PDA

View Full Version : I Am Really Sick Of All This GOP Rhetoric



Santa's Little Helper
03-22-2013, 07:31 AM
Why can't the GOP leaders grow up and quit crying

And this Tea Party is such a JOKE and I would suggest reading a fifth grade history book to learn about the real tea party

And Paul Ryan please STFU and settle down cause NOBODY CARES what you got to say anymore

Cigar
03-22-2013, 07:38 AM
The answer is simple ...

http://simplypoliticsblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/obama-president-available.jpg

zelmo1234
03-22-2013, 07:46 AM
The answer is simple ...

http://simplypoliticsblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/obama-president-available.jpg

If this is the answer then the question must be how do you destroy 50% of the middle calss wealth and make them work for 5000 less per year, while destroying the american economy in the process?

Did I get that about right?

zelmo1234
03-22-2013, 07:47 AM
Sorry about that Cigar, that was a hanging curve over the center of the plate? I had to hit that one!

Cigar
03-22-2013, 07:50 AM
If this is the answer then the question must be how do you destroy 50% of the middle calss wealth and make them work for 5000 less per year, while destroying the american economy in the process?

Did I get that about right?


Let me guess ... you were in a coma from 2001 through 2008 and woke up in 2009 :rollseyes:

patrickt
03-22-2013, 07:53 AM
Why can't the GOP leaders grow up and quit crying

And this Tea Party is such a JOKE and I would suggest reading a fifth grade history book to learn about the real tea party

And Paul Ryan please STFU and settle down cause NOBODY CARES what you have room say anymore

Right. If one nitwit can't understand the Tea Party and doesn't care what Paul Ryan "have room to say anymore" than nobody cares.

For god's sake, Little, grow up and quit whining.

zelmo1234
03-22-2013, 08:12 AM
Let me guess ... you were in a coma from 2001 through 2008 and woke up in 2009 :rollseyes:

No I was busy!

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/gdp-growth

Had that little blip from 911 but then steady growth. until the democratic housing policies brought down the house, but the Republicans were to scared of being called racist to do naything about it so they are responsible too!

And I don't seem to remember those high unemployment numbers either?

https://fortress.wa.gov/esd/lmea/countydashboard/URateDetails.aspx?area=53_01_000000

Oh but you know how the republicans lie, I bet the real unemployment rate was much higher than it is today?

http://www.cnbc.com/id/48468748

7% Isn;t that what obamas numbers say we are at today? Oh! but wait his real number is a little over 14%

WELL this just can't be Obama is the economic God of the world. Surely they did it on the backs of the poor and middle class and now they were paying for it, because revenue after that nasty give away to the rich cost the government so much money!

http://www.crystalbull.com/stock-market-timing/Personal-Income-Taxes-chart/

No revenue seemd to spike after the tax cuts too?

So what was it that was so economicly bad about the Bush years? and what is the great part about the Obama years, I am still waiting to see?

Cigar
03-22-2013, 08:18 AM
Dude ... give it a rest ... A Breif History of the Debt/Deficit Debate Over The Last 20 Years

1993
Bill Clinton is sworn into office amid an economic slump, and he wants to pass a major stimulus bill. He is talked out of doing that by Alan Greenspan and bond traders. They tell him to focus on the deficit/debt. He does and in the summer of 1993, Clinton's deficit reduction plan is passed into law by one vote. No Republicans support his plan.

1994
Because Clinton raised taxes, the Gingrich Revolution uses it as a wedge issue to win control of the Congress.

1995 to 2000
The yearly deficits slowly disappear, and a small surplus emerges.

2000
During the presidential campaign of 2000, Al Gore wants to put the surplus into a lock box to shore up Social Security. He is openly ridiculed and mocked by the DC Beltway punditry.

2001
George W. Bush assumes power after a highly questionable election. One of his first acts as president is to pass a massive tax cuts without any spending cuts to offset it. He even makes his cuts retroactive, and tax rebate checks were mailed out to everyone. By August 2001, the surplus is gone and we slip back into deficits. Not a peep is heard by the media. NOTHING.

2001 to 2008
Bush runs up massive deficits each year of his presidency. In the middle of two wars, he passed yet another tax cut without paying for it. He signs into law a prescription drug benefit without paying for it as well. It all culminates in the grandaddy of all spending, the TARP bailout fund of 2008.

