't put emotions into politics b/c they are all the same people just pandering to their base.

Let me break it down for you all.

1. Trump is a sexist . You don't think Biden is sexist? You don't think Clinton was sexist? Do you really think Obama is all holy coming from Chicago politics?
2. Trump is racist - Who put in the 3 strikes law that put mostly Blacks in prison for life - You got it A democrat. Who pulled it back - Trump. God forbid he is racist while dems are holy.
3. Trump hates foreigners and separate families - Bunch of crock. Obama had both houses of congress and he did nothing for immigration. Look up how many people he deported and separation of family
4. Trump cheats elections and lets the Russians meddle - So let me get this straight. Obama was in office for 8 yrs and did nothing to stop this, but Trump is the blame for all the Russian meddling. Also, lets not kid ourselves that Americans meddle in many countries politics. Such hippocrites
5. Trump cheats on taxes. What a strawman argument. He does what everyone single american tries to do. He uses all avenues to pay the least amount of taxes. Same as Clinton. Same as Obama. Same as you. Same as me. You think Buffet pays high taxes?
6. Trump uses the office to make himself rich. Another strawman argument. You really think someone wants to pay Clinton 250+K for a 15 min speech? You think someone wants to pay Obama 7 figures to write a book? All of them become rich after being a president. They pushed friendly deals with corporations during their presidency, they get paid back in spades once they are done. Obama just bought a 12M home after leaving office.

Anyhow, I am not blinded by the fact that Trump is a sexist/narcissistic person. But I am not blinded by the fact that Obama/Clinton/Biden is the exact same person who has alittle more tact and plays the political game more discretely. Pelosi just as dirty as McConnell. The list goes on. People are more genuine voting on issues and not on who is the better person.

 

[GeneralVeers]

Austrailia also has a minimum wage of 20 bucks an hour (and a real safety net)

True. It's not my ideal country, but every place has tradeoffs.

 

[turkeyjerky]

True. It's not my ideal country, but every place has tradeoffs.

I'm trying to picture what your ideal country would look like. Maybe the social stratification of Snowpiercer but set on a tropical island?

 

[Birdstrike]

Please do not post political related replies or topics in the EM forum... If the topic relates to emergency medicine (proposed laws, regulation changes, fee reimbursement), then those are acceptable....
Thanks for everyone's understanding.

Okay, fair enough. I agree to abide by this 100%.

Please clarify something if you could, however. The OP was about about tax law as it relates to, and affects Emergency Physicians, including the desirability of practicing EM in a specific location. I presume that's why you allowed it, even though its not explicitly about the "medicine" of EM, but because it involves a law that affects EPs, their practice quality and ultimately their take home income. These are things we talk about on here all the time.

Would it be relevant and acceptable to discuss here, if there was a proposed tax law that would be a tax increase for Emergency Physicians not only in Washington State, but also many other states? If not, fine. If so, I think there's an relevant number of EPs on this board that I think would be interested and affected by the proposal. I'm politely asking for a ruling on this.

 

[RustedFox]

Okay, fair enough. I agree to abide by this 100%.

Please clarify something if you could, however. The OP was about about tax law as it relates to, and affects Emergency Physicians, including the desirability of practicing EM in a specific location. I presume that's why you allowed it, even though its not explicitly about the "medicine" of EM, but because it involves a law that affects EPs, their practice quality and ultimately their take home income. These are things we talk about on here all the time.

Would it be relevant and acceptable to discuss here, if there was a proposed tax law that would be a tax increase for Emergency Physicians not only in Washington State, but also many other states? If not, fine. If so, I think there's an relevant number of EPs on this board that I think would be interested and affected by the proposal. I'm politely asking for a ruling on this.

I sure as hell want to know about the tax laws in a state that I'm considering moving to.

Veers is right-on. We're under the thumb of these social/political issues moreso than many if not all other specialties.

 

[AMEHigh]

Okay, fair enough. I agree to abide by this 100%.

Please clarify something if you could, however. The OP was about about tax law as it relates to, and affects Emergency Physicians, including the desirability of practicing EM in a specific location. I presume that's why you allowed it, even though its not explicitly about the "medicine" of EM, but because it involves a law that affects EPs, their practice quality and ultimately their take home income. These are things we talk about on here all the time.

Would it be relevant and acceptable to discuss here, if there was a proposed tax law that would be a tax increase for Emergency Physicians not only in Washington State, but also many other states? If not, fine. If so, I think there's an relevant number of EPs on this board that I think would be interested and affected by the proposal. I'm politely asking for a ruling on this.

