What does Obamacare mean for me?

[Natural Selection]

I know you were, clearly he didn't. He may be able to read but he clearly didn't understand what you have wrote.

He didn't read it, he clearly trolls Sly no matter what the topic.

 

[JenksIX]

He didn't read it, he clearly trolls Sly no matter what the topic.

What did you read rep me and say this for

Healthcare for all means healthcare for none. Fuck Obama

No Fuck Obama, Fuck Bush

He's the reason we're in this mess #neverforget

 

[This Is My Name Thank You]

Dude, (Jenks) do you have a clue on what you are talking about? Or do you simply just parade around on the thoughts of others who surround you? Do they sit and bash Bush for what he did during his time in office? Or do you just talk out of your ass along with everyone and have no clue what you're talking about whilst talking about it?

Google, Yahoo, Bing and hell, even use Ask, to help you on the said subject at hand. You're clueless about this whole subject it appears.

Fuck Obama, and yes Fuck Romney too.

It is now a battle of the lesser of evil and sadly Obama is the lesser of the two.

 

[Natural Selection]

What did you read rep me and say this for



No Fuck Obama, Fuck Bush

He's the reason we're in this mess #neverforget

And Obama is the reason we are not getting out of this mess.

 

[Natural Selection]

Dude, (Jenks) do you have a clue on what you are talking about? Or do you simply just parade around on the thoughts of others who surround you? Do they sit and bash Bush for what he did during his time in office? Or do you just talk out of your ass along with everyone and have no clue what you're talking about whilst talking about it?

Google, Yahoo, Bing and hell, even use Ask, to help you on the said subject at hand. You're clueless about this whole subject it appears.

Fuck Obama, and yes Fuck Romney too.

It is now a battle of the lesser of evil and sadly Obama is the lesser of the two.

Neither one of them is the lesser evil. Obama far left, Romney slightly left.

 

[Lee]

It means nothign for me, I'm British.

 

[Slyfox696]

And Obama is the reason we are not getting out of this mess.

Please explain. Did you read that report I linked you to?

 

[Natural Selection]

Please explain. Did you read that report I linked you to?

No I recently had to wipe my CPU and haven't re-installed Adobe yet.

 

[Slyfox696]

No I recently had to wipe my CPU and haven't re-installed Adobe yet.

http://www.nitroreader.com/

Better than Adobe Reader. Smaller and less intrusive. Go ahead, grab the download and install and let me know how it goes on that .pdf.


While you're waiting on the installation, go ahead and explain how it is Obama's fault we're not getting out of the mess you acquiesced to being Bush's fault.

 

[Natural Selection]

http://www.nitroreader.com/

Better than Adobe Reader. Smaller and less intrusive. Go ahead, grab the download and install and let me know how it goes on that .pdf.


While you're waiting on the installation, go ahead and explain how it is Obama's fault we're not getting out of the mess you acquiesced to being Bush's fault.

Ok let me get off my phone and down to my CPU

 

[Natural Selection]

PolitiFact.com also went one step farther. It looked at the debt as a percentage of the gross domestic product because this factors out complications such as economic cycles and inflation. Using Office of Management and Budget statistics, here's what PolitiFact found:

Reagan, up 14.9 percentage points; George H.W. Bush, up 7.1 percentage points; Clinton, down 13.4 percentage points; George W. Bush, up 5.6 percentage points; Obama, up 21.9 percentage points.

PolitiFact.com reported: "So by this measurement — potentially a more important one — Obama is the undisputed debt king of the last five presidents, rather than the guy who added a piddling amount to the debt, as Pelosi's chart suggested."

It also depends on what kind of debt you look at: public debt, which is debt held by the public, or gross federal debt, which combines that debt plus debt held by the government itself. The Washington Post also pointed out other ways to look at presidential debt in an article at tinyurl.com/79erqx7.

Another way of checking out the national debt is at the Treasury Department's "debt to the penny" website at tinyurl.com/djlqmw.

That database shows that Palin's statement about Obama's debt increase surpassing all previous presidents combined is not factual. The nation's total debt was $10.626 trillion on the day Obama took office and, as of Thursday, it had increased to $15.614 trillion — a rise of $4.988 trillion.

Actually, Obama's debt-increase number overtook that of George W. Bush — which rose from $5.727 trillion to $10.626, or $4.899 trillion — last month.

So, yes, the debt increase has risen more during Obama's almost three years and three months in office than it did during eight years of Bush's presidency — but obviously not more than all presidents combined.

Read more at Jacksonville.com: http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/...ted-debt-king-last-5-presidents#ixzz20ZNPBSzc

http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/...-obama-undisputed-debt-king-last-5-presidents

 

[Natural Selection]

There was no comprehensive and strategic plan for containment, because they
lacked a full understanding of the risks and interconnections in the financial markets

Source: That link you sent me. Page 11

I agree our elected officials are completely ******ed. I would gladly vote out the politicians I support if it meant they all got voted out

 

[Slyfox696]

http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/...-obama-undisputed-debt-king-last-5-presidents

What you just posted didn't answer my question at all. First of all, you made absolutely no effort to link how deficit spending is related to "this mess" and second of all, if you studied your Constitution, you'll realize the President doesn't have the power to spend money, Congress does (which has been split between Dem and Repub the last two years). Third of all, your post conveniently leaves out the fact that the growth of spending under Obama has been less than any President (other than Clinton) since Nixon (image in spoiler tag).