2009
Barack Obama is sworn into office amid the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. He passes a scaled-down stimulus bill, and now, after a 8 year slumber, the DC Beltway media begins screaming about the debt and deficit. Also, a Tea Party movement emerges over the debt/deficit issue.

2010
Because the economy is still sluggish--in part due to the scaled down stimulus-- the Republicans are able to take control of the House of Representatives. They threaten not to lift the debt ceiling because of the size of the debt and deficit.

2012 to 2013
Barack Obama is re-elected. The DC Beltway chrous grows louder with cries about the debt/deficit.


Summary
I left out a lot of details, but I captured the gist of these events. The point of this post is to clearly show that when Republicans are out of power, they, and the media, immediately start crying sbout the debt/deficits. However, when they are in power, there's not even a peep out of either of them about it.

For 8 damn years, Bush ran up the deficit and debt without the media nor the Republicans saying a word. The man passed tax cuts in the middle of two wars, and the only person I recall complaining about it were commentators on Air America radio.

So, don't fall for this b.s. about the debt/deficit. It's another hoax just like the Iraq war.

Santa's Little Helper
03-22-2013, 08:18 AM
Let me guess ... you were in a coma from 2001 through 2008 and woke up in 2009 :rollseyes:

Yes people need to understand the BUSH ECONOMY was PHONY

THE 2000's BOOM was purely based upon asset bubbles, speculation, cheap easy credit,and a trillion in war spending that exploded our debt although Obama is spending twice that

Cigar
03-22-2013, 08:28 AM
A dominant theme of the national political discourse has been the crushing spending spree the U.S. has ostensibly embarked on during the Obama presidency. That argument, ignited by Republicans and picked up by many elite opinion makers, has infused the national dialogue and shaped the public debate in nearly every major budget battle of the last thee years.

But the numbers tell a different story.


The fact that the national debt has risen from $10.6 trillion to $15.6 trillion under Obama’s watch makes for easy partisan attacks. But the vast bulk of the increase (http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/05/obama-romney-deficit-debt-chart.php) was caused by a combination of revenue losses due to the 2008-09 economic downturn as well as Bush-era tax cuts and automatic increases in safety-net spending that were already written into law.


Obama’s policies, including the much-criticized stimulus package, have caused the slowest increase in federal spending (http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/03/how-congress-helps-republicans-but-not-democrats-weather-bad-economies-charts.php) of any president in almost 60 years, according to data compiled by the financial news service MarketWatch (http://www.marketwatch.com/story/obama-spending-binge-never-happened-2012-05-22)

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/images/slowest-spending.png
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/05/federal-deficit-barack-obama-spending-stimulus-budget-historic-trends.php

Agravan
03-22-2013, 08:30 AM
The answer is simple ...

http://simplypoliticsblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/obama-president-available.jpg

If obama is the answer, then it must have been a very stupid question.

zelmo1234
03-22-2013, 08:30 AM
Dude ... give it a rest ... A Breif History of the Debt/Deficit Debate Over The Last 20 Years

1993
Bill Clinton is sworn into office amid an economic slump, and he wants to pass a major stimulus bill. He is talked out of doing that by Alan Greenspan and bond traders. They tell him to focus on the deficit/debt. He does and in the summer of 1993, Clinton's deficit reduction plan is passed into law by one vote. No Republicans support his plan.

1994
Because Clinton raised taxes, the Gingrich Revolution uses it as a wedge issue to win control of the Congress.

1995 to 2000
The yearly deficits slowly disappear, and a small surplus emerges.

2000
During the presidential campaign of 2000, Al Gore wants to put the surplus into a lock box to shore up Social Security. He is openly ridiculed and mocked by the DC Beltway punditry.

2001
George W. Bush assumes power after a highly questionable election. One of his first acts as president is to pass a massive tax cuts without any spending cuts to offset it. He even makes his cuts retroactive, and tax rebate checks were mailed out to everyone. By August 2001, the surplus is gone and we slip back into deficits. Not a peep is heard by the media. NOTHING.

2001 to 2008
Bush runs up massive deficits each year of his presidency. In the middle of two wars, he passed yet another tax cut without paying for it. He signs into law a prescription drug benefit without paying for it as well. It all culminates in the grandaddy of all spending, the TARP bailout fund of 2008.

2009
Barack Obama is sworn into office amid the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. He passes a scaled-down stimulus bill, and now, after a 8 year slumber, the DC Beltway media begins screaming about the debt and deficit. Also, a Tea Party movement emerges over the debt/deficit issue.