There's a pinned post at the top of the forum:
"If you want to debate politics, you may do so in the lounge. If the topic relates to emergency medicine (proposed laws, regulation changes, fee reimbursement), then those are acceptable. The Democrat vs Republican posts of who did what, who does what better, etc. needs to stop."

It doesn't say it has to be state specific. So yes it seems that if it's a federal law or a law affecting multiple states that would affect emergency physicians that's fair game. I think the multiple posts you had back to back to back posting Biden did xyz were way off topic, so no that wouldn't be included in ok even though discussing the president obviously has federal implications.

 

[Birdstrike]

I sure as hell want to know about the tax laws in a state that I'm considering moving to.

Well, I have information on a proposed tax law, that would massively raise your taxes, as an Emergency Physician, in the state you're moving to. It would repeal previous tax cuts and raise taxes on you as a physician, potentially 5 figures. It will affect, rates, deductions, everything. I currently can't speak about it since I'm under a gag order, waiting for a ruling by the mods. But it is a proposed, in fact promised law, that would effect Emergency Physicians and their tax brackets, and has a greater than 50% chance of happening. The information on the proposed law is out there, by no means do I have insider knowledge. It is a law that would affect Emergency Physician net take home pay, but I can't talk about it, until I'm given permission as discussing such matters is currently banned on SDN EM.

 

[RustedFox]

Well, I have information on a proposed tax law, that would raise your taxes in the state you're moving to. It would repeal previous tax cuts and raise taxes on you as a physician in the states you're considering moving to, potentially 5 figures. It will affect, rates, deductions, everything. I currently can't speak about it since I'm under a gag order, waiting for a ruling by the mods. But it is a proposed, in fact promised law, that would effect Emergency Physicians and their tax brackets, and has a realistic chance of happening. The information is out there, but I can't talk about it, until I'm given permission.

Lamesauce. The Thought Police are on to you.

I'll bet this is why McNinja left.

 

[GeneralVeers]

Lamesauce. The Thought Police are on to you.

I'll bet this is why McNinja left.

Maybe we should use "You-know-who" instead of naming names. Because to speak his name might summon the devil.

 

[RustedFox]

Maybe we should use "You-know-who" instead of naming names. Because to speak his name might summon the devil.

Voldemort?

 

[bravotwozero]

Yes. I agree with Voldemort.

 

[Birdstrike]

Lamesauce. The Thought Police are on to you.

I'll bet this is why McNinja left.

Maybe we should use "You-know-who" instead of naming names. Because to speak his name might summon the devil.

Yes. I agree with Voldemort.

Agree.

I'm starting to wonder if "Voldemort" was on to something. I mean, the thought has crossed my mind also, lately. Have any of you thought of jumping ship and deleting your SDN account?

 

[GeneralVeers]

Voldemort?

Agree.

I'm starting to wonder if "Voldemort" was on to something. I mean, the thought has crossed my mind also, lately. Have any of you thought of jumping ship and deleting your SDN account?

Using pseudonyms would certainly preclude a debate. I've had to refer to "certain organizations" instead of naming by name evil causes with which I disagree.

 

[Birdstrike]

Using pseudonyms would certainly preclude a debate. I've had to refer to "certain organizations" instead of naming by name evil causes with which I disagree.

How silly is this, that we can talk about this Voldemort goofiness, but I'm banned from notifying you all of a proposed, in fact promised law, that would massively raise your taxes as Emergency Physicians, because that might be "offensive" to certain people, because it kisses around the edges of something called "politics"?

 

[thegenius]

How silly is this, that we can talk about this Voldemort goofiness, but I'm banned from notifying you all of a proposed, in fact promised law, that would massively raise your taxes as Emergency Physicians, because that might be "offensive" to certain people, because it kisses around the edges of something called "politics"?

Because you step across the line, habitually. You are a habitual line stepper.

 

[WilcoWorld]

Because you step across the line, habitually. You are a habitual line stepper.

Oh man, great use of a reference to one of the greatest sketch comedy shows of all time.

 

[RustedFox]

I liked McNinja a lot.
I was honestly trying to make a HP joke.

 

[Birdstrike]

I know you are better than that @Birdstrike. You can laugh at yourself you habitual line stepper, which is one of the best attributes a person can have

M o m . Stop. I know you want to talk to me, but quit coming online as "La Cumbre Lines."

 

[Mad Jack]

NY POST: Senate report links Hunter Biden to ‘prostitution or human trafficking ring’

Who is voting for Hunter Biden?

