What happened to all of the doom and gloom economic threads?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Thank you Obama, and thanks to all of the dupes who voted for him:

IRS: Cheapest Obamacare Plan Will Be $20,000 Per Family
January 31, 2013

(CNSNews.com) – In a final regulation issued Wednesday, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) assumed that under Obamacare the cheapest health insurance plan available in 2016 for a family will cost $20,000 for the year.

VETTEBITCHSLAPPED!

Cheapest Obamacare Plan Will Actually Be $13,000 Per Family

In a stunning refudiation of the neofaggot Vettebigot's latest doughy pantload, the commie Investor's Business Daily has found that Obamacare family healthcare plans in 2016 will actually start around $13,000, not $20,000 .

LINK
 
The only problem is that the $20,000 figure was an example that has no basis in fact. The IRS always uses hypothetical numerical examples in its regulations to illustrate how the rules will work in practice and this was no different.


This was patently obvious. I said it was patently obvious. I showed exacly why it was patently obvious. But the reality deniers here did their thing anyway.

That $13,000 is before subsidies by the way. Someone here was bemoaning the plight of a man making $18k having to buy insurance on his own and after running it through the calculator we found that his subsidy would be 77% of cost. So a mere $2860 per year, or $0 per year if that person had a dependent.
 
Last edited:
Like any cat turd in the litter box, you will eventually be buried or sifted out. Pull those granules up over your shoulders turd, it might get cold tonight.:rolleyes:

Your bizarre, sudden fixation on cat shit aside (guess regular people poop got boring for your fetish), hot or cold, I'll be outlasting you, that's for damn sure.

And if you keep sweating your fears as spectacularly as you've been doing for the past several years, you'll be needing a portable kitty litter box of your own to collect the instant chocolate running down the inside your pants every time you exit the house and a person of color, GLBT or woman taps you on the shoulder for directions.

tumblr_mi8ocrMNBu1qba7meo1_r6_500.gif
 
Last edited:
Awww, look at the cheerleader coming up from the back bench a day late and a dollar short, as usual!

3205100_o.gif


Shake them pom poms, Becky!
 
You couldn't outlast at fart in a windstorm, turd.:rolleyes:

Your ass sure loves talking about shits and farts tonight. Even more than usual. Did the fragrant putt-putt-putt after-effects of your high-fiber five-bean burrito with queso takeout dinner put you in the mood for love or something?

tumblr_md3ukoOYpm1qa6g1m.gif
 
According to the IMF, the dollar is at a 15-year low...

...although the dollar still holds onto 62% of allocated foreign exchange holdings by the world’s central banks ($3.72 trillion of the $6 trillion total), the Japanese yen, Swiss franc, and what the IMF classifies as “other currencies”, such as the Chinese yuan, are gaining.
 
Last edited:
Unlike you, we don't do Mexican or Asian take out, we make our own. Not all American have a big flashy menu next to the phone, like you must.:rolleyes:

I forget that you're all about the All-American McDonald's Dollar Menu for your three squares per day. Hey, at least you keep it simple and invest your money back into the local economy, so there's that.

You'll have my gourmet sympathies next time I sit down with friends for real food and drinks at a place with a name you can't pronounce correctly, much less afford, have the taste for or possess the sartorial sense to match.

tumblr_mbgmtnvsVT1qa6g1m.gif
 
Bahahahaha, your "gourmet" sympathies extend no further than the government commodities you consume every month. Tell us all about your peanut butter cheese and rice, dork.

Your fantasies are your own to deal with, Ms. Marmelstein. Ain't got zilch to do with me.

All I know is that when I go out — meaning sitting down at a place with non-plastic utensils, not driving through a window — and take the time from my lifespan to eat any sort of meal worth having, I don't gobble it down and rush back home within the time it takes to make instant noodles just to get back online to a liberal porn board and derp out my fears of all that is different from me in the world.

LIKE YOU.
 
Talk about a fantasy.....:rolleyes:

Come to my town youngster. I'll take you out for a real meal but you'll have to be properly attired. No basketball jersey down to the knees, no butt cheeks hanging out, no long shorts down to the ankles, no goofy looking basketball shoes with sissy socks. Oh, and clean the spray paint off your fingertips too, eh? Thanks.:D

PS: We won't have to take the bus either.:D

holy homoerotic racist gay grandpa batman...
 
Soon the only juans that support NIGGERCARE will be LIT NIIGERZ


KEY DEMOCRATS TURN ON OBAMACARE:



Powerful Democrats who helped write and pass Obamacare subjected the new law’s chief administrator to withering criticism at a Senate hearing yesterday. Gary Cohen, the director of the Center for Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight, testified before the Senate Finance Committee, and the Democrats on the committee—from its Chairman Max Baucus to Senators Ron Wyden, Bill Nelson, and Maria Cantwell—tore into him. . . .

