[Speed Gibson,
Thursday January 25, 2007 at 9:01am]
Equal Pay for Equal Work
The President has proposed health care reform in terms of how it is taxed. This is an interesting can of worms to open, for it illustrates a great unfairness.
Let's take a couple of school teachers, same age, same education, same school, and same union, meaning they make the same gross pay. Both get their health insurance from this employment. But one is married with two children and the other is single. Who makes more money per year? The married teacher does, the difference being the cost of the additional family medical coverage, easily over $1,000 a year.
Or take two professionals, one making $45,000 and no benefits, the other $40,000 with $5,000 worth of health care coverage. The effect on the employer's bank account is the same, but the cash only worker pays higher taxes since the entire income is taxable.
If "equal pay for equal work" means anything, we should embrace the President's thinking at least.
Let's take a couple of school teachers, same age, same education, same school, and same union, meaning they make the same gross pay. Both get their health insurance from this employment. But one is married with two children and the other is single. Who makes more money per year? The married teacher does, the difference being the cost of the additional family medical coverage, easily over $1,000 a year.
Or take two professionals, one making $45,000 and no benefits, the other $40,000 with $5,000 worth of health care coverage. The effect on the employer's bank account is the same, but the cash only worker pays higher taxes since the entire income is taxable.
If "equal pay for equal work" means anything, we should embrace the President's thinking at least.