[JayJuanGee]

(10-01-2013 12:08 PM)It_is_my_time Wrote:  

JayJuan, it would be hard for me to discuss economics with you, being you don't understand how the bond market works.

Obama spent trillions on green energy and other Democratic pet projects. We got nothing in return. If you read up about how the bond markets work you will realize the USA does not have anywhere near enough money and our time is about to run out.

Its My Time: Just b/c we have differences of opinions I see no need to try to act as if you know something that i do not, regarding some mystery bond market theory.

You are being very inconsistent in your various comments, and really your comments do not make a whole heck of a lot of sense b/c they seem to be all over the place.. and somewhat affiliated with Fox news and/or tea party talking points.. which are generally less informative and distracting rather than helpful to any meaningful discussion of relevant points.

You cannot tell me that all government spending is bad and only Obama's supposed spending had gotten the US into its debt situation. Also, you poo poo Cattle Rustler's comment that distinguishes between kinds of government spending... He specifically differentiated between policing type spending and health and welfare spending.

The end game is that the very wealthy are always trying to take money from the system through various schemes, and they like some government programs including military contractors, defense and these policing-type governmental spending in order to spend spend spend.. or take take take... and also they do like amorphous banking concepts to in order to spend and receive more bail outs from the treasurer or the fed reserve. like the ongoing printing of money that is likely going from the federal reserve to banks. However, anything related to spending money on social well-being or education and welfare or environment or labor or consumer empowerment is cut, cut, cut out of the budget.

Some of the members on this forum, including me, know a lot more than you are giving us credit, and instead of acting like you have some secret knowledge about bonds or some mystery topic maybe you should explain to our level .... and make some sense as far as tying various dynamics together.. without the distracting talking points. to try to take away from the points that we were making. Sorry, but currently, you are NOT accomplishing that kind of convincing explanation of your conclusions, but instead you are merely throwing out various buzz words and talking points that you may have learned from watching Fox news or some affiliate of fox.

There is no secret knowledge about bonds, or futures or options or derivative or some other baloney distractions.... and there is no need to revisit Obama care at this particular moment in order to make some kind of philosophical or political point about some very important dynamic that we should consider but don't understand.. Instead, let's stick to what we do know and keep the govt running and then discuss and debate these budgetary type issues that you claim to be complicated and so important and incomprehensible to us regular lay people without guns to anyone's heads

The reality is that some well-to-do people have been skimming for years off of the various federal govt systems and the tax payers and the social security and raiding the federal reserve and that is not new, and they are affiliated with both the republicans and the democrats... Well probably more actively with the republicans, but we do not need to get into that b/c I will concede that the democrats seem to let these things slide too often, but anyhow, maybe this is getting off track b/c initially, I thought that we were trying to discuss the government shut down and how long it would last and to predict it and explain it.. and in that regard, the public is likely blaming the republicans for engaging in these hostage-taking tactics to be like school bullies who are not getting their way and are a minority and want to pressure the majority into doing what they want which is to destroy a potential upcoming benefit that they are about to receive (namely obamacare).

So our discussion sort of relates to these topics.... and how the govt shut down is negatively going to affect the US credibility the longer it lasts. Actually, probably what will hurt the bond market that supposedly we forum members do not understand more than anything is when there is lack of confidence in the US govt and threats towards shut downs, which had caused a rating downgrade a couple of years ago... which I think republicans are trying to achieve further rating downgrades in order to sabotage the US's credibility. Maybe they are not doing this on purpose, but sometimes i wonder about their motives?

And, maybe if all of this keeping the govt going gets screwed up by such extreme and destructive thinking, then I am not going to be able to go bang girls abroad based on the strength of the US dollar and economic system for the next 30 years, and according to you and Bacon, I may be lucky to get a good 10 years of banging in before the whole house of cards comes falling down. In the short term, I do not think Americans are blaming democrats for this and the shut down.

By the way, since you want to put out links to quasi-irrelevant polls that ask a question about whether American's approve Obama care, I believe the various polls that you referred to are not conclusive or even in your favor.
A recent Forbes poll shows that generally 3/4 of Americans do not approve of repealing or delaying ObamaCare.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecar...obamacare/

And even if Americans did approve repealing or delaying Obama care, that question should not be in front of us at the moment. In this regard, there are also polls that show that Americans don't agree with shutting down the govt and blame the Republicans for such shut down.

https://www.google.com/search?q=polls+ab...=firefox-a

In essence, its my time, you are spinning and skimming your data in order to show a conclusion that you want to show rather than reflecting the true sentiment of the American people in order to fabricate some quasi Fox news vision of America and the current government shut down.

[la_mode]

It's all political theater, good way for the high-ranking democrats/republicans to spend the last warm week or two of the year playing golf at the same country club.

