The logic behind the Obamacare tax issue, and Obama's lack of integrity

Why you insist on being smart as a sidewalk and intentionally misusing words to try to make a completely lost point shows a definite lack of maturity. But in case it's only a lack of knowledge, here is some information for you to try to absorb:

law (lô)
n.
1. A rule of conduct or procedure established by custom, agreement, or authority.

bill 1 (bl)

a. A draft of a proposed law presented for approval to a legislative body.

When a bill is NOT approved, it remains a non-approved BILL, not a non-approved LAW.

A law is a bill that has been approved into law, and remains a law until its established expiration date or its repeal. Then it becomes an expired law or a repealed law. It never becomes a bill again.

And again, if obamaTAX is good, why are you trying to shift the BLAME for it to Republicans? Do loony liberals find BLAME in good laws? Do loony liberals EVER make any sense?

And I said that I am NOT a Republican, I am a registered INDEPENDENT, and have been for years. And you make some lame comment about liberalism in my signature. Evidently you have numerous language difficulties. There is a Democrat Party, there is a Republican Party, there are other Parties, including the Libertarian Party. THERE IS NO LIBERALISM PARTY. Some Democrats are not very liberal, most have been FORCED out by the obamaTAX passage. And there are Democrats that are insanely liberal. And there are Republicans that are too liberal and are being weeded out by the tea party (NOT an official party)

If you understood our language, you might have deduced that I am very conservative and very anti-liberal. But neither a member of the Republican Party nor a member of the Democratic Party [although I once WAS a registered Democrat until I could no longer stand the lies and stupidity]

 

1) If you were a registered independent, you would be railing against the Republicans in your signature as well. Instead you devote it entirely to (poorly written) anti-Democrat rhetoric.

2) I'm giving Republicans credit for being willing to address a healthcare issue as well as 1989, even though I believe a single-payer system would be much more efficient than the individual mandate. I'm also calling out the blind party-liners who won't admit that the individual mandate, this "destruction of freedom," was concocted by their own ideologues.

3) It was a proposed law by conservatives who are now SCREAMING about the "liberals and their attack on our freedom." It's hypocrisy, and it's a shame that you can't pull your head out of your ass long enough to acknowledge it.

 

The state will. Obamacare is much more expansive, costly, wasteful, taxing than anything Romney put together.

Why are you so in love with Obamacare? not able to take care of yourself, so you need government to do it for you?

 

I, personally, don't like paying for free-riders with my premiums.

 

Republicans ARE NOT in charge right now. Haven't been since Jan 2007. If you cared to look back I have consistently said Bush was a bad president. That he was not as bad as the wholly incompetent obama is a separate issue. I have also said many times that I distrust Republicans about 98%, and 100% distrust .
Democrats.

And its laughable that a rock head that insists on giving words meanings they don't have, thinks he is competent to comment on my writing ability. You may not appreciate it but I have been PAID and published for writing. But with all the junk available to read today, that's no great claim to fame.

What I do know in this thread about obamaTAX is that this horribly BAD law WILL 100%, no question, costs TRILLIONS more than projected. It WILL not reduce the costs of health care. It will not improve the service OR coverage of healthcare. It will be just another huge government bureaucratic, expensive, boondoggle. All that was true before the SCOTUS ruling, and remains true today. And how can I make such a prediction? Simple. You CANNOT name any US govt project that did not end up exactly like that. Higher cost, and poorer results, is the end game of all government ventures in the business world.

 

Guess we'll wait and see if what you say comes to pass; I'm sure you also have some kind of degree in policy or political science to go with that non-existent publishing career, right?

You can't punctuate and don't know the difference between basic homophones. You were never published.

 

When the bill was first written, there was no mandate. Obama wanted the public option. The republicans added the mandate as an alternative to the public option and then pulled with support the moment Obama agreed, and now, they are blaming Obama for the mandate when it was their fault.

 

And you are again, 100% wrong. Your complete lack of knowledge has already been thoroughly proven. No need to continue posting more evidence.

And NO I have no political science degree, I'm proud to say. I do have business degrees and accounting degrees and a 40 plus year, successful career of running hundred million dollar international companies. And when one IS successful, little things like punctuation, are done for one by secretaries and editors.** But that is another area wherein you have a total lack of knowledge. And I'll let you guess how important I consider the opinions of a butt zit.

** I DO miss that advantage.

 

Yes, you have such a successful career that you decide to come to the Stormfronts of the world and rail against one political party ad infinitum. I bet you have a foot long penis, a model wife, and dozens of concubines.

In short, it's so sad when people come to the internet to get the self-esteem that they lack in the real world.

 

You total lack of ability to present a factual argument is noted, and you are laughed AT, by me.

Your childish critic of my writing and punctuation is also laughable. Present your FACTS please, instead of avoiding the issues.