The about-face of these Democrats is a phenomenon worth pausing over. Many formerly supportive constituencies have grown wary of Obamacare in recent weeks as we’ve learned more about the effects it will have on the health care system. But these Senators’ 180-degree turns are something more severe.

The fate of the Democratic party in America over the next decade is tied to Obama’s healthcare reform. If it is seen to be a success, America could trend Democratic for the foreseeable future. If it fails, liberalism as we’ve known it will take a massive hit. But, so far, support for Obamacare has been waning instead of waxing. Even a recent piece by Talking Points Memo that placed the blame for Obamacare’s potential failure on Republicans noted that the law’s unpopularity with the public at large was the number one threat to its success. Democrats are getting nervous and consequently are trying to put some distance between themselves and the ACA.


Good luck with that.
 
In 1994, the Republicans captured Congress for the first time since the Eisenhower Administration. On top of this, they had won five of seven presidential elections. A dozen years later, they lost power to the Democrats. Additionally, an unqualified and inexperienced Chicago machine politician managed to win the presidency in 2008. A combination of factors doomed the party. A series of scandals, congressional overspending, lack of communication, and a revolt from the base over immigration reform led to the Democratic resurgence.

Scandal helped the Democrats lose Congress in 1994. The party managed to escape voter judgment for a generation over scandals ranging from check kiting to the House Post Office to rape. However, they eventually paid for their behavior and entered the wilderness for a dozen years. In 2006, the Republicans experienced a number of major scandals helping doom the off-year campaign. Congressman Duke Cunningham accepted $2.3 million in bribes from defense contractors. Lobbyist Jack Abramoff over-billed his clients and even worked against their interests to squeeze more fees out of them. Representative Mark Foley admitted to an illicit relationship with a 16-year-old boy. In the end, the Democrats regained control of both houses of congress and waited for the presidential election to strike.

The Democrats needed to avoid controversy and allow the Republicans to implode. Federal spending exploded in the Bush years. Although some blame tax policy, spending caused the ballooning deficit. Once again, the Republicans became Democrats. Progressives do not worry about massive deficits, but used it as a campaign issue in 2008. Bill Clinton left office with a budget surplus thanks to the Republican congress. Without Clinton, the Republicans felt compelled to follow Bush policies. Increased spending, an economic downturn in 2000, and two wars made balancing the budget impossible. The Bush deficits exceeded $400 billion by 2008. Later, President Obama decided to triple the amount.

As a result of scandal and spending, the Republicans could no longer distinguish themselves from the Democrats. This helped cripple the party message. Additionally, the Bush White House failed to counter leftist charges. Liberals argued Bush lied about the Iraq War and hurled poisonous and hateful insults against the president. The White House responded with silence. As a result, the left controlled the narrative and continue to write it.

The conservative base helped the Democrats brand Republicans. President Bush hoped to capture the Hispanic vote for a generation. When he offered his version of the dream act, conservatives cried foul. They argued the president was granting amnesty and rewarding criminal behavior. The noise collapsed the initiative and scared Latino voters. In 2012, Obama used fear tactics to capture over 70% of their votes.

In late 2007, the country entered a recession based on Clinton era deregulation and housing policies. In September 2008, the economy collapsed leading to the election of a first term senator from Illinois. Obama created a cult of personality allowing people to paint whatever they wished onto his canvas. This cult helped his re-election. Obama also railed against G.O.P. spending, scandals, Bush policies, and campaigned to “kill Romney.” He ran the dirtiest campaign since 1828 and won. However, Republican weaknesses combined with an unusually large number of uninformed voters led to his victory. A stronger Republican Party would have defeated Obama.

The Republicans ruined their own legacy. In 1994, they rode into Washington promising reforms, including a balanced budget and welfare reform. They achieved their goals, but later lost their way. The institutional power corrupted the party the same way it corrupted the Democrats. Scandal, overspending, communication problems, and hostility to immigration reform led to their downfall. However, politics is cyclical and a fresh, charismatic individual with the ability to explain his principles through the media filter could negate Democratic gains over the last decade.

Good luck with that.

You got the right.
 
Soon the only juans that support NIGGERCARE will be LIT NIIGERZ


KEY DEMOCRATS TURN ON OBAMACARE:



Powerful Democrats who helped write and pass Obamacare subjected the new law’s chief administrator to withering criticism at a Senate hearing yesterday. Gary Cohen, the director of the Center for Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight, testified before the Senate Finance Committee, and the Democrats on the committee—from its Chairman Max Baucus to Senators Ron Wyden, Bill Nelson, and Maria Cantwell—tore into him. . . .

