GOP quietly backing away from Obamacare

[Anonymous]

The Grey Old Party ain't over till the old, fat, Evangelical, white Southern Fat guys sing.

"With the government shutdown firmly in its second week, and the debt limit projectedto be reached next Thursday, top House and Senate Republicans are publicly moving away from gutting the health care law — a practical move that could help resolve the stalemate and appear more reasonable in the eyes of frustrated voters."

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/...hutdown-debt-ceiling-98102.html#ixzz2hJvQUJrk

 

[Anonymous]

The Grey Old Party ain't over till the old, fat, Evangelical, white Southern Fat guys sing.

"With the government shutdown firmly in its second week, and the debt limit projectedto be reached next Thursday, top House and Senate Republicans are publicly moving away from gutting the health care law — a practical move that could help resolve the stalemate and appear more reasonable in the eyes of frustrated voters."

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/...hutdown-debt-ceiling-98102.html#ixzz2hJvQUJrk

Democrats are so young and vibrant, just like Harry Reid, Joe Biden, Patrick Leahy, Chuck Schumer, Carl Levin, Jay Rockefeller. Oh yeah, and they are so racially and ethnically diverse. No old, white guys there.... LOL!!!

 

[Anonymous]

Democrats are so young and vibrant, just like Harry Reid, Joe Biden, Patrick Leahy, Chuck Schumer, Carl Levin, Jay Rockefeller. Oh yeah, and they are so racially and ethnically diverse. No old, white guys there.... LOL!!!

I know that you Grey Old Party types are used to distracting yourselves with non-scientific facts like you use in your Literal Biblical but it is a fact that the Grey Old party's voters are just that - The only 2 demographics the Grey Old party won in the last election were white men and people over 65.

So you may have named some old white guys on the Dem side but more people that are NOT old and white voted for their ideas.

Just like the last Pres election, fuqs like you talk a lot of shit until reality strikes and then, since you only hang out with other fuq ups like you, you don't stop talking it because you are all the same.

 

[Anonymous]

Seriously, only racist liberals think about voting demographics and how best to pander to each group. Pathetic!

 

[Anonymous]

Seriously, only racist liberals think about voting demographics and how best to pander to each group. Pathetic!

funny coming from a pig feeding from the trough of govt subsidies that just so happen to be mostly benefiting white people and a party when voted into power at the state level take away the voting privileges for non-whites and that is just few examples of your open racism.

But it is good that you feel this way as it prevents you from seeing what your party is, prevents you from changing it and ensures its eventual death.

you are pathetic

 

[Anonymous]

funny coming from a pig feeding from the trough of govt subsidies that just so happen to be mostly benefiting white people and a party when voted into power at the state level take away the voting privileges for non-whites and that is just few examples of your open racism.

But it is good that you feel this way as it prevents you from seeing what your party is, prevents you from changing it and ensures its eventual death.

you are pathetic

Rule one... Blame Bush.
Rule two... Blame Bush.
Rule three... Cry racism.

Pathetic

 

[Anonymous]

You can't name one positive thing Obama has accomplished, but you continue to follow like a good little drone.

Don't worry about the horse being blind, just load the wagon.

 

[Anonymous]

You can't name one positive thing Obama has accomplished, but you continue to follow like a good little drone.

Don't worry about the horse being blind, just load the wagon.

Obama Care but in Faux News land giving other people the same govt subsidies as you get it not an accomplishment. Where you stand, you get points for being a racist.

 

[Anonymous]

Obama Care but in Faux News land giving other people the same govt subsidies as you get it not an accomplishment. Where you stand, you get points for being a racist.

Nice job utilizing Rule 3. I forgot about Rule 4... Just say Fox News over and over for no apparent reason.

Please explain what government subsidy I receive.

 

[Anonymous]

Nice job utilizing Rule 3. I forgot about Rule 4... Just say Fox News over and over for no apparent reason.

Please explain what government subsidy I receive.

