Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-03-2014, 11:22 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,606 posts, read 44,314,754 times
Reputation: 13530

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
The part of the bill which affects most americans, is now considered "a small part" of the bill..
Interesting, that. No?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-03-2014, 11:24 AM
 
4,130 posts, read 4,446,542 times
Reputation: 3041
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.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-03-2014, 11:31 AM
 
12,638 posts, read 8,906,052 times
Reputation: 7458
Quote:
Originally Posted by EmeraldCityWanderer View Post
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.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-03-2014, 11:34 AM
 
924 posts, read 663,799 times
Reputation: 312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trace21230 View Post
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.
I'm a raging liberal and I don't know a single person who thinks Obama is a good president.

Maybe the electorate is protecting the status quo against the steamy, tightly coiled candidates the GOP keeps squeezing out.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-03-2014, 11:37 AM
 
12,638 posts, read 8,906,052 times
Reputation: 7458
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ecstatic Magnet View Post
I'm a raging liberal and I don't know a single person who thinks Obama is a good person.

Maybe the electorate is protecting the status quo against the steamy, tightly coiled candidates the GOP keeps squeezing out.
No, the electorate is just brainwashed and infantile. They like talking about poop, for example.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-03-2014, 11:37 AM
 
69,368 posts, read 63,868,515 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ecstatic Magnet View Post
I'm a raging liberal and I don't know a single person who thinks Obama is a good person.

Maybe the electorate is protecting the status quo against the steamy, tightly coiled candidates the GOP keeps squeezing out.
Well tht depends on what you mean by a good person.

I think he's a good person, but he's a stubborn mule and doesnt listen to people who claim what he's doing is damaging.

I've been on this employer mandate for years, as being very harmful, liberals called me crazy..

I cant wait to hear them spin into me being wrong, and Obama knew since day 1 that it had to go, but only there because the GOP insisted it be added.

I know its coming
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-03-2014, 11:44 AM
 
Location: Fredericktown,Ohio
7,168 posts, read 5,344,597 times
Reputation: 2922
Quote:
Originally Posted by EmeraldCityWanderer View Post
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.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-03-2014, 11:51 AM
 
Location: Barrington
63,919 posts, read 46,474,580 times
Reputation: 20674
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Gibbs predicts employer mandate will be killed | BenefitsPro

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.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-03-2014, 11:52 AM
 
3,599 posts, read 6,762,310 times
Reputation: 1461
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Gibbs predicts employer mandate will be killed | BenefitsPro

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.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-03-2014, 11:55 AM
 
69,368 posts, read 63,868,515 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by aneftp View Post
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..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top