The about-face of these Democrats is a phenomenon worth pausing over. Many formerly supportive constituencies have grown wary of Obamacare in recent weeks as we’ve learned more about the effects it will have on the health care system. But these Senators’ 180-degree turns are something more severe.

The fate of the Democratic party in America over the next decade is tied to Obama’s healthcare reform. If it is seen to be a success, America could trend Democratic for the foreseeable future. If it fails, liberalism as we’ve known it will take a massive hit. But, so far, support for Obamacare has been waning instead of waxing. Even a recent piece by Talking Points Memo that placed the blame for Obamacare’s potential failure on Republicans noted that the law’s unpopularity with the public at large was the number one threat to its success. Democrats are getting nervous and consequently are trying to put some distance between themselves and the ACA.


Good luck with that.


None of them tore into him. You're believing lies again.
 
NYSlime in total full NIGGER mode


Leave it to the New York Times to turn a book review of a biography of Calvin Coolidge into an attack on President Reagan, but sure enough, toward the end of Jacob Heilbrunn's review of the book comes this: "The bogus nostrums that Coolidge touted have directly led either to enormous deficits during the Reagan era or to outright catastrophe during the Bush era."

Hmm. Let's look at those "enormous deficits" of the Reagan era. According to the White House Office of Management and Budget, they looked like this:

Year Deficit in Current Dollars Deficit as Percent of GDP
1981 79 billion 2.6
1982 128 billion 4.0
1983 208 billion 6.0
1984 185 billion 4.8
1985 212 billion 5.1
1986 221 billion 5.0
1987 150 billion 3.2
1988 155 billion 3.1

Were those deficits the result of President Reagan following Coolidge's practice of cutting tax rates? No; in fact federal tax receipts grew under the Reagan administration, to $909 billion in 1988 from $599 billion in 1981. The big driver of the deficit under Reagan wasn't tax cuts, which if anything by spawning growth helped reduce the deficit; the big driver of the deficit under Reagan was defense spending, which nearly doubled to $290 billion in 1988 from $158 billion in 1981 (it had been $134 billion in 1980). That was a bet on winning the Cold War that ultimately paid off in a big way, but that has next to nothing to do with Coolidge. Reagan could have had a zero deficit in his final year had he simply kept defense spending at Carter levels.

Meanwhile, let's have a look, for comparison's sake, at the deficits under President Obama, as reported by the same source, the White House Office of Management and Budget:

Year Deficit in Current Dollars Deficit as a Percent of GDP
2009 $1.4 trillion 10.1
2010 $1.3 trillion 9.0
2011 $1.3 trillion 8.7

Funny how you don't often see the Times referring to Mr. Obama's deficits as "enormous." Yet both in current dollars and as a percent of GDP, they are considerably larger than those of the Reagan administration. At least the Times hasn't yet found a way to blame the current deficits on President Coolidge.
 
Soon the only juans that support NIGGERCARE will be LIT NIIGGERZ




Good luck with that.

OBAMACARE UPDATE: Will young adults face ‘rate shock’ because of the health-care law?

Meanwhile, my former colleague Colleen Medill, an ERISA expert, writes:



I don’t know if you will see this in your volume of email, but you might.

I am deeply into studying the impact of Obamacare on employers, and I have been communicating with highly sophisticated ERISA lawyers who are advising employers, from Fortune 50 companies to small firms under 50 employees, on whether to keep or drop or modify their employer group health plans.

It has become very clear to everyone involved who is analytical and not ideological that the rational strategy, for both large and small firms, is to cease providing health care insurance to employees.

No company wants to admit that they are considering eliminating health insurance as an option, or be the first one to drop their health insurance plan, but once a competitor does so, the preference cascade will begin. The clear sentiment is “We will not be the first one to drop our health insurance plan, but we would be a close second.”

The coming preference cascade for employer group health plans is what the Democrats fear the most, because Obamacare was sold to the masses as “if you like your health insurance plan, you can keep it.”

The people who really know the law, and who have been following the avalanche of regulations, have already figured this out. It will take a while for this specialized knowledge to seep downward, because right now only $800+ an hour ERISA attorneys and the most sophisticated HR people understand how Obamacare really works.

Hopey-changey!
 
All people are equal

Some are more equal then others


CONNECTED: Facebook Gets A Multi-billion Dollar Tax Break.

Related: How a dream team of engineers from Facebook, Twitter, and Google built the software that drove Barack Obama’s reelection
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top