And Stormfronts is misspelled by you. But no matter, I recognize your use of that term as a exceedingly desperate and lame ass attempt to play the liberal fall back, THE RACE CARD. If you want to call me a racist go ahead and do so. HAVE the balls to say what you mean instead of hiding behind veiled references like a wuzzy weenie.

But I do not believe that obama is a total failure because he is half black, or half pink, or bright yellow, or dayglo orange. obama is a failure because he is incompetent and inept.

And railing against one party?

Well here is ENOUGH reason to do so:

National debt after 216 years of US government 10/01/2007. That is the day that the Democratic Party took control of both Houses of congress. Congress, you can look this up, is where money actually is authorized to be spent. $9,062,552,400,356.63. Nine trillion after 216 years.

National debt today, $15,888,741,858,820.66.

All governments took 216 years to accumulate $9 trillion in debt. Then only 4.5 years later, Democrats have racked up $6.84 TRILLION more.

A 43% increase in debt in a mere 4.5 years. That is more than enough reason to totally condemn the Democratic Party.

 

It's more expansive and costly because it's designed to cover 50 states, whereas Romneycare is designed to cover 1 state. Yes Mr. Conservative. 50 is a bigger number than 1, so it requires more people, and more money proportionally to implement.

Also there is zero evidence that "Obamacare" is more wasteful, if you assert otherwise, you are lying.

And finally.."Obamacare" is not more taxing. Romneycare in Massachusetts incorporates higher penalties. Romneycare taxes people $1200, and "Obamacare" taxes people $700

Slam dunk, no more tears please.

Actually I have my own health insurance, glad to clear up your confusion. Also, I'm not in love with The Affordable Care Act, but I certainly won't pipe up when I see people like you literally making stuff up as you go along, when falsely describing it.

If you don't know then you shouldn't say anything. Saying it falsely does X or Y when it clearly does not, is borderline lying. And you certainly wouldn't lie, would you?

 

1) How is "Stormfronts" misspelled? It's not; you've failed again.

2) Bush alone ran up the debt 1.4 TRILLION for the war that you so desperately wanted; what did the American people get out of that? And when Bush and the Republican policies led to the Great Recession, who footed the bill? The American people and the deficit due to a lack of revenue (hey, people are worth 40% less than they were 2 years ago, imagine that!) and more people on safety net programs.

"Divorced from context, the numbers are uncomfortable for the President and are ready-made for pointed partisan attacks. Under Obama’s watch the national debt has risen from roughly $10 trillion to $15 trillion, a record high. But to what extent are his decisions while in office to blame? The answer: very little. The vast bulk of the debt is the result of policies enacted during the Bush administration coupled with automatic increases in federal spending and decreases in tax revenue triggered by the economic downturn.

Those are economic facts of life known to experts but that often gets lost in the political debate (and which Obama’s opponents are willing to obscure). So with the GOP’s push to return the deficit to the center of the political conversation, here’s quick reminder of the basic facts that you may have forgotten.

As the chart below reveals, the main drivers of projected deficits over the next decade are the wars of the oughts in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Bush tax cuts and the so-called “automatic stabilizers” — unemployment insurance spending, lower tax burdens — built into existing policy to combat economic downturns. Recovery measures by Bush and Obama caused a short-term spike in deficits but have mostly phased out and thus represent only modest fractions of the national debt."

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/05/obama-romney-deficit-debt-chart.php

I don't expect to see you back here again. Walk away with your tail between your legs.

 

FYI and example. Just one TINY thing. obamaTAX contains a penalty for Cadillac Plans. The determination of a Cadillac Plan is by its COST alone. $10.700 for individuals, $27,000 for family plans. Plans costing more, incur a 40% excise tax. So??? The amounts, $10k and $27.5 are not adjusted for inflation. As premiums increase, everyone will get to pay a 40% excise tax. OR as we have already seen, another layer of the onion skin of rot that is obamaTAX will need to be changed. It has barely started and many changes have already been made. This is a slopped together, BAD law.

 

lmao, your going to be paying for them now anyway. holy crap.

 

My what?

 

We already pay for such folks. I think the last figure heard was, up to 30% extra of what we all pay in the present system, is there to cover the most expensive types of medical care... such as those who wait to see a doctor and/or end up going to emergency rooms for care.

Without a doubt, those of us who have insurance ARE paying MORE (right now) for "free-riders".

 

...except now the free-riders who can otherwise afford insurance but choose not to get it, will pay a penalty for doing so.

 

And it should have been that way all along.

 

Conservatives want the free-riders to keep taking advantage of the system. It's called personal responsibility. Oh wait...

 

Ha-Ha!! LOL!!

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ka01NFnygS0&feature=youtu.be

 

And how does that fit in to "Affordable" in the Affordable healthcare act?

 

No it's not.

It's a tax cut.

Buy insurance and you get a tax cut.

Don't buy insurance and you don't get the tax cut.

 

It is a tax for not doing something.

 

Yes.

Just like the tax for not getting married.
The tax for not investing in an IRA.
The tax for not carrying a mortgage.

Is any of this slipping in?