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.
We have yet tpo see the actaully nmbers compnig form the healthcare bill cost in actaul terms. that is because spending is based on the senate rules as to scoring which is often false as its based on such things as assumed savings from what is given to CBO. But we do know that already CBO has raised the cost of the heal;thcare bill by about 1.5 trillion since first scored.So far what has been spent on it is just the 500 out pof medicare for pasrt done so far. Much of the spending alos shiftas more to states starting in 2017 because of medicaid increased rolls.Next year the 3% tax o sale of homes kicks in and then the tax on all dividends.One often forget the healthcare bill includes actaul raising of taxes starting in 2013. and other late such as tax on employers and on people not buying healthcare insurance.Even Obama has now admitted that healthcare spending will go up initially but alos cliams it will go down in long run.
Not sure why, but it still shocks me how difficult it is to have a political discussion with conservatives in the Fox News era. They don’t make cohesive, fact-based arguments, they just angrily regurgitate Fox talking points, regardless of how few facts they have backing them. And when that doesn’t work, they do the same thing, but louder.
It is interesting indeed. Apparently, no one in the forum actually looked at the charts or read the article.
~ shun the nonbelievers Charlie~
Curious how the true fiscal conservatives were the democrats. Goes to show the Repug line is all lip service, not based in reality.
It is interesting indeed. Apparently, no one in the forum actually looked at the charts or read the article.
~ shun the nonbelievers Charlie~
Curious how the true fiscal conservatives were the democrats. Goes to show the Repug line is all lip service, not based in reality.
LOL.... perhaps I can help the mathematically challenged with an easy explanation.
Putting aside that the House and Senate was controlled by Democrats during much of this time let's say that the cost of gasoline was $2.98 a gallon in 2008. In 2009 during Obama's first year it would rise to $3.51, we're going to blame this on Bush, while I don't think it's completely fair especially considering the House and Senate is still controlled by the Democrats........whatever. This is the year the article is using as baseline to determine how much spending has increased. The cost of gas would drop in 2010 to $3.45 a gallon but it's still 45 cents a gallon more than it was in 2008. $3.60 a gallon in 2011, and $3.80 a gallon in 2012.
It used to be...didn't you hear that Bush contaminated the cheese via his militarization of space program? We could've gone to the moon any time we were hungry, and filled up on cheese. No more....
[quote=thecoalman;25177443]LOL.... perhaps I can help the mathematically challenged with an easy explanation.
Putting aside that the House and Senate was controlled by Democrats during much of this time let's say that the cost of gasoline was $2.98 a gallon in 2008. In 2009 during Obama's first year it would rise to $3.51, we're going to blame this on Bush, while I don't think it's completely fair especially considering the House and Senate is still controlled by the Democrats........whatever. This is the year the article is using as baseline to determine how much spending has increased. The cost of gas would drop in 2010 to $3.45 a gallon but it's still 45 cents a gallon more than it was in 2008. $3.60 a gallon in 2011, and $3.80 a gallon in 2012.
Well a week ago our gas dropped a little below the $2.98 mark you cited with a recent bump to 3.15. Personally I really don't think any president controls the price of gas.
In the time the House has been controlled by Reps. they deliberately put off passing the budget which resulted in the drop in the US credit rating... Nice to see what happens when they are in power... Not sure how much of that we can afford.
The reality for our deficit is Under Cater - under 1T under Reagan - 3.5T, Under Clinton a slight decrease then under Bush 2 - 10.5 t.....with a T dollar war, and the unfunded Medicare Part D, Wall Street bailout... It would have required Ron Paul tactics to have a deficit stay stable under what was dealt the president.
In the time the House has been controlled by Reps. they deliberately put off passing the budget which resulted in the drop in the US credit rating... Nice to see what happens when they are in power... Not sure how much of that we can afford.
rubbish. you fail in this part of your post because the republicans HAVE passed budgets like they are required to. it is harry reid in the senate that is tabling those budgets so that they dont get a vote. and the budgets that obama has sent to congress have bipartisan opposition. in fact the opposition is total against his budgets.
Quote:
The reality for our deficit is Under Cater - under 1T under Reagan - 3.5T, Under Clinton a slight decrease then under Bush 2 - 10.5 t.....with a T dollar war, and the unfunded Medicare Part D, Wall Street bailout... It would have required Ron Paul tactics to have a deficit stay stable under what was dealt the president.
you are confusing deficits with debt. granted bush43 spent too much money, but he only pushed the debt up by just under $5 trillion in eight years, where as obama has pushed the debt up by nearly $6 trillion in less than four years. so again you fail.
rubbish. you fail in this part of your post because the republicans HAVE passed budgets like they are required to. it is harry reid in the senate that is tabling those budgets so that they dont get a vote. and the budgets that obama has sent to congress have bipartisan opposition. in fact the opposition is total against his budgets.
you are confusing deficits with debt. granted bush43 spent too much money, but he only pushed the debt up by just under $5 trillion in eight years, where as obama has pushed the debt up by nearly $6 trillion in less than four years. so again you fail.
Why did we add $6 trillion to the debt under Obama? Bush's unfunded wars and unfunded tax cuts have anything to do with all that? How about Bush's unfunded Medicare part D or that huge drop off in revenue caused by bush's GREAT RECESSION? Why did welfare, food stamps and unemployment spending explode, was it becuz of bush's GREAT RECESSION? Why did we need that stimulus plan in 2009, was that becuz of bush's GREAT RECESSION? Why did we need those bank bailouts and TARP, bush's GREAT RECESSION?
I realize you guys like to blame the cost of the recovery on Obama, but without bush's economic collapse the recovery spending wouldn't have been needed. Just keep thinking the middle class has forgot who caused that economic collapse we are digging out of. Just keep thinking that America isn't wise to the GOP's plan to sacrifice their well being over the last four years in order to defeat Obama.... Ppl aren't as dumb as you give them credit 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.
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.