2010
Because the economy is still sluggish--in part due to the scaled down stimulus-- the Republicans are able to take control of the House of Representatives. They threaten not to lift the debt ceiling because of the size of the debt and deficit.

2012 to 2013
Barack Obama is re-elected. The DC Beltway chrous grows louder with cries about the debt/deficit.


Summary
I left out a lot of details, but I captured the gist of these events. The point of this post is to clearly show that when Republicans are out of power, they, and the media, immediately start crying sbout the debt/deficits. However, when they are in power, there's not even a peep out of either of them about it.

For 8 damn years, Bush ran up the deficit and debt without the media nor the Republicans saying a word. The man passed tax cuts in the middle of two wars, and the only person I recall complaining about it were commentators on Air America radio.

So, don't fall for this b.s. about the debt/deficit. It's another hoax just like the Iraq war.

You forgot to include one of the biggest accomplisments of the Clinto years and the reason for the surplus?

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2008/03/tax-cuts-not-the-clinton-tax-hike-produced-the-1990s-boom

You forgot that he gave the biggest tax cut to the rich when he cut capital gains taxes and the economy took off like a shot!

You also must ahve forgoten this?

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2011/02/lessons_from_the_great_governm.html

Now they paid a dear price in the elections but the spending cuts stayed. And we actually had a surplus.

Then there is the one thing that nobody seems to remember that happened 8 months into the Bush Presidency

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/911

The recovery after this was incredable, and yes there were wars after and deficites, but 486 billion the worst that history will assign to Bush. though Democrats are still saying that all of Obamas deficites are his fault!

Obama is a total economic failure, much like Carter, his Ideas are what is wrong with the country! Now I am not saying that they are not designed to be conpassionate, but they just are not working out that way in the real world.

Agravan
03-22-2013, 08:35 AM
Tell me this, Cigar:
How does letting me keep more of my own money, in the form of a tax cut, costing the government anything? It's not their money to begin with, it's money I worked for and earned.Are they cutting me a check every payday to go with my paycheck?

zelmo1234
03-22-2013, 08:36 AM
A dominant theme of the national political discourse has been the crushing spending spree the U.S. has ostensibly embarked on during the Obama presidency. That argument, ignited by Republicans and picked up by many elite opinion makers, has infused the national dialogue and shaped the public debate in nearly every major budget battle of the last thee years.

My profit margin was up this year by nearly 2% but I actually because of starting my investment phase, made less money.

last time I checked we pay our bills with dollars not %

So if you Push your first year to astrnomical levels and then assign it to the past President, something that has never been done in history! then you can keep your % low.

Here is the deficite chart! and the dollars tell a different story!

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/downchart_gs.php?year=1995_2015&view=1&expand=&units=b&fy=fy11&chart=G0-fed&bar=1&stack=1&size=l&title=&state=US&color=c&local=s

Holy crap there is a lot of dollars their. And history is going to judge the dollars!

But the numbers tell a different story.


The fact that the national debt has risen from $10.6 trillion to $15.6 trillion under Obama’s watch makes for easy partisan attacks. But the vast bulk of the increase (http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/05/obama-romney-deficit-debt-chart.php) was caused by a combination of revenue losses due to the 2008-09 economic downturn as well as Bush-era tax cuts and automatic increases in safety-net spending that were already written into law.


Obama’s policies, including the much-criticized stimulus package, have caused the slowest increase in federal spending (http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/03/how-congress-helps-republicans-but-not-democrats-weather-bad-economies-charts.php) of any president in almost 60 years, according to data compiled by the financial news service MarketWatch (http://www.marketwatch.com/story/obama-spending-binge-never-happened-2012-05-22)

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/images/slowest-spending.png
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/05/federal-deficit-barack-obama-spending-stimulus-budget-historic-trends.php

Cigar
03-22-2013, 08:36 AM
Remind those who are nervous about debt that Bush started with a $128 billion SURPLUS & ended with a $1.4 trillion DEFICIT. Obama was handed that kind of spending right during the worst GLOBAL economic collapse in 100 years.


* $600 billion in deficit reduction since Bush's last budget.
* Lowest spending increases since Eisenhower.
* 38 months of private sector job growth, including small businesses.
* Record corporate profits & Wall Street values.
* More millionaires and billionaires every year.
* Lowest real tax rates on the rich since 1928.
* 21 new tax cuts for middle-class families.
* 18 new tax cuts for small businesses.
* First growth in manufacturing sectors in 30 years.
* Americans #1 in worker productivity.
* Household debt reduced by half-a-trillion.
* Gas prices peaked at $4.12 under Bush.


