Obamacare a smaller tax hike than Reagan instituted in 82

Switch to electronic cigarettes. There's no tax on them.

 

Then why are Obama and pals lying to us?

 

Sales tax still...which will mean im paying more taxes. THANKS OBAMA!

 

well SCOTUS rules its not a tax under the Anti Injunction Act

 

Only if you buy them in the state where you live.

Still, sales taxes are far lower than tobacco taxes.

 

I'm lost. Someone clue me in on why I'm supposed to be outraged when life is completely meaningless and absurd to begin with. What are you trying to tell me? That I'm suddenly a slave because taxes go up? I've had absolutely no control over the circumstances of my birth. I couldn't control the fact that I got old. I woke up one day when I was 12 and I was out of my mind with lust. I didn't ask for that, either. Soon, 10 or 20 years from now, I'll be dead. Nothing I can do about it. In the endless line of time I might get, 70 or 75 years? And then I'm extinct. Gone. Forever. You want me to get outraged about a tax? Life is tragic and absurd. That's slavery. Who pays who how much for what is a mere detail on the path towards death. You can let anything eat you alive if you want. The outcome is the same. Will this plan save someone's life? I don't know. Life requires moral action. That's all I got when you boil it right down to the essentials. That's all any of us has.

 

It's not about that anymore. It's about the LIES. He and Pelosi have lied to the American people for 4 almost 4 years now.....and are STILL lying about it.

Did he not tell us that not one time of taxes would be placed on the middle class?

HE LIED.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Probably the most definitive promise you made in the campaign is that no one in the middle class would get a tax increase on your watch.


OBAMA: Right.



http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0909/27384_Page2.html

 

It's ok to lie about how big because they lie too!

 

The bottom line... we now have a centralized authoritative federal government telling Americans how we MUST spend our after tax dollars.

WTG Liberals... well done.

 

I think you'll find that they all lie. Lying about taxes is about as common as lying about affairs.

If you're looking for a president who doesn't lie... Well, good luck. You usually have to vote for 3rd party candidates to avoid liars.

 

Liberals didn't appoint CJ Roberts

 

Not good enough. There is always someone else that has done a bad deed, and it should never excuse the one doing it now. But, Obama has taken lying to a whole new level...I don't know if the man knows or even cares to ever tell the truth. He gets away with it because people are so enamored that he "is so well spoken". Isn't that when this nightmare all started? People just can't admit that "what people actually say" should take priority over "how well they say it".

 

That's been going on way before Obama.

 

great, so you will vote for the candidate who hasnt lied about anything.....

which is?

 

The actuall Affordable Care Act Legislation calls it a penalty. Also the head of the Republican Party (Romney) Calls it a penalty. And the SCOTUS never said it wasn't a penalty. That means Romney has been lying since 2002 (when he became governor)

 

Hmmm...you made me think. NOT! I'm voting Obama out of office.

 

So Romney's lies are ok? Is it because he has an (R) in front of his name after he lies to you?

 

You are indeed correct, JP5.

Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi have both lied to us. And they knew they were lying to us when they did it.

Here is an accurate analysis of the lies they have told the American people from the very beginning of Obama's term.

"But $2.0 trillion wouldn’t be the total ten-year costs. Instead, that would merely be the “gross cost of coverage provisions.” Based on earlier incarnations of the proposed overhaul, the total costs would be about a third higher (the exact number can’t be gleaned from the CBO’s analysis, which is only preliminary and is not a full scoring) — making the total price-tag between $2.5 and $3 trillion over the bill’s real first decade."

Article follows.

The CBO’s most recent analysis is out, and it’s not likely to convince wavering House Democrats to jump to the Obamacare side of the fence. Even the Democrats are granting that the latest version of their proposed health care overhaul would cost $69 billion more than the previous version. According to the CBO, this version would siphon even more money out of Medicare, make even further cuts to Medicare Advantage, and levy even higher taxes and fines on the American people.

President Obama, Speaker Pelosi, and their allies, are cheerfully citing “ten year” costs of $940,000,000,000.00 — apparently believing this to be a far more palatable figure than $1 trillion. But even this colossal tally is like the introductory price quoted by a cell phone provider. It’s the price before you pay for minutes, fees, and overcharges — and before the price balloons after the introductory offer expires.

For a variety of reasons, this tally doesn’t remotely reflect the bill’s real ten-year costs. First, it includes 2010 as the initial year. As most people are well aware, 2010 has now been underway for some time. Therefore, the CBO would normally count 2011 as the first year of its analysis, just as it counted 2010 as the first year when analyzing the initial House health bill in the middle of 2009. But under strict instructions from Democratic leaders, and over strong objections from Republicans, the CBO dutifully scored 2010 as the first year of the latest version of Obamacare. If the clock were started in 2011, the first full year that the bill could possibly be in effect, the CBO says that the bill’s ten-year costs would be $1.2 trillion.

But even that wouldn’t come close to reflecting the bill’s true costs. The CBO projects that over the next four years, less than two percent of the bill’s alleged “ten year” costs would hit: just $17 billion of the $940 billion in costs that the Democrats are claiming. In fact, the costs through President Obama’s entire presidency, should he be reelected, would be $336 billion. What would the president leave behind for his successor? According to the CBO, he would leave behind costs of $837 billion during his successor’s first term alone. If his successor were to serve a second term, he or she would inherit a cool $2.0 trillion in Obamacare costs — about six times its costs during Obama’s own tenure. This legislation is a ticking time-bomb.