[It_is_my_time]

I don't have time to go through all that. It isn't a "difference of opinion" when you say "the USA has plenty of money". Money or in other words, wealth, is finite. It has a limit. The USA would have plenty of wealth if we managed it well. But we don't.

There is nothing magical about the bond market. For the USA to borrow more money we have to sell treasury bonds. You can go out and buy treasury bonds yourself, though I wouldn't recommend it as the return is terrible and it is looking less likely we can pay them back.

So who is buying the treasury bonds? The central bankers. They own our debt. Who are the central bankers? Extremely wealthy and well connected private owners who can manipulate the markets to their favor by buying our debt.

So in other words, our ability to keep loaning money to pay for services is now dependent on a few rich guys who already pulled the rug out from under Greece, Portugal, Spain and Italy for good reason (they had no way of repaying their debt).

Our debt per GDP is not far behind where these countries were when they had the rug pulled out from under them. And when that happens, well, go to youtube and type in "Life in Greece after austerity" and see for yourself.

[JayJuanGee]

(10-01-2013 01:24 PM)It_is_my_time Wrote:  

I don't have time to go through all that. It isn't a "difference of opinion" when you say "the USA has plenty of money". Money or in other words, wealth, is finite. It has a limit. The USA would have plenty of wealth if we managed it well. But we don't.

There is nothing magical about the bond market. For the USA to borrow more money we have to sell treasury bonds. You can go out and buy treasury bonds yourself, though I wouldn't recommend it as the return is terrible and it is looking less likely we can pay them back.

So who is buying the treasury bonds? The central bankers. They own our debt. Who are the central bankers? Extremely wealthy and well connected private owners who can manipulate the markets to their favor by buying our debt.

So in other words, our ability to keep loaning money to pay for services is now dependent on a few rich guys who already pulled the rug out from under Greece, Portugal, Spain and Italy for good reason (they had no way of repaying their debt).

Our debt per GDP is not far behind where these countries were when they had the rug pulled out from under them. And when that happens, well, go to youtube and type in "Life in Greece after austerity" and see for yourself.

Finally IIMT you are making some sense.. and I am not trying to rag on you... but we are getting closer and yes, this is not obama or some republican that is causing these shut down talking points or the underlying financial dynamics.. these are wealthy people stealing from the US people.. and their shutting down the govt is part of the staging of theatrics and acting as if the US is broke when we are not. Anyhow, you and I are not so far apart if people talk like real people about these various issues and reason rather than talking through fox news or the tea party funder talking-points.

Certainly also you and I can agree that we do not want to be treated like greece, spain, portugal or italy... and in essence these analogies to treat our debt like household debt does not apply to govt debt and especially US govt dept b/c of our unique lucky situation of having the dollar standard ... In this regard, trying to force us into austerity measures is something that was caused by wealthy people taking trillions of dollars from the treasury and the fec and then acting like we do not have money for social programs.. and many Americans see through that baloney, even though from time to time it can be very confusing for us to keep our eyes on the ever moving ball.

[It_is_my_time]

(10-01-2013 01:29 PM)JayJuanGee Wrote:  

(10-01-2013 01:24 PM)It_is_my_time Wrote:  

I don't have time to go through all that. It isn't a "difference of opinion" when you say "the USA has plenty of money". Money or in other words, wealth, is finite. It has a limit. The USA would have plenty of wealth if we managed it well. But we don't.

There is nothing magical about the bond market. For the USA to borrow more money we have to sell treasury bonds. You can go out and buy treasury bonds yourself, though I wouldn't recommend it as the return is terrible and it is looking less likely we can pay them back.

So who is buying the treasury bonds? The central bankers. They own our debt. Who are the central bankers? Extremely wealthy and well connected private owners who can manipulate the markets to their favor by buying our debt.

So in other words, our ability to keep loaning money to pay for services is now dependent on a few rich guys who already pulled the rug out from under Greece, Portugal, Spain and Italy for good reason (they had no way of repaying their debt).

Our debt per GDP is not far behind where these countries were when they had the rug pulled out from under them. And when that happens, well, go to youtube and type in "Life in Greece after austerity" and see for yourself.

Finally you are making some sense.. .and yes, this is not obama or some republican.. these are wealthy people stealing from us.. and their shutting down the govt is part of the staging of theatrics and acting as if we are broke when we are not. Anyhow, we are not so far apart if people talk like real people and reason rather than talking through fox news or the tea party funder talking points.

Yes, they are wealthy people who steal from us and influence both political parties. I don't like either party. But Obama's form of taking more and more from men and giving to women is even worse than what Bush offered us.

I don't know if the Republicans would be all that much better in control or not or if their is too much influence. I think they would be a little better for us middle class men trying to get some money saved up and a chance to travel overseas. But I can't predict what they will do next.