Spoiler

Finally, your post seems to ignore the facts which have lead to the growth of the national debt, such as two unfunded wars, unfunded prescription drug program, TARP, and the 01 and 03 tax cuts, all of which happened under Bush. Allow me to copy and paste now:

From 2001 to 2009, Bush's policies, including two wars, higher Pentagon spending in addition to those wars, tax cuts, higher discretionary spending and the prescription drug program contributed $5.1 trillion to the nation's debt. From 2009 to 2017 (using projections for 2011-2017), Obama's policies have added or will add $983 billion. Not even in the same ballpark. Klein:

There is a way to tally the effects Obama has had on the deficit. Look at every piece of legislation he has signed into law. Every time Congress passes a bill, either the Congressional Budget Office or the Joint Committee on Taxation estimates the effect it will have on the budget over the next 10 years. And then they continue to estimate changes to those bills. If you know how to read their numbers, you can come up with an estimate that zeros in on the laws Obama has had a hand in. [...]

So the center built a baseline that includes everything that predated Obama and everything we knew about the path of the economy and the actual trajectory of spending through August 2011. Deviations from the baseline represent decisions made by the Obama administration. Then we measured the projected cost of Obama’s policies.

Here are the calculations:

For Bush: $1.812 trillion from the "Bush tax cuts"; $853 billion from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan; $616 in higher Pentagon spending outside those wars; $608 billion in non-defense discretionary spending; $480 billion in "other tax"-related matters; $293 billion in entitlement changes; $224 billion in spending for Trouble Assets Relief Program (TARP) and the Housing and Economic Recovery Act; and $180 billion for the prescription drug bill.

For Obama: $874 billion for the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (the stimulus package); $620 billion for the two-year extension of the Bush tax cuts; $324 in "other mandatory spending"; and $113 billion in "other revenue." Subtotal: $1.931 trillion. Subtracted from that are policies that reduce the net deficit: $502 billion in automatic spending cuts; $271 reduction in defense spending; $123 billion in reduced health care spending; $51 billion in reduced non-defense discretionary spending. Total: $983 billion.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/...t-Romney-targets-the-wrong-guy-to-whine-about

So basically what I'm saying is that what you posted doesn't implicate Obama at all. Could you please try again?

 

[Slyfox696]

Source: That link you sent me. Page 11

I agree our elected officials are completely ******ed. I would gladly vote out the politicians I support if it meant they all got voted out

I'm confused as to why you posted that. It had nothing to do with entitlements, and has nothing to do with the problems which caused our economic recession.

Not trying to be a smartass, genuinely don't understand why you posted that.

 

[Natural Selection]

I'm confused as to why you posted that. It had nothing to do with entitlements, and has nothing to do with the problems which caused our economic recession.

Not trying to be a smartass, genuinely don't understand why you posted that.

It was pointing out our governments ignorance and inability to see the big picture.

 

[Slyfox696]

It was pointing out our governments ignorance and inability to see the big picture.

If you continue reading, you'll see it wasn't ignorance, it was arrogance. There were all sorts of people warning about the potential catastrophe, but their warnings fell on deaf ears. Mostly because fat wads of cash were clogging the ears of legislators and regulators. It really is a great read, I haven't gotten through it yet (only the first couple parts), but I'm completely fascinated with it.

All of which goes back to the fact that a market free of regulation simply will not sustain itself. Which means it is necessary for government to step in and control/prevent human failures.

You and others don't want to pay for your own health insurance, but by not doing so you and/or others are forcing others to pay for you. This is why government intervention into the market is necessary.

 

[Natural Selection]

In short what I'm saying is the republicans and democrats are basically the same party. Obama has done nothing but continue down the busch path of spending. They both spend recklessly, just in different ways. Obamacare is Obama's two wars. The answer with both parties is always the people will pay for it and the only problem with that is they continue to do nothing, but enable the people to be dependent on the government. The same government that is bleeding itself dry.

 

[Natural Selection]

You and others don't want to pay for your own health insurance, but by not doing so you and/or others are forcing others to pay for you. This is why government intervention into the market is necessary.

You misunderstand Sly. Not once in here did I say I didn't have health insurance. I do have health insurance.

If you continue reading, you'll see it wasn't ignorance, it was arrogance

By ignorance I meant arrogance.

 

[Slyfox696]

You misunderstand Sly. Not once in here did I say I didn't have health insurance. I do have health insurance.

But you were upset that you HAVE to have it, and didn't understand why government should involve itself in a free capitalist society. The link I provided you is a great reason why.

 

[Natural Selection]

But you were upset that you HAVE to have it, and didn't understand why government should involve itself in a free capitalist society. The link I provided you is a great reason why.

I will continue to read it, but I think what we disagree on is Obama. He has no real hope or change, he is just a more charismatic Busch. As a Greek philosopher once said, which Benjamin Franklin later quoted (paraphrase) "Once congress figures out it can vote itself more money every republic is destined to fail." To me its not any one thing that is the problem, its just everything is just another problem and every person with a solution seems to end up just being in on it.

 

[Slyfox696]

I will continue to read it, but I think what we disagree on is Obama.

Oh, I think we disagree on quite a few things.

He has no real hope or change

Not true. Ask homosexuals across the country. Ask those with medical conditions who could not previously get health insurance. His changes in both those areas have provided hope to millions of people.

As a Greek philosopher once said, which Benjamin Franklin later quoted (paraphrase) "Once congress figures out it can vote itself more money every republic is destined to fail." To me its not any one thing that is the problem, its just everything is just another problem and every person with a solution seems to end up just being in on it.

The problem, like you said, is that those with the power to make things better are not interested in doing so. They are too busy stuffing their pants pockets with fat wads of cash.

I think this scene from the terrific movie "The Distinguished Gentleman" sums it up perfectly, in particular, the last lines.