And:
* Obama has proposed $4 trillion in additional debt reduction, but the GOP have blocked him.
* Republicans partisanship in Congress is the primary reason for the downgrade of USA's credit rating.
* Romney has said military spending is off-limits for cutting ($683.7 billion in 2010)

But there's a 7.8% unemployment rate still, right? That's in large part due to the 700,000 government jobs that have been cut, including States cutting 230,000 teachers and 130,000 police/emergency responders.

* 7.5 million jobs were lost in 2008 and 2009. Expecting a quick recovery of equal magnitude is irrational.
* Without exception, historically, Democratic presidents have created jobs at a faster rate than Republicans (2m/y vs 1m/y).
* 2.8 million jobs have been added in the last 18 months.
* We're in a recovery, thanks to Obama.

The overall argument we need to make: The GOP are peddling the wrong kind of (failed) capitalism

Cigar
03-22-2013, 08:40 AM
Tell me this, Cigar:
How does letting me keep more of my own money, in the form of a tax cut, costing the government anything? It's not their money to begin with, it's money I worked for and earned.Are they cutting me a check every payday to go with my paycheck?


I'm not going to search this forum for all the post I have outlining the cost of your cool new military toys sitting in dry-dock, you can do that.

littlejohn
03-22-2013, 08:57 AM
A dominant theme of the national political discourse has been the crushing spending spree the U.S. has ostensibly embarked on during the Obama presidency. That argument, ignited by Republicans and picked up by many elite opinion makers, has infused the national dialogue and shaped the public debate in nearly every major budget battle of the last thee years.

But the numbers tell a different story.


The fact that the national debt has risen from $10.6 trillion to $15.6 trillion under Obama’s watch makes for easy partisan attacks. But the vast bulk of the increase (http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/05/obama-romney-deficit-debt-chart.php) was caused by a combination of revenue losses due to the 2008-09 economic downturn as well as Bush-era tax cuts and automatic increases in safety-net spending that were already written into law.


Obama’s policies, including the much-criticized stimulus package, have caused the slowest increase in federal spending (http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/03/how-congress-helps-republicans-but-not-democrats-weather-bad-economies-charts.php) of any president in almost 60 years, according to data compiled by the financial news service MarketWatch (http://www.marketwatch.com/story/obama-spending-binge-never-happened-2012-05-22)

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/images/slowest-spending.png
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/05/federal-deficit-barack-obama-spending-stimulus-budget-historic-trends.php

help me out reading this, not sure annualized -- is that to say 1.4% average per year between 10 and 13 ?
OK .. never mind, its CAGR across that period . which indeed seems very small.

Cigar
03-22-2013, 09:00 AM
help me out reading this, not sure annualized -- is that to say 1.4% average per year between 10 and 13 ?

Variance or change of the rate ... i.e how much "more" is being spent.

Mainecoons
03-22-2013, 09:06 AM
Notice how he conveniently leaves out 2009 for Obama.

Cigar's posts remind me of the old saw, "figures don't lie but liars sure can figure." :rofl:

Greenridgeman
03-22-2013, 09:51 AM
If this is the answer then the question must be how do you destroy 50% of the middle calss wealth and make them work for 5000 less per year, while destroying the american economy in the process?

Did I get that about right?



There has been a huge increase in food stamp recipients and former workers going onto Social Security disability.

Why do you ignore the economy stimulating trends?

Cigar
03-22-2013, 09:56 AM
There has been a huge increase in food stamp recipients and former workers going onto Social Security disability.

Why do you ignore the economy stimulating trends?

7.5 million jobs were lost in 2008 and 2009

700,000 government jobs that have been cut in the aftermath

... including States cutting 230,000 teachers and 130,000 police/emergency responders.

Think that great recession had anything to do with it?

Greenridgeman
03-22-2013, 09:58 AM
Tell me this, Cigar:
How does letting me keep more of my own money, in the form of a tax cut, costing the government anything? It's not their money to begin with, it's money I worked for and earned.Are they cutting me a check every payday to go with my paycheck?



If you read his posts, he is for the government letting HIM keep more of HIS money, against the government letting YOU keep more of YOUR money.

The Democratic policy is that you are lucky if they let you keep any of THEIR money.