 

[DeadCactus]

I would encourage everyone to get away from the idea of a racist person or even a racist party. Yes, there are certainly people who fully believe the color of their skin makes them superior to those of different colors. And these people do form groups around that belief. But I would argue this small minority of people is irrelevant. For the vast majority of people in our country, a label as binary as racist is reductionist and serves only to shut down the conversation as you're now attacking someone's fundamental character. The conversation should be about racist ideas and racist policies. Our country as a whole has a 400 year history of racist ideas and racist policies which have been built, propagated, and supported by all aspects of our society including both political parties and people of all skin colors. Racist ideas are ubiquitous and have wriggled their way into our subconscious. The way forward is to identify those ideas and policies and address them, not to pretend any person or group is the racist choice and the other group is free of racism.

Second, our understanding and scholarly thought on racism evolves just as much as any area of human knowledge. Racist ideas, like many other -isms, are a tool used to justify the exploitation of those without power by those with power. As a result, these ideas are going to continuously morph and change to try to survive in the face of changing social values and scientific understanding. What was initially able to survive as a simply belief that one group of humans was an inferior race has now been forced to evolve into more complex socioeconomic ideas. The only constant is an attempt to justify systemic differences in the status of groups by intrinsic faults in one group rather than by blaming policy decisions. Policies and ideas that were celebrated in the past by progressives and even the Black community have not survived closer study and scrutiny. If we're going to talk about policies from decades ago, it should be done in the context of our understanding in that time period.

 

[GeneralVeers]

DeadCactus, while you feel passionate, you are wrong. America is not a racist country, in fact it is one of the least racist major countries in the world. Hundreds of thousands of POC immigrate here every year. Every single country has some racism in its past, either at the founding or during subsequent periods. That doesn't render the entire system and society irredeemable and marked for destruction. The racism argument is a distraction, and a way for them to sneak in policies and societal change that otherwise wouldn't be possible.

The whole system is racist, therefore it has to be torn down and replaced. With what??? They haven't said, but I have a good idea what they want in place of meritocracy, market capitalism, and private property ownership.

 

[GeneralVeers]

I think you kind of missed the point. It’s moving beyond the idea of a racist person, a racist party, or even a racist country, towards the concept that ideas and policies might have a racist base. Our understanding of racism has indeed moved beyond just the idea of a perceived inferior class of people depending upon their skin color to how socioeconomic factors are related to race. Therefore, context over time certainly matters too. It’s much easier to argue against the relationship between the effects of race and socioeconomic factors when in a position of power with an incentive against change that might negatively impact your standing in society. Not everything though is a secretive plot to overthrow the entire system, which has tones of paranoia.

That's called Critical Race Theory. It is a dangerous, racist, debunked theory. Possibly one of the worst ideas humans have ever come up with. (next to socialism)

 

[BoardingDoc]

Possibly one of the worst ideas humans have ever come up with. (next to socialism)

A very large part of the world would disagree with you about the merits of socialism. Just because you personally disagree with a philosophy doesn't mean it's "one of the worst ideas humans have every come up with."

I don't know enough about Critical Race Theory to comment other than to say that I just looked it up and the first few articles about it don't seem to say anything definitive about it being racist or debunked.

 

[NITRAS]

A very large part of the world would disagree with you about the merits of socialism. Just because you personally disagree with a philosophy doesn't mean it's "one of the worst ideas humans have every come up with."

I don't know enough about Critical Race Theory to comment other than to say that I just looked it up and the first few articles about it don't seem to say anything definitive about it being racist or debunked.

99% of the world makes less than $35k USD a year and have no where near the wealth that is wasted by the average American.

 

[GeneralVeers]

A very large part of the world would disagree with you about the merits of socialism. Just because you personally disagree with a philosophy doesn't mean it's "one of the worst ideas humans have every come up with."

I don't know enough about Critical Race Theory to comment other than to say that I just looked it up and the first few articles about it don't seem to say anything definitive about it being racist or debunked.

I think the people of Cuba and Venezuela would agree with you.....but then they aren't allowed to disagree or they get killed.

 

[erdoc00]

I think the people of Cuba and Venezuela would agree with you.....but then they aren't allowed to disagree or they get killed.

Freedom is slavery iirc

 

[WilcoWorld]

I think the people of Cuba and Venezuela would agree with you.....but then they aren't allowed to disagree or they get killed.

Freedom is slavery iirc

I don't think Orwell meant what you guys say he meant.