Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
He's entitled to his opinion, and he makes his point why he believes so...but people make predictions all the time that don't come out to be true.
Weren't Romney and McCain predicted to be president as well by many people?
Opinions are like asses, everyone's got one. When people start believing ones opinion is a certain prediction of the future it is a great way to turn into a horse's ass.
He's entitled to his opinion, and he makes his point why he believes so...but people make predictions all the time that don't come out to be true.
Weren't Romney and McCain predicted to be president as well by many people?
Opinions are like asses, everyone's got one. When people start believing ones opinion is a certain prediction of the future it is a great way to turn into a horse's ass.
Yes, lots of people predicted Romney or McCain would win. That's called underestimating the stupidity of the American electorate.
And even after six years of a failed Presidency, we still have lobotomized drones -- lots of them -- who believe Obama is a good President.
So, I doubt anyone is going to be underestimating the stupidity of the Democrat base anytime soon.
He's entitled to his opinion, and he makes his point why he believes so...but people make predictions all the time that don't come out to be true.
Weren't Romney and McCain predicted to be president as well by many people?
Opinions are like asses, everyone's got one. When people start believing ones opinion is a certain prediction of the future it is a great way to turn into a horse's ass.
Sometimes other people are smart enough to see a pattern and know the habits {fascism } of their elected leaders. Lets see, the mandate was kicked back a year then again all the way up to 2016. What is 2016? a election year. Do you think Obama is going to let the mandate take place in a election year when his party will be looking for cash from corporations? So far Obama has not let this issue hit congress but if he does do you think either of the pathetic parties will let the mandate take place in a election year when they are whoring for campaign contributions? If you do you have a lot of unfounded faith in our elected leaders.
And with that, Gibbs reveals the true goal of Obamacare... to shift health care insurance costs away from employers/corporations, and onto individuals themselves.
Pay up, suckers!!!
Oh, and enjoy the significant reduction to your spendable income.
Let's compare your speculation to the CATO Institute's ( conservative public policy think tank that seeks to shape and influence law) position on healthcare. Specifically, they seek to get employers out of providing healthcare benefits to employees. They dangle a carrot that some employers may instead choose to increase employee compensation instead of subsidizing insurance. They don't say that some employers may instead, choose to increase their bottom line.
Step one in the Cato pitch is to punish and impose a new tax on employees for the value equal to the employer's contribution to healthcare.
And with that, Gibbs reveals the true goal of Obamacare... to shift health care insurance costs away from employers/corporations, and onto individuals themselves.
Pay up, suckers!!!
Oh, and enjoy the significant reduction to your spendable income.
But the way the ACA is written, it won't matter much to those making less than 400% of poverty. Premiums could to $1000/month for individual and $2000/month for family of four still making say $80K a year. Those families will still be protected by paying no more than 9.5% of your AGI and the rest if subsidized by the governement.
Yet if you made more than 400% of poverty, you could be screwed especially if you are just above the 400% of poverty. The premiums may end up eating 10-20% of your income and that becomes a huge problem.
But the way the ACA is written, it won't matter much to those making less than 400% of poverty. Premiums could to $1000/month for individual and $2000/month for family of four still making say $80K a year. Those families will still be protected by paying no more than 9.5% of your AGI and the rest if subsidized by the governement.
Yet if you made more than 400% of poverty, you could be screwed especially if you are just above the 400% of poverty. The premiums may end up eating 10-20% of your income and that becomes a huge problem.
But paying 9.5% of your income, and then paying 10% more in taxes, doesnt really = 9.5% does it? Those subsidies have to be paid for..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.