Greenridgeman
03-22-2013, 09:59 AM
7.5 million jobs were lost in 2008 and 2009

700,000 government jobs that have been cut in the aftermath

... including States cutting 230,000 teachers and 130,000 police/emergency responders.

Think that great recession had anything to do with it?




Fewer kids spared abortion, fewer teachers needed.

Law of unintended consequences.

Cigar
03-22-2013, 10:01 AM
Feeling insignificant these days ... not special ? :laugh:

TheDictator
03-22-2013, 10:30 AM
Why can't the GOP leaders grow up and quit crying

And this Tea Party is such a JOKE and I would suggest reading a fifth grade history book to learn about the real tea party

And Paul Ryan please STFU and settle down cause NOBODY CARES what you got to say anymore


Who is doing the crying here?


The biggest child in the House is Nancy, She should be a big Girl and go home, and let an Adult run the democrats.

An I would take the Tea Party over the Criminals and Rapist of the Occupy Movement.

nic34
03-22-2013, 10:32 AM
REP. NEWT GINGRICH: ”I believe that that will in fact kill the current recovery
and put us back in a recession. It might take 1 and a half or 2 years, but it will happen.” (Cong. Record 02/02/1993)

The Clinton tax hikes on the richest did not result in a “recession.” They did not increase our deficits. Instead, the government was placed on a path to a surplus and we had a strong economy that created 22 million jobs. This isn’t to say that tax increases on the rich necessarily create jobs, but the evidence shows that they do not harm the economy in the ways that Republicans are claiming today.

Recall that every single Republican in both the House and the Senate voted against the Clinton tax increase on the rich. As Republicans circle the wagons to protect the rich, we should remember how they made outlandish predictions in the 1990s, and how their dire words are no more true now.

TheDictator
03-22-2013, 10:51 AM
If you think Tax increases are good, then be fair and increase every one's Taxes.

nic34
03-22-2013, 10:55 AM
Only if we go to a German style VAT.

Greenridgeman
03-22-2013, 10:58 AM
Who is doing the crying here?


The biggest child in the House is Nancy, She should be a big Girl and go home, and let an Adult run the democrats.









An I would take the Tea Party over the Criminals and Rapist of the Occupy Movement.


How can you slam Nancy Pelosi?

Didn't you know she learned her politics under the Kennedy boys?

Greenridgeman
03-22-2013, 11:00 AM
If you think Tax increases are good, then be fair and increase every one's Taxes.


I have long called for across the board repeal of the Bush tax cuts.

It is ridiculous that 47% of wage earners pay no Federal Personal Income Tax, or worse, get EIC, and it is ridiculous that I only pay 10% instead of the 15% I was paying.

BB-35
03-22-2013, 11:54 AM
Why can't the GOP leaders grow up and quit crying

And this Tea Party is such a JOKE and I would suggest reading a fifth grade history book to learn about the real tea party

And Paul Ryan please STFU and settle down cause NOBODY CARES what you got to say anymore

Tough shit.

Quit whining,nancy

Cigar
03-22-2013, 11:59 AM
Tough shit.

Quit whining,nancy


Quit Losing Lucy :)

TheDictator
03-22-2013, 12:42 PM
Quit Losing Lucy :)

Yes, Nancy did lose the House, and the Dems will not win it back any time soon.

BB-35
03-22-2013, 12:49 PM
Quit Losing Lucy :)

I didn't lose anything,jackass...

Cigar
03-22-2013, 12:56 PM
Yes, Nancy did lose the House, and the Dems will not win it back any time soon.

You can have it ... it's overrated anyway. :)

TheDictator
03-22-2013, 01:19 PM
You can have it ... it's overrated anyway. :)

Well is does keep the President from passing Liberal Programs. So it is worth that.

Cigar
03-22-2013, 01:23 PM
Well is does keep the President from passing Liberal Programs. So it is worth that.

