Druff is right that most of the bad stuff or medicine of Obamacare doesn't start till 2014. Why is that Gamble?
Easy and only answer --Democrats wanted to hide how great it was until after the election.
Druff is right that most of the bad stuff or medicine of Obamacare doesn't start till 2014. Why is that Gamble?
Easy and only answer --Democrats wanted to hide how great it was until after the election.
They are already pushing for Jeb Bush 2016. Karl Roves panty's are getting moist. Cheney is doubling up on up on his oil and war profiteering Haliburton stock.Originally Posted by mulva
Here is another healthcare related post I made in the same thread. Despite being 2.5 years old, it remains 100% true today:
I am also not saying I am for this bill. I am saying that I agree with parts of it and disagree with others.
Here are some facts that you should consider.
First off, people are not "perfectly happy" with their health insurance. Most people who are haven't had to use it much, or have been fortunate not to find themselves in some sort of fail situation that they didn't expect.
I was happy with my insurance until a major blunder (that wasn't my fault) got me presented with a $3800 bill for a CAT scan. It was hell getting this sorted out, and most was due to the problems in the current system.
But my story pales in comparison to that of others.
The individual coverage situation has degenerated into a game of roll-and-re-roll. Individuals often lie on their application in order to get acceptance, due to insurance companies' over-sensitivity to pre-existing conditions. In response, the insurance companies are constantly looking for excuses to not pay large medical bills, and often deny coverage after-the-fact for huge bills. You won't know if this will happen to you until something major happens and you owe $600,000. It's a fucking disaster. While some people are legitimately denied payment for hiding major pre-existing conditions, others are denied for flimsy or downright nonexistent reasons.
While I am generally a right-wing person, I am pretty centrist on this health care issue.
The left wants heavy government involvement. The far-left wants a completely socialized medicine system. Both of these ideas are awful.
The right wants to do too little, and paints a rosier picture of our health care system than really exists.
I do believe that every American should have the right to basic health care, provided that they pay into it to the best of their ability.
I feel that the burden of cost should be shared by everyone -- not just the rich and big businesses.
I believe that people with pre-existing conditions deserve coverage, but at a higher rate. I also believe that the government should not just write a blank check to insurance companies claiming "pre-existing condition", but should have strict and well-defined rules determining this.
I believe that the government should try to limit its role as much as possible, and act more as subsidizers and overseers.
I believe that we need general reform in billing practices, which are a disaster. I don't believe the current bill addresses that at all. I'll discuss this another time. These billing fiascos are tough to deal with, and the costs are high to both the patient and the insurance industry.
I believe that this health care reform should not be used as an opportunity to pander to young people, seniors, families, or any other group. Benefits and exceptions should make sense, and should not be just written in to please potential voters.
George W. Bush got his foot in the door because of his last name, while Jeb will fail to be the 2016 candidate for the same reason. The country now has "Bush fatigue".
I would prefer to see Marco Rubio in 2016 (if Romney loses).
While there is still plenty of time for him to flame out Bobby Jindal style, he will give Republicans a big boost by appealing to hispanic voters. He will also easily give them Florida.
If Romney loses, five of the past six Republican Presidential candidates will have failed (if you don't count George W. Bush twice). It might be time for Republicans to try something different, and Rubio would be a good start.
Good post.I also think Obama has been a disappointment, But I am not ready to go back to Bush/Cheney.
Romney says he will lead and be tougher with Iran and Syria. The only way to get tougher on them would be to start some more wars. Romney says he won't do it but he won't explain what he will do.
Anyone with a brain knows that it will be impossible to balance the budget/cut the deficit while not raising taxes and not cutting the military. Cutting only "entitlements" is not going to get you there. It upsets me when Romeny stands up there and lies about this.
Romney doesn't just want to continue our insane level of military spending (we spend more than the next 16 biggest militaries combined). Mitt has proposed spending an *additional* two trillion dollars over the next 10 years. This dwarfs every cost cutting proposal he's made. The fact that anyone can say he wants to cut the deficit with a straight face is amazing.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...hypocrisy.html
what you really mean is that you don't think the populous would get it wrong for a third time. sadly,..i think they can, or won't rule it out. you can't bet against the ignorance of people.
Do you have any specific examples (that actually affect you personally) of how that dumb n-word has made it harder for you to run your small business?No I am smart enough not to waste my valuable time going back and forth with an Obama drone.
I have a small business to run, and it is harder and harder these days with that dumb n-word in the White House.
SOBCHAK SECURITY 213-799-7798
PRESIDENT JOSEPH R. BIDEN JR., THE GREAT AND POWERFUL
i luv jon stewart. every year he seems to get a little more and more political w/o even knowing it. he should fucking run for president. i would vote for him. bill and mary would be proud in their graves as wellGood post.