This is a sign you spend too much time watching Faux News, reading your Tea Bagger Blogs and listening to right wing radio.

If you have employer provided Health Care Insurance then, on average they pay 80% of the premium and you pay 20%. A special loop hole in the Tax Law says that they get to expense that so that they pay less income tax because of it. There have been numerous proposals to take away the tax loop hole but the employers say if it is then they will pass along the extra expenses back to the employees. That is why the tax loop hole has never been eliminated. So you get your Health Care Insurance at a cost less than what is paid to the Insurance Companies. That is a subsidy.It is the 4th largest tax expenditure including others like the subsidy to your house price from the fact that you get to deduct the interest on your mortgage from your income tax.

As a proportion of the US population, whites receive a disproportionate benefit from employer provided healthcare. African Americans and Hispanic are disproportionately uninsured and so under Obama Care, will benefit from the subsidies there.

If you have employer provided healthcare and you oppose Obama Care you are a hypocritical racists because what is good enough for white folk is too good for African Americans and Hispanics.

 

[Anonymous]

This is a sign you spend too much time watching Faux News, reading your Tea Bagger Blogs and listening to right wing radio.

If you have employer provided Health Care Insurance then, on average they pay 80% of the premium and you pay 20%. A special loop hole in the Tax Law says that they get to expense that so that they pay less income tax because of it. There have been numerous proposals to take away the tax loop hole but the employers say if it is then they will pass along the extra expenses back to the employees. That is why the tax loop hole has never been eliminated. So you get your Health Care Insurance at a cost less than what is paid to the Insurance Companies. That is a subsidy.It is the 4th largest tax expenditure including others like the subsidy to your house price from the fact that you get to deduct the interest on your mortgage from your income tax.

As a proportion of the US population, whites receive a disproportionate benefit from employer provided healthcare. African Americans and Hispanic are disproportionately uninsured and so under Obama Care, will benefit from the subsidies there.

If you have employer provided healthcare and you oppose Obama Care you are a hypocritical racists because what is good enough for white folk is too good for African Americans and Hispanics.

You are a complete fucking moron. A tax break is not a subsidy. A tax break means somebody gets to keep more of their hard-earned money. A subsidy is when the government gives someone or something money. When you cash your welfare check, government is subsidizing you for doing nothing, that is very different from giving a tax-break to someone who works hard. You are a complete economic juvenile. I seriously didn't know people in America were this stupid. How old are you?

 

[Anonymous]

You are a complete fucking moron. A tax break is not a subsidy. A tax break means somebody gets to keep more of their hard-earned money. A subsidy is when the government gives someone or something money. When you cash your welfare check, government is subsidizing you for doing nothing, that is very different from giving a tax-break to someone who works hard. You are a complete economic juvenile. I seriously didn't know people in America were this stupid. How old are you?

The employers say that if the govt removes the tax break they will pass the costs from the insurance company to you. Please explain how this isn't a subsidy? If the govt makes your employer pay the taxes then they make you pay. Funny how when challenged with real examples you fall back into generalities that don't apply. You can't even make reasoned arguments.

I am 53 years old with an undergraduate degree in Physics and an MBA in Finance from UNC. After 10 years of active duty in the Marine Corps with 2 Air Medals from the First Gulf War and Somalia i worked at Novartis for 9 years where I lead many financial projects as a Sr Dir.

I'll stack my financial and capitalist credentials against a moron like you any day.

It is widely accepted by all credentialed economists as a subsidy:

"The National Journal of Economic Research

Tax Subsidies to Employer-Provided Health Insurance

This paper investigates the current tax subsidy to employer- provided health insurance, and presents new evidence on the economic effects of various tax reforms."

http://www.nber.org/papers/w5147

 

[Anonymous]

You are a complete fucking moron. A tax break is not a subsidy. A tax break means somebody gets to keep more of their hard-earned money. A subsidy is when the government gives someone or something money. When you cash your welfare check, government is subsidizing you for doing nothing, that is very different from giving a tax-break to someone who works hard. You are a complete economic juvenile. I seriously didn't know people in America were this stupid. How old are you?