Yea ... you're right ... :)




Health Care for All Americans
Wall Street Reform
Avoiding another Great Depression
Saving a million jobs in the American auto industry
Expanding Medicaid
Eliminating Don't Ask Don't Tell
Expanding Children's Health
Environmental Reform
Expanding Labor Rights
Expanding Civil Liberties
Equal Pay for Equal Work
Ended the Iraq War

TheDictator
03-22-2013, 01:46 PM
Yea ... you're right ... :)



Health Care for All Americans - Sorry but not all americans are covered, and the cost and most of the problems will be on the middle class, we will see if the American people love it when it takes 8 months to see a doctor
Wall Street Reform - That will cost Jobs and investment in America
Avoiding another Great Depression- LOL, What a joke, get real.
Saving a million jobs in the American auto industry - they still went bankrupt and lost jobs
Expanding Medicaid- Again the cost will fall on the middle class
Eliminating Don't Ask Don't Tell - Yes the President is immoral and Godless
Expanding Children's Health - More spending
Environmental Reform - Yes his EPA has put 50,000 people out work in East Texas
Expanding Labor Rights - Forcing people into unions is not labor rights
Expanding Civil Liberties - He has taken away more rights than given
Equal Pay for Equal Work - Sure, we already had that
Ended the Iraq War - We still have one war going
Drone Policy of killing American in America


Yes you proved my point.

nic34
03-22-2013, 01:49 PM
......and denial ain't a river in Egypt

Cigar
03-22-2013, 01:50 PM
Yes you proved my point.



I didn't expect you to like things a Democratic President gets done ...

That's what happens when you lose ... twice. :)

Cigar
03-22-2013, 01:51 PM
http://24.media.tumblr.com/3ece12b48c938be232bb2c74b29fe2d0/tumblr_mg6ac75OLI1rlnmpto1_500.jpg

nic34
03-22-2013, 01:53 PM
republicans were never too good at the math thing...

Cigar
03-22-2013, 02:15 PM
Lather. Rinse. Repeat repeat repeat...

https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/s480x480/164426_556038391097749_965246803_n.jpg

nic34
03-22-2013, 02:18 PM
Yep, the math....

Agravan
03-22-2013, 02:26 PM
I'm not going to search this forum for all the post I have outlining the cost of your cool new military toys sitting in dry-dock, you can do that.

that still does not answer the question of how keeping my money costs the government anything.

nic34
03-22-2013, 02:27 PM
No one wants any of this, they're happy being fleeced the way it is:

•Coverage to Americans with Pre-existing Conditions

•Small Businesses tax credits to help cover the costs of covering employees.

•new annual wellness exams and prescription drug discounts.

•Protects Your Choice of Doctors: Choose the primary care doctor you want from your plan’s network.

•Keeps Young Adults Covered: If you are under 26, you may be eligible to be covered under your parent’s health plan.

•Ends Lifetime Limits on Coverage: Lifetime limits on most benefits are banned for all new health insurance plans.

•Ends Pre-Existing Condition Exclusions for Children: Health plans can no longer limit or deny benefits to children under 19 due to a pre-existing condition.

•Ends Arbitrary Withdrawals of Insurance Coverage: Insurers can no longer cancel your coverage just because you made an honest mistake.

•Reviews Premium Increases: Insurance companies must now publicly justify any unreasonable rate hikes.

•Helps You Get the Most from Your Premium Dollars: Your premium dollars must be spent primarily on health care – not administrative costs.

•Restricts Annual Dollar Limits on Coverage: Annual limits on your health benefits will be phased out by 2014.

•Removes Insurance Company Barriers to Emergency Services: You can seek emergency care at a hospital outside of your health plan’s network.

•Covers Preventive Care at No Cost to You, eligible for recommended preventive health services. No copayment.

•Guarantees Your Right to Appeal: You now have the right to ask that your plan reconsider its denial of payment.

http://www.healthcare.gov/news/factsheets/2011/03/betterbenefits.html

Cigar
03-22-2013, 02:28 PM
that still does not answer the question of how keeping my money costs the government anything.


Take an Economics Class

Cigar
03-22-2013, 02:31 PM
No one wants any of this, they're happy being fleeced the way it is:

•Coverage to Americans with Pre-existing Conditions

•Small Businesses tax credits to help cover the costs of covering employees.

•new annual wellness exams and prescription drug discounts.

•Protects Your Choice of Doctors: Choose the primary care doctor you want from your plan’s network.

•Keeps Young Adults Covered: If you are under 26, you may be eligible to be covered under your parent’s health plan.

•Ends Lifetime Limits on Coverage: Lifetime limits on most benefits are banned for all new health insurance plans.

•Ends Pre-Existing Condition Exclusions for Children: Health plans can no longer limit or deny benefits to children under 19 due to a pre-existing condition.

•Ends Arbitrary Withdrawals of Insurance Coverage: Insurers can no longer cancel your coverage just because you made an honest mistake.