The only presidential candidate that made any sense to me was Ron Paul and Gary Johnson. Small govt politicians who give us guys a chance to save our money and freedom to do as we please with it.

[Hencredible Casanova]

Mark Manson made this post on his FB page:

Quote:

For the past couple years, I've seen article after article saying Millennials are self-absorbed and entitled. But I've yet to see anything about the old white douchebags who are willing to shut down the entire US government when just because they didn't get their way. How can a political party call themselves patriotic when they aren't even willing to participate in the system?

[It_is_my_time]

(10-01-2013 01:44 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  

Mark Manson made this post on his FB page:

Quote:

For the past couple years, I've seen article after article saying Millennials are self-absorbed and entitled. But I've yet to see anything about the old white douchebags who are willing to shut down the entire US government when just because they didn't get their way. How can a political party call themselves patriotic when they aren't even willing to participate in the system?

That is terrible. They are participating in the system. Nothing they did is illegal or unheard of in the least. It is our system and they are doing their job.

I don't know how old you are, but if you are under 35 you should be doing all you can to stop Obamacare.

[GameTheory]

(10-01-2013 12:18 PM)Aliblahba Wrote:  

Politicians are making that last stab for cash. When the U.S. is in a civil war they'll be sitting in a chateau in France sipping brandy and laughing. The 1% will have safe passage. Normal citizens won't be allowed to leave, and those abroad forced back to suffer. Why do you think so many now are renouncing citizenship? We've been duped.

right on, Comrade !!!

[la_mode]

Also, this "government mandated" healthcare is only by state (it's not nationwide - each insurance exchange has state specific politicies). Meaning, it can be used in one state, but not the next state over. It's still unclear as to how it will work when people do move, but it will probably just add confusion and there will be a whole new set of problems.

Maybe they want everyone to stay put.

The other thing, besides those who are completely on medicare/medicaid or some sort of welfare, there really are no savings, since Obamacare is "private insurance" purchased via a government veil, and ends up costing more. The average "bronze" plan (most basic plan) for a healthy 25 year old is approx. $155 per month (with slight variance by state), which would have easily been a premium plan with any insurance company before Obamacare.

So many people aren't going to be able to afford Obamacare, and no one has realized that. They will sign up, think it's free, and not be able to make the monthly payments. Which could be what the government wants.

It's not the same as what is found in Canada or most of Western Europe. Although it would have been possible to do something similar in the US, there's just no way they ever would when they knew they could fool the masses into wanting to pay more, while making it appear as if were "free", and attach the term "Obamacare" to it, as to pander to those who support it.

[JayJuanGee]

(10-01-2013 01:34 PM)It_is_my_time Wrote:  

Yes, they are wealthy people who steal from us and influence both political parties. I don't like either party. But Obama's form of taking more and more from men and giving to women is even worse than what Bush offered us.

I don't know if the Republicans would be all that much better in control or not or if their is too much influence. I think they would be a little better for us middle class men trying to get some money saved up and a chance to travel overseas. But I can't predict what they will do next.

The only presidential candidate that made any sense to me was Ron Paul and Gary Johnson. Small govt politicians who give us guys a chance to save our money and freedom to do as we please with it.

I agree with you about saving and traveling,but it may not be a solution if the system is too screwed over.

Additionally, you are getting back into the nit-picky blaming or figuring out who will be the next best candidate for president.

Currently, The question in front of us RIGHT NOW is govt shut down.. NOT whether Obama is empowering feminists.

After we get through this particular shut down (and maybe the one or two weeks from now), then we can talk about some of these substantive issues about visions and about our preferences for future candidates.

I mean ultimately if so many of the candidates or the current office holders are beholden to money and corruption, then probably there needs to be discussion about how to get money out of politics and to get politicians to act in favor of the people rather than pursuing money-influenced agendas that end up screwing regular people.

In the short run, I do not see how it helps to shut down the govt... except to screw confidence in the USA... and unless you are saying that this maneuver of shutting the govt is a good thing b/c it is ultimately going to help the US to move more towards a Ron Paul vision of the structure of government.. well Ron Paul is NOT currently in office and not by a long shot.. and if that becomes the leadership vision in the future, then we would cross that bridge at that time and no one man can really run the show and such a person would have to work the political forces then in existence to achieve his/her vision.

Surely, I would think that RVF members are all over the board concerning their views on whether govt should be shrunk or not, and yes, I do understand that there are a lot of fairly conservative RVF members, but I do not believe that necessarily means RVF members don't recognize some value to various social govermental programs and social safety nets - whether for ourselves or for our grandparents or families that we have or may have in the future. These kinds of visions will play out in a variety of ways for RVF members and their opinions.