See the new thread.

The Economists at the National Bureau of Economic Research don't seem to agree.

http://www.cafepharma.com/boards/showthread.php?t=541211

 

[Anonymous]

Since when did party politics become your Jesus?

You people do realize that you're falling into the trap that both political parties want you to? Both parties achieve power by dividing and conquering people.

I suggest that you read the transcript to Cal Thomas's speech that he gave a few days ago. A quick summarization is that politics should not be a reason that people cannot remain friends. He further goes on to state and I agree that party labels are a lazy way to discount the opinions and feelings of others So that if you go down that path, you run the risk of not meeting a lot of really good people and becoming friends.

Both of you seem to treat opposite political views as leprosy. The sad part is that your arguments sound like arguments the kids have a playgrounds.

 

[Anonymous]

See the new thread.

The Economists at the National Bureau of Economic Research don't seem to agree.

http://www.cafepharma.com/boards/showthread.php?t=541211

There is nobody anywhere that makes a serious argument that tax-breaks are the same as subsidies. Who does money belong to? Money belongs to the people who earn it. Then government takes that money in the form of taxes. Government uses that money and gives it to the 47 million that Obama has forced onto food stamps. That is not to say that some of that money is used to fund legitimate functions of government, it just so happens that grand schemes of wealth redistribution is not one of them. So when Obama uses my money to feed your worthless ass or pay for your healthcare because your cell-phone, car and giant flat-screen TV is more important, that is a subsidy.... and like all activities that government subsidizes, it increases that activity, thus the explosion in welfare and food stamps. If government takes enough of our money away, we will all be on food stamps. Government will just control all money and dole-out whatever it deems necessary.

 

[Anonymous]

There is nobody anywhere that makes a serious argument that tax-breaks are the same as subsidies. Who does money belong to? Money belongs to the people who earn it. Then government takes that money in the form of taxes. Government uses that money and gives it to the 47 million that Obama has forced onto food stamps. That is not to say that some of that money is used to fund legitimate functions of government, it just so happens that grand schemes of wealth redistribution is not one of them. So when Obama uses my money to feed your worthless ass or pay for your healthcare because your cell-phone, car and giant flat-screen TV is more important, that is a subsidy.... and like all activities that government subsidizes, it increases that activity, thus the explosion in welfare and food stamps. If government takes enough of our money away, we will all be on food stamps. Government will just control all money and dole-out whatever it deems necessary.

What ever you do, don't tell this to the National Bureau of Economic Research or Dr Gruber or Dr Poterba, authors of the paper entitled, "Tax Subsidies to Employer-Provided Health Insurance" or the other dozens of PhD's who have also published scientific papers on this subject in peer reviewed journals over the years. It would break there little hearts that an under undereducated, Torus driving, old, evangelical, fat, Southern, white male had just destroyed their world!

"Tax Subsidies to Employer-Provided Health Insurance

NBER Working Paper No. 5147 (Also Reprint No. r2060)
Issued in June 1996
NBER Program(s): AG HC PE

This paper investigates the current tax subsidy to employer- provided health insurance, and presents new evidence on the economic effects of various tax reforms."

http://www.nber.org/papers/w5147

"National Bureau of Economic Research

The NBER is the largest economics research organization in the United States.[2] Many of the American winners of the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences were NBER Research Associates. Many of the Chairmen of the Council of Economic Advisers have also been NBER Research Associates, including the former NBER President and Harvard Professor, Martin Feldstein.

The NBER's current President and CEO is Professor James M. Poterba of MIT.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Bureau_of_Economic_Research

No one considers tax loop holes as govt subsidies except NBER, you fucking moron.