•Reviews Premium Increases: Insurance companies must now publicly justify any unreasonable rate hikes.

•Helps You Get the Most from Your Premium Dollars: Your premium dollars must be spent primarily on health care – not administrative costs.

•Restricts Annual Dollar Limits on Coverage: Annual limits on your health benefits will be phased out by 2014.

•Removes Insurance Company Barriers to Emergency Services: You can seek emergency care at a hospital outside of your health plan’s network.

•Covers Preventive Care at No Cost to You, eligible for recommended preventive health services. No copayment.

•Guarantees Your Right to Appeal: You now have the right to ask that your plan reconsider its denial of payment.

http://www.healthcare.gov/news/factsheets/2011/03/betterbenefits.html



http://ts1.mm.bing.net/th?id=H.4527377492280140&pid=1.7

Agravan
03-22-2013, 02:36 PM
I didn't expect you to like things a Democratic President gets done ...

That's what happens when you lose ... twice. :)

Once again, you try to make hay from the fact that you guys won two elections. So what? In the 80s you lost THREE elections in a row, did the Democratic party fall apart? NO. in 2000 and 2004 you lost back to back elections. Did the Democratic party die out? NO. So we lost the previous election and your boy won re-election. What does that mean? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. yet, you go on bleating about it as if it had some real meaning and it signaled the end of the Republican party. You, Cigar, are an ignorant fool and act like a spoiled 3 year old. There will be another Republican president eventually. What will you do then? Will you start whining about stolen elections like you people do every time a Republican wins? Will you concede defeat? Unlikely. you'll just keep whining like the little bitch you really are.
We know he won, twice. So F'ing what? Unless he suspends further elections, there will be more. You won't win them all even with your ballot box stuffing, illegal alien and foreign voters, and people voting multiple times.
So take your "we won twice" BS and shove it where the sun don't shine.

Agravan
03-22-2013, 02:37 PM
Take an Economics Class
Why? i'm not the idiot claiming that my money all belongs to the government. That's your job.

nic34
03-22-2013, 02:41 PM
The beatings are having an effect......:grin:

Agravan
03-22-2013, 02:43 PM
The beatings are having an effect......:grin:
Which beatings would those be? Your gums?

zelmo1234
03-22-2013, 06:08 PM
There has been a huge increase in food stamp recipients and former workers going onto Social Security disability.

Why do you ignore the economy stimulating trends?

I don't ignore it, the policies of this administration are promoting the stagnation of the economy!

Like all social programs designed to lessen the pain of a recession or depression they prolong it, just like the new deal prolonged the depression. The massive government spending, debt and taxations is prolonging this recession!

zelmo1234
03-22-2013, 06:14 PM
REP. NEWT GINGRICH: ”I believe that that will in fact kill the current recovery
and put us back in a recession. It might take 1 and a half or 2 years, but it will happen.” (Cong. Record 02/02/1993)

The Clinton tax hikes on the richest did not result in a “recession.” They did not increase our deficits. Instead, the government was placed on a path to a surplus and we had a strong economy that created 22 million jobs. This isn’t to say that tax increases on the rich necessarily create jobs, but the evidence shows that they do not harm the economy in the ways that Republicans are claiming today.

Recall that every single Republican in both the House and the Senate voted against the Clinton tax increase on the rich. As Republicans circle the wagons to protect the rich, we should remember how they made outlandish predictions in the 1990s, and how their dire words are no more true now.

Now we have been through this BS before, his tax increases of 93 most definalty did lead to a slowing of the economy, So in 97 he gave one of the biggest tax cuts to the rich in the nations history, when he cut capital gains taxes. The only tax increases that were allowed to remain were the ones on the middle class, because they can't shelter themselves form it!

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2008/03/tax-cuts-not-the-clinton-tax-hike-produced-the-1990s-boom

Also the surpluses would not have come to pass without the cuts in spending demanded byu the Cincrich congress

zelmo1234
03-22-2013, 06:25 PM
Take an Economics Class

So you can't answer why him keeping his money cost the government anything!

Peter1469
03-22-2013, 06:59 PM
Yes people need to understand the BUSH ECONOMY was PHONY

THE 2000's BOOM was purely based upon asset bubbles, speculation, cheap easy credit,and a trillion in war spending that exploded our debt although Obama is spending twice that

Bush was a lib.

And the original tea party was not asking for bigger government to help them out. You need to read more.