To see the bill’s true first-decade costs, we need to start the clock when the costs would actually start in any meaningful way: in 2014. The CBO says that Obamacare would cost $2.0 trillion in the bill’s real first decade (from 2014 to 2023) — and much more in the decades to come.

But $2.0 trillion wouldn’t be the total ten-year costs. Instead, that would merely be the “gross cost of coverage provisions.” Based on earlier incarnations of the proposed overhaul, the total costs would be about a third higher (the exact number can’t be gleaned from the CBO’s analysis, which is only preliminary and is not a full scoring) — making the total price-tag between $2.5 and $3 trillion over the bill’s real first decade.

How would we pay for all of this? According to the CBO, by diverting $1.1 trillion away from already barely-solvent Medicare and spending it on Obamacare, and by increasing taxes on the American people by over $1 trillion. Among the Medicare cuts would be cuts of $25,000 in Medicare Advantage benefits per enrollee — up from $21,000 in the previous scoring. To be clear, those living in South Florida wouldn’t have to worry about this, as the newly politicized nature of health care would cause them to be exempted. These cuts would affect only less-fortunate seniors, namely those living in just about any other part of the country.

We’d also pay for this through increased deficits. Under strict instructions from the Democrats, the CBO gave Obamacare credit for over $400 billion (from 2014 to 2023) in phony “savings” that would allegedly result from cutting doctor’s payments under Medicare by over 20 percent and never raising them back up. As the CBO notes, one of two things could happen: Congress could either follow through on these severe pay cuts — in which case doctors would view all Medicare patients as if they have the plague — or, Congress could eliminate these pay cuts — as everyone in Washington expects to have happen under the so-called “doc fix” — in which case the CBO projects that this bill would raise deficits by over $100 billion from 2017 to 2019 alone.

So, after racking up higher deficit spending in two years than President Bush (or any other president) did in two terms, President Obama would leave his successor a 12-figure deficit related to Obamacare alone — for the period from 2017 to 2019 alone. That’s according to the CBO.

And what would we get for all of this? The CBO says that health insurance premiums would rise by 10 to 13 percent in the individual market, in relation to current law. The Medicare Chief Actuary says that the percentage of the gross domestic product spent on health care would also rise in relation to current law, increasing from 17 percent today to 21 percent in 2019. And, as the CBO reports in its latest scoring, as of 2019 there would still be 23 million people in America lacking health insurance.

When the House votes on Obamacare, probably this weekend, it will do the following: Most likely all in one motion, it will vote on whether to pass the Senate bill — or, more likely, on whether to “deem” it passed — and on additional language. Should the House pass the Senate bill, it would be enacted the second that it went to the president and his pen touched the page. At that point, the “Cornhusker Kickback,” the “Louisiana Purchase,” “Gator Aid,” and all the rest, would become the law of the land. The additional language would be passed on to the Senate. The new CBO score is for the whole ball of wax — for the Senate bill, which would immediately become law, plus the new language, which wouldn’t. Clear as mud?

Meanwhile, President Obama is continuing to meet with wavering House Democrats, offering them rides on Air Force One and almost unimaginable combinations of other incentives and disincentives. Members of Congress report that, when they sit across from him in close quarters at his invitation, he says to them, “Help me make history.” In Jerry Maguire, the character played by Cuba Gooding Jr. famously says, “Help me help you.” For Obama, it’s “Help me help me.

The latest CBO score should help wavering Democrats to resist the president’s plea and listen anew to the pleas of their constituents. Two trillion dollars is a lot to spend on something that Americans don’t want.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/print/blogs/cbo-obamacare-would-cost-over-2-trillion?page=2

 

So the talking point is no longer that it's a tax, but rather that it was presented to us in a dishonest fashion?

Well, my first thought is to say that is blatantly moving the goal post, my second thought is if we're gauging candidates based on their truthfullness, then I think the top two folks on the ballot ought to be removed since neither of them score very well according to politifact....

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/mitt-romney/
http://www.politifact.com/personalities/barack-obama/

 

as always the right relies on dishonest half truths to make their case...

Yes, the CBO found health-care reform would reduce premiums. The issue gets confused because it also found that access to subsidies would encourage people to buy more comprehensive insurance, which would mean that the value of their insurance would be higher after reform than before it. But that's not the same as insurance becoming more expensive: The fact that I could buy a nicer car after getting a better job suggests that cars are becoming pricier. The bottom line is that if you're comparing two plans that are exactly the same, costs go down after reform.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/02/did_the_congressional_budget_o_1.html

 

Romeny's not president; Obama is. And Obama passed this massive FEDERAL PROGRAM on the people against our will. There has not been one poll that showed the vast majority of people wanting it. They didn't listen.....because "Big Daddy" federal gov't thinks they know better than us. They want to make all your decisions for you.

 

If it "encourages" people to buy the more comprehensive (aka higher cost) plans....it's because the lower ones.....like for instance the "bronze level" pays only 60% of one's healthcare costs and has high copays and high deductibles. You WILL pay, just like you do now---the only difference is that Big Daddy federal gov't will be in control. They'll have you drawing clocks that shows it's 11:15!!!!

 

Ah, so by your rationale, Romneys LIES don't count yet because he is merely running for POTUS while telling you his LIES rather than actually being the POTUS telling you his LIES.

Let me ask you JP, before Obama got elected POTUS, did you believe him to be an honest man? Basically, did you believe his words he was telling everyone while he was running for POTUS?

 

It's only a tax hike for those without insurance who do not want insurance