 

[Anonymous]

What ever you do, don't tell this to the National Bureau of Economic Research or Dr Gruber or Dr Poterba, authors of the paper entitled, "Tax Subsidies to Employer-Provided Health Insurance" or the other dozens of PhD's who have also published scientific papers on this subject in peer reviewed journals over the years. It would break there little hearts that an under undereducated, Torus driving, old, evangelical, fat, Southern, white male had just destroyed their world!

"Tax Subsidies to Employer-Provided Health Insurance

NBER Working Paper No. 5147 (Also Reprint No. r2060)
Issued in June 1996
NBER Program(s): AG HC PE

This paper investigates the current tax subsidy to employer- provided health insurance, and presents new evidence on the economic effects of various tax reforms."

http://www.nber.org/papers/w5147

"National Bureau of Economic Research

The NBER is the largest economics research organization in the United States.[2] Many of the American winners of the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences were NBER Research Associates. Many of the Chairmen of the Council of Economic Advisers have also been NBER Research Associates, including the former NBER President and Harvard Professor, Martin Feldstein.

The NBER's current President and CEO is Professor James M. Poterba of MIT.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Bureau_of_Economic_Research

No one considers tax loop holes as govt subsidies except NBER, you fucking moron.

Did you even read the article moron? The economic effects of tax breaks is similar to a subsidy in that it can encourage certain activities, but to say that a tax break is the same as a subsidy is ABSURD AND NO SERIOUS PERSON HAS EVER MADE THAT ARGUMENT. If government gives me money to buy a windmill, that is different than if government gives me a tax break every year for owning and operating a windmill. Both scenarios might encourage me to buy a windmill, but it is not the same and nowhere in that article do they make the claim that it is the same MORON!

 

[Anonymous]

Did you even read the article moron? The economic effects of tax breaks is similar to a subsidy in that it can encourage certain activities, but to say that a tax break is the same as a subsidy is ABSURD AND NO SERIOUS PERSON HAS EVER MADE THAT ARGUMENT. If government gives me money to buy a windmill, that is different than if government gives me a tax break every year for owning and operating a windmill. Both scenarios might encourage me to buy a windmill, but it is not the same and nowhere in that article do they make the claim that it is the same MORON!

You wrote - "Did you even read the article moron? The economic effects of tax breaks is similar to a subsidy in that it can encourage certain activities, but to say that a tax break is the same as a subsidy is ABSURD AND NO SERIOUS PERSON HAS EVER MADE THAT ARGUMENT."

From the article entitled, "Tax Subsidies to Employer-Provided Health Insurance" - "the net tax subsidy to employer-provided insurance is substantial, with tax factors generating an average reduction of approximately thirty percent in the price of this insurance. Reducing the tax subsidy, either by capping the value of employer-provided health insurance that could be excluded from taxation, or eliminating the exclusion entirely, would have substantial effects on the level of employer- provided insurance and on tax revenues."

You wrote - "nowhere in that article do they make the claim that it is the same MORON!"

Gowd you are fucking stupid. You must be a "true conservative".

 

[Anonymous]

You wrote - "Did you even read the article moron? The economic effects of tax breaks is similar to a subsidy in that it can encourage certain activities, but to say that a tax break is the same as a subsidy is ABSURD AND NO SERIOUS PERSON HAS EVER MADE THAT ARGUMENT."

From the article entitled, "Tax Subsidies to Employer-Provided Health Insurance" - "the net tax subsidy to employer-provided insurance is substantial, with tax factors generating an average reduction of approximately thirty percent in the price of this insurance. Reducing the tax subsidy, either by capping the value of employer-provided health insurance that could be excluded from taxation, or eliminating the exclusion entirely, would have substantial effects on the level of employer- provided insurance and on tax revenues."

You wrote - "nowhere in that article do they make the claim that it is the same MORON!"

Gowd you are fucking stupid. You must be a "true conservative".

They even have a name for it, "Tax Subsidy". The is as explicit as it gets, unless you are a moron like you.