Romney doesn't just want to continue our insane level of military spending (we spend more than the next 16 biggest militaries combined). Mitt has proposed spending an *additional* two trillion dollars over the next 10 years. This dwarfs every cost cutting proposal he's made. The fact that anyone can say he wants to cut the deficit with a straight face is amazing.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...hypocrisy.html
Do you have any specific examples (that actually affect you personally) of how that dumb n-word has made it harder for you to run your small business?
The dumb n-word sure has made it hard to obtain a home loan.
The fucker has had 4 years to try and straighten out the economy and has done shit. The only reason the S&P is over 1000 is because of Bernake and he only did this to pad his retirement accounts. This fiscal cliff that WILL happen at the end of the year will put the US back into a recession. This is a 100% fact. Obama is putting this country into a recession first quarter of 2013. If you have money in the stock market then bend over because your dividend rates are going to 40% from 15%. This is most likely money you have already been taxed on. Your capital gain rates are going through the roof as well.
I've said this 100 times here. Obama is a president for n-words and poor people who want hand outs. Why should a guy/company who works their ass off and takes risks have to "pay a little more" in order to subsidize lazy fucks who don't want to work. They do not want to work, period. If you're unemployed that's one thing. There are programs for that and always will be but people working making money have to support these lazy ass poor n-words watching tv all day. Fuck that and fuck Obama.
Obama did that or the banks did that?
The dumb n-word sure has made it hard to obtain a home loan.
SOBCHAK SECURITY 213-799-7798
PRESIDENT JOSEPH R. BIDEN JR., THE GREAT AND POWERFUL
Obama didn't cause the fiscal cliff. Everything hits at once because that's the way Congress wrote the laws. Some were written when Obama was president like the extension of the Bush tax cuts but the president can only do so much when the Republicans obstruct him mercilessly at every opportunity. If he hadn't agreed to it tax rates would have gone up for everyone including the middle class, and you would be blaming Obama for that instead.
How can you already have been taxed on a dividend when you never had the money before the dividend was paid?
By "n-words and poor people who want handouts" you must mean "the banks that got bailed out and let completely off the hook for all their illegal activities."
Here's a fact: the vast majority of people on welfare and food stamps and Medicaid are EMPLOYED. But instead of learning something you'd rather call people n-words.
SOBCHAK SECURITY 213-799-7798
PRESIDENT JOSEPH R. BIDEN JR., THE GREAT AND POWERFUL
Dodd-Frank dude. If it happens on Obama's watch then Obama has done it. The buck stops with him. Are you even from America?Obama did that or the banks did that?
No, I'm talking about the millions of people who refuse to find work. The people who wouldn't work if a job fucked them in the ass.Obama didn't cause the fiscal cliff. Everything hits at once because that's the way Congress wrote the laws. Some were written when Obama was president like the extension of the Bush tax cuts but the president can only do so much when the Republicans obstruct him mercilessly at every opportunity. If he hadn't agreed to it tax rates would have gone up for everyone including the middle class, and you would be blaming Obama for that instead.
How can you already have been taxed on a dividend when you never had the money before the dividend was paid?
By "n-words and poor people who want handouts" you must mean "the banks that got bailed out and let completely off the hook for all their illegal activities."
Here's a fact: the vast majority of people on welfare and food stamps and Medicaid are EMPLOYED. But instead of learning something you'd rather call people n-words.
Tell me how taxing dividends at 40% benefits anyone? The company has no incentive to declare them and the investors have no incentive to purchase shares. Obama wants to do this while the economy is in the shitter no less. Let's institute policies that are going to kill the economy in the middle of an economic crisis.
Doesn't matter because the dude is out of office in a couple months. Book it. Romney just went ahead in PA. Check mate.
lol how hard are you going to tilt when Obama gets reelected?
538 has PA 94% going to Obama - what are you blathering about?
I never said I agree with all Republican policies and I don't automatically vote Republican across the board. The country is falling a part though and Obama isn't helping, which is why he isn't getting my vote. I didn't vote last election. We're all coming out of the word work now though.
If he does he does. I only have one vote. Don't worry about me little man.
lol how hard are you going to tilt when Obama gets reelected?
Pretty much the correct answer here.
So true about the dividends and capital gains tax rates.
There is a recent push to raise these because doing so supposedly makes "the rich" pay their "fair share", but that rhetoric comes from people who don't really understand the nature of that income. (Or if they do, they're counting on people who don't understand it to support the idea.)
That's the worst thing about Obama, in my opinion. He has an obsession with class warfare. He honestly thinks this country's recovery will come from further punishing the successful people and corporations. I can get behind ideas such as tying tax breaks for businesses to keeping jobs in the US, but not to simply use the rich, the small businesses, and the corporations as blank checkbooks for the government.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote
