FYI, the CBO numbers on Obamacare are bullshit because they are structured such that revenues are front-loaded and expenditures are back-loaded during the 10-year period of CBO analysis. If you really want to see the real impact of the law, you have to look at it from like 2021 outward.
One thing is for damned sure, President Obama can no longer claim he cut taxes. In fact, if I'm not mistaken, he rammed through the largest tax increase in the history of the world, without a single Republican vote.
On June 29 2012 00:54 xDaunt wrote: FYI, the CBO numbers on Obamacare are bullshit because they are structured such that revenues are front-loaded and expenditures are back-loaded during the 10-year period of CBO analysis. If you really want to see the real impact of the law, you have to look at it from like 2021 outward.
On June 29 2012 00:54 xDaunt wrote: FYI, the CBO numbers on Obamacare are bullshit because they are structured such that revenues are front-loaded and expenditures are back-loaded during the 10-year period of CBO analysis. If you really want to see the real impact of the law, you have to look at it from like 2021 outward.
Impact on the Federal Budget Beyond the First 10 Years CBO does not generally provide cost estimates beyond the 10-year projection period, but certain Congressional rules require some information about the budgetary impact of legislation in subsequent decades, and many Members have requested analyses of the long-term budgetary impact of the broad changes in the health care and health insurance systems that will result from these laws. That impact, however, becomes more and more uncertain the farther into the future one projects. Over a longer time span, a wide range of changes could occur—in people’s health, in the sources and extent of their insurance coverage, and in the delivery of medical care—that are very difficult to predict but that could have a significant effect on federal health care spending, both under current law and under the law prior to passage of PPACA and the Reconciliation Act. Therefore, CBO developed a rough outlook for the second decade after enactment by grouping the elements of the legislation into broad categories and assessing the rate at which the budgetary impact of each of those broad categories will increase over time. On the basis of its February 2011 analysis, CBO effectively projected that PPACA and the Reconciliation Act would reduce federal budget deficits by an amount in a broad range around one-half percent of gross domestic product (GDP) for the 2022– 2031 period, assuming that all provisions of the legislation were fully implemented. That estimate has not been updated since the February analysis.
The problem with conservatives -- they are anti-intellectual, preferring polemics to analysis and facts.
Anyway, this is a good day to be an American.
Congratulations and welcome to the universal and unconditional healthcare coverage that every other citizen of an advanced country has the privilege of.
On June 29 2012 00:42 Hertzy wrote: It mystifies me how Americans seem to misrepresent European social security as "The people that sit at home and do fuck all and expect to get money". As it happens, I once had to apply for welfare in Finland. One of the first questions I was asked trying to book an appointment with the board that decides whether you qualify or not was "And what are you going to do about your situation?"
The point of the system isn't to give layabouts a cozy little existence on hard-working people's tax-euros. The point is to help out members of our society that are down on their luck, and if you wonder why we need the government to do that one only needs to look at the sentiment expressed by the questio "The people that sit at home and do fuck all and expect to get money?"
The issue is that when collective US conservatism imagines the people who benefit most from the healthcare decision, they picture a huge amorphous blob of greed, laxity, and lasciviousness, not a family struggling to make ends meet. They assume the worst of their fellow humans, and I think it comes down to simply not KNOWING and EMPATHIZING.
It's not only an american state of mind, it's something that exists in Europe too, many (maybe more and more) people consider poors and unemployed as "lazy bastard using the money of honests worker".
It's true for some, we can't denie it, but it's false for most of them. But i think these guys just can't get the head out of their little comfortable houses to learn what the real word looks like.
On June 29 2012 00:54 xDaunt wrote: FYI, the CBO numbers on Obamacare are bullshit because they are structured such that revenues are front-loaded and expenditures are back-loaded during the 10-year period of CBO analysis. If you really want to see the real impact of the law, you have to look at it from like 2021 outward.
Impact on the Federal Budget Beyond the First 10 Years CBO does not generally provide cost estimates beyond the 10-year projection period, but certain Congressional rules require some information about the budgetary impact of legislation in subsequent decades, and many Members have requested analyses of the long-term budgetary impact of the broad changes in the health care and health insurance systems that will result from these laws. That impact, however, becomes more and more uncertain the farther into the future one projects. Over a longer time span, a wide range of changes could occur—in people’s health, in the sources and extent of their insurance coverage, and in the delivery of medical care—that are very difficult to predict but that could have a significant effect on federal health care spending, both under current law and under the law prior to passage of PPACA and the Reconciliation Act. Therefore, CBO developed a rough outlook for the second decade after enactment by grouping the elements of the legislation into broad categories and assessing the rate at which the budgetary impact of each of those broad categories will increase over time. On the basis of its February 2011 analysis, CBO effectively projected that PPACA and the Reconciliation Act would reduce federal budget deficits by an amount in a broad range around one-half percent of gross domestic product (GDP) for the 2022– 2031 period, assuming that all provisions of the legislation were fully implemented. That estimate has not been updated since the February analysis.
Kali: Via the Atlantic Wire, "Mitt Romney's spokeswoman said the candidate raised $300,000 off the ruling in the first hour after it was handed down."
Hahahahaha
Guys who were here for the LR portion of the thread, had a blast. And now, away!
I find it hilarious that Romney is going to be campaign on this issue. He was for it the last time he held office himself. Gonna be fun seeing Obama plaster ads with that all over the airwaves the next couple of months.
On June 29 2012 00:11 JoelB wrote: Congratulations Obama. You have brought your country a little step closer to the the civilized world again. I cannot even imagine what would happen in Germany if someone would go to court against healthcare because it is a unfair for the healthy people to pay for the unhealthy and calls that communism oO. This country and those people are still a mystery to me.
'because it is a unfair for the healthy people to pay for the unhealthy and calls that communism'
How is it not...? You foreigners are a mystery to me, you like paying for other peoples expenses? The people that sit at home and do fuck all and expect to get money? Stop talking moron.
Hahahaha the Redneck strikes again. You have to learn the differences. If someone sufferes from cancer suddenly and cannot pay the bills by himself because he works and but doesnt earn enough money to do so? Even if he doesn't have a job, maybe because of bad luck? Yes, iam totally willing. There is a difference between mindless cede of lazy people and the rules of a social economy. You call this communism, we call it christian altruism and we are proud of it. Its a big part of the structure of our culture and economy and as far as per capita values are concerned it owns yours. Thx bye bye.
I'm from New York buddy... probably like the 2nd biggest liberal state in the US... I'm no redneck moron.
On June 29 2012 00:11 JoelB wrote: Congratulations Obama. You have brought your country a little step closer to the the civilized world again. I cannot even imagine what would happen in Germany if someone would go to court against healthcare because it is a unfair for the healthy people to pay for the unhealthy and calls that communism oO. This country and those people are still a mystery to me.
'because it is a unfair for the healthy people to pay for the unhealthy and calls that communism'
How is it not...? You foreigners are a mystery to me, you like paying for other peoples expenses? The people that sit at home and do fuck all and expect to get money? Stop talking moron.
Hahahaha the Redneck strikes again. You have to learn the differences. If someone sufferes from cancer suddenly and cannot pay the bills by himself because he works and but doesnt earn enough money to do so? Even if he doesn't have a job, maybe because of bad luck? Yes, iam totally willing. There is a difference between mindlessly cede of lazy people and the rules of a social economy. You call this communism, we call it christian altruism and we are proud of it. Its a big part of the structure of our culture and economy and as far as per capita values are concerned it owns yours. Thx bye bye.
Is "Christian altruism" voluntarily helping others, as a good Christian, or is it requiring that everyone else does it ?
I voluntarily give up part of my earnings in order to facilitate a healthcare system that is accessible for all. The 'Christian' part he wrote is completely unnecessary as I, and many others in Europe are not Christians.
You aren't doing it "voluntarily" when you support the extraction from people as a tax. Voluntarily supporting it, is giving additional money, in addition to taxes to whatever people need the help. When you vote and support additional taxes for this stuff, there is nothing "voluntary" about that. It's a tax and it's required.
My point was that I have no problems doing it.
It's a good thing you speak for every single person then.
And then you get fired, get cancer and because everyone has to fend for themselves according to the "small government" people you can't get treatment because it's too expensive.
It is a wasted effort my dutch friend people like him should remind us all why europe is such a nice place to live in and give us a great example why extreme liberalism will not be the way to go in the future (communism ofcourse isn't either). We have found our own way and should be proud of that. Maybe its because we have grown up in the middle between both of those extremes and have learned from both of them ... like a child that has been risen by a rich father and a poor mother. You know both worlds with all its advantages and problems and pick the best out of it for your own.
On June 29 2012 00:38 Kaitlin wrote: For small businesses struggling to make payroll, which is the vast majority of small businesses in this country, and the driving force of the economy in this country, the increased costs associated with this law make it more difficult to survive.
how much is the no insurance tax going to cost?
how much is the lowest-level insurance going to cost?
and
how much cost is there to businesses?
so. anyone? or you all just going to retort the ruling ... just because
On June 29 2012 00:11 JoelB wrote: Congratulations Obama. You have brought your country a little step closer to the the civilized world again. I cannot even imagine what would happen in Germany if someone would go to court against healthcare because it is a unfair for the healthy people to pay for the unhealthy and calls that communism oO. This country and those people are still a mystery to me.
'because it is a unfair for the healthy people to pay for the unhealthy and calls that communism'
How is it not...? You foreigners are a mystery to me, you like paying for other peoples expenses? The people that sit at home and do fuck all and expect to get money? Stop talking moron.
Hahahaha the Redneck strikes again. You have to learn the differences. If someone sufferes from cancer suddenly and cannot pay the bills by himself because he works and but doesnt earn enough money to do so? Even if he doesn't have a job, maybe because of bad luck? Yes, iam totally willing. There is a difference between mindless cede of lazy people and the rules of a social economy. You call this communism, we call it christian altruism and we are proud of it. Its a big part of the structure of our culture and economy and as far as per capita values are concerned it owns yours. Thx bye bye.
I'm from New York buddy... probably like the 2nd biggest liberal state in the US... I'm no redneck moron.
You just offended the millions of rednecks upstate.
Part of me was hoping that they would strike it down so we could just get a single-payer system going instead of this half-assed system but this is fine I guess. Baby steps...
On June 29 2012 00:11 JoelB wrote: Congratulations Obama. You have brought your country a little step closer to the the civilized world again. I cannot even imagine what would happen in Germany if someone would go to court against healthcare because it is a unfair for the healthy people to pay for the unhealthy and calls that communism oO. This country and those people are still a mystery to me.
'because it is a unfair for the healthy people to pay for the unhealthy and calls that communism'
How is it not...? You foreigners are a mystery to me, you like paying for other peoples expenses? The people that sit at home and do fuck all and expect to get money? Stop talking moron.
Hahahaha the Redneck strikes again. You have to learn the differences. If someone sufferes from cancer suddenly and cannot pay the bills by himself because he works and but doesnt earn enough money to do so? Even if he doesn't have a job, maybe because of bad luck? Yes, iam totally willing. There is a difference between mindlessly cede of lazy people and the rules of a social economy. You call this communism, we call it christian altruism and we are proud of it. Its a big part of the structure of our culture and economy and as far as per capita values are concerned it owns yours. Thx bye bye.
Is "Christian altruism" voluntarily helping others, as a good Christian, or is it requiring that everyone else does it ?
I voluntarily give up part of my earnings in order to facilitate a healthcare system that is accessible for all. The 'Christian' part he wrote is completely unnecessary as I, and many others in Europe are not Christians.
You aren't doing it "voluntarily" when you support the extraction from people as a tax. Voluntarily supporting it, is giving additional money, in addition to taxes to whatever people need the help. When you vote and support additional taxes for this stuff, there is nothing "voluntary" about that. It's a tax and it's required.
My point was that I have no problems doing it.
It's a good thing you speak for every single person then.
And then you get fired, get cancer and because everyone has to fend for themselves according to the "small government" people you can't get treatment because it's too expensive.
I'm politically very conservative. And you know, I don't know that I would be too upset if the Federal government increased wealfare with a greater subsidies for healthcare. My issue is with the individual mandate, it takes away my freedom to decide whether or not I want to purchase health insurance. I have a right to make decisions about my life, if that means I get sick and end up $100,000 in debt so be it. It's my risk to take, and the Federal government has no business to tell me otherwise. That's the problem that us "small government people" have with the law. Take away the individual mandate, there wouldn't be even half as much furor over the law.
And PS, basic individual health insurance isn't that expensive. For a healthy person, you can get coverage for like $400 a month or less.
On June 29 2012 00:54 xDaunt wrote: FYI, the CBO numbers on Obamacare are bullshit because they are structured such that revenues are front-loaded and expenditures are back-loaded during the 10-year period of CBO analysis. If you really want to see the real impact of the law, you have to look at it from like 2021 outward.
Anyway, this is a good day to be an American.
Congratulations and welcome to the universal and unconditional healthcare coverage that every other citizen of an advanced country has the privilege of.
Seconded, USA is lucky that this mandate got trough!
On June 29 2012 00:57 Kaitlin wrote: One thing is for damned sure, President Obama can no longer claim he cut taxes. In fact, if I'm not mistaken, he rammed through the largest tax increase in the history of the world, without a single Republican vote.
On June 29 2012 00:54 xDaunt wrote: FYI, the CBO numbers on Obamacare are bullshit because they are structured such that revenues are front-loaded and expenditures are back-loaded during the 10-year period of CBO analysis. If you really want to see the real impact of the law, you have to look at it from like 2021 outward.
Impact on the Federal Budget Beyond the First 10 Years CBO does not generally provide cost estimates beyond the 10-year projection period, but certain Congressional rules require some information about the budgetary impact of legislation in subsequent decades, and many Members have requested analyses of the long-term budgetary impact of the broad changes in the health care and health insurance systems that will result from these laws. That impact, however, becomes more and more uncertain the farther into the future one projects. Over a longer time span, a wide range of changes could occur—in people’s health, in the sources and extent of their insurance coverage, and in the delivery of medical care—that are very difficult to predict but that could have a significant effect on federal health care spending, both under current law and under the law prior to passage of PPACA and the Reconciliation Act. Therefore, CBO developed a rough outlook for the second decade after enactment by grouping the elements of the legislation into broad categories and assessing the rate at which the budgetary impact of each of those broad categories will increase over time. On the basis of its February 2011 analysis, CBO effectively projected that PPACA and the Reconciliation Act would reduce federal budget deficits by an amount in a broad range around one-half percent of gross domestic product (GDP) for the 2022– 2031 period, assuming that all provisions of the legislation were fully implemented. That estimate has not been updated since the February analysis.
It's funny to me that not even the facts laid out by the CBO can change your opinion of what the facts ought to be. When did facts that disagree with a worldview cease to become facts?
On June 29 2012 00:54 xDaunt wrote: FYI, the CBO numbers on Obamacare are bullshit because they are structured such that revenues are front-loaded and expenditures are back-loaded during the 10-year period of CBO analysis. If you really want to see the real impact of the law, you have to look at it from like 2021 outward.
Impact on the Federal Budget Beyond the First 10 Years CBO does not generally provide cost estimates beyond the 10-year projection period, but certain Congressional rules require some information about the budgetary impact of legislation in subsequent decades, and many Members have requested analyses of the long-term budgetary impact of the broad changes in the health care and health insurance systems that will result from these laws. That impact, however, becomes more and more uncertain the farther into the future one projects. Over a longer time span, a wide range of changes could occur—in people’s health, in the sources and extent of their insurance coverage, and in the delivery of medical care—that are very difficult to predict but that could have a significant effect on federal health care spending, both under current law and under the law prior to passage of PPACA and the Reconciliation Act. Therefore, CBO developed a rough outlook for the second decade after enactment by grouping the elements of the legislation into broad categories and assessing the rate at which the budgetary impact of each of those broad categories will increase over time. On the basis of its February 2011 analysis, CBO effectively projected that PPACA and the Reconciliation Act would reduce federal budget deficits by an amount in a broad range around one-half percent of gross domestic product (GDP) for the 2022– 2031 period, assuming that all provisions of the legislation were fully implemented. That estimate has not been updated since the February analysis.
EPT
people like him should remind us all why europe is such a nice place to live in and give us a great example why extreme liberalism will not be the way to go in the future (communism ofcourse isn't either). We have found our own way and should be proud of that. Maybe its because we have grown up in the middle between both of those extremes and have learned from both of them ... like a child that has been risen by a rich father and a poor mother. You know both worlds with all its advantages and problems and pick the best out of it for your own.