Ultimately, it appears that you think a govt shut down is generally NOT a bad thing, and I am inclined much differently from you b/c generally I am NOT philosophically opposed to govt and I see that govt can serve various valuable functions for the people in opposition to monied interests. Currently, many Americans seem to agree that monied interests control the government rather than the government controlling monied interests. Additionally, in the past three years, I have not been too excited about the fed govt's various widespread austerity measures and cuts that it has already been doing to screw over people, and I do not believe the solution to economic woes is cutting social programs that benefit people. and instead probably certain levels of spending would be better from my humble opinion (like Keynsian type spending in govt projects (public works) that would stimulate growth, jobs and production and have rippling effects).

Anyhow, people will differ about these kinds of views, and I believe that is why we have elections, but when we are not currently having an election, we should have governing and reasonable compromise rather than extremism. That's my opinion, and some RVF members will differ.

(10-01-2013 01:45 PM)It_is_my_time Wrote:  

I don't know how old you are, but if you are under 35 you should be doing all you can to stop Obamacare.

You had some reasonable points, and then you go making these broad and destructive fox news talking point statements again... with no real backing..

Do anything to stop Obamacare means that it is o.k. to shut down the govt in order to get your way or some kind of compromise regarding Obama care.

Well, this viewpoint is just not even closely in step with what the American people want, and generally the polls show that the Americans are a little torn about Obamacare b/c they are not sure about what it is exactly but they think it is affiliated with Obama b/c it has his name in the reference (which can be misleading); however, they do not want the govt shut down b/c of it, and when you get into particulars about educating people about the many benefits of obamacare, they are generally in favor.. ... and there are probably way too many benefits to list... but there are a lot.

Certainly, we can work towards tweaking obamacare, if that is necessary, after getting passed this govt shutdown issue.

(10-01-2013 02:19 PM)la_mode Wrote:  

Also, this "government mandated" healthcare is only by state (it's not nationwide - each insurance exchange has state specific politicies). Meaning, it can be used in one state, but not the next state over. It's still unclear as to how it will work when people do move, but it will probably just add confusion and there will be a whole new set of problems.

Part of it seems to make sure everyone stays put, so they can track you better.

The other thing, besides those who are completely on medicare/medicaid or some sort of welfare, there really are no savings, since Obamacare is "private insurance" purchased via a government veil, and ends up costing more. The average "bronze" plan (most basic plan) for a healthy 25 year old is approx. $155 per month (with slight variance by state), which would have easily been a premium plan before Obamacare.

So many people aren't going to be able to afford Obamacare, and no one has realized that. They will sign up, think it's free, and not be able to make the monthly payments. Which could be what the government wants.

These sound like Fox news talking points that are attempting to describe a bunch of hypothetical negatives of Obamacare rather than some concrete positives that are more concrete than those negatives.

One concrete positive will probably trump a lot of the petty hypothetical concerns that still need to be worked out..
.. one positive is:
no elimination of qualifications of a person to become insured based on preexisting conditions or removal from insurance for the development of a condition which will likely result in the elimination of medical bankrupcies for thousands of people every year. It may even completely eliminate medical bankrupcies in America... that is worth implementing obamacare in and of itself... and there are more benefits that i will not list in this posting.

[Aliblahba]

(10-01-2013 11:44 AM)Cattle Rustler Wrote:  

On the other hand, I'm happy that defense contractors are not getting paid.

[It_is_my_time]

Quote:

You had some reasonable points, and then you go making these broad and destructive fox news talking point statements again... with no real backing..

Do anything to stop Obamacare means that it is o.k. to shut down the govt in order to get your way or some kind of compromise regarding Obama care.

Well, this viewpoint is just not even closely in step with what the American people want, and generally the polls show that the Americans are a little torn about Obamacare b/c they are not sure about what it is exactly but they think it is affiliated with Obama b/c it has his name in the reference (which can be misleading); however, they do not want the govt shut down b/c of it, and when you get into particulars about educating people about the many benefits of obamacare, they are generally in favor.. ... and there are probably way too many benefits to list... but there are a lot.

Certainly, we can work towards tweaking obamacare, if that is necessary, after getting passed this govt shutdown issue.

It isn't a Fox News talking point, it is just a fact. If you are a man under 35 your insurance costs will sky rocket. Women it will go up a little for under 35, for men it will sky rocket.

The govt. shutting down isn't nearly as big of a deal as you are making it out to be. It has happened before and it will probably happen again.

[la_mode]

The only point I'm making - Obamacare is not "free" how most on the right think it is. If anything, they should be happy, it costs more.

[Christian McQueen]

Let's talk math.

With ObamaCare the AVERAGE family was going to save around $2,500 a year; now it's been established it's going to cost them an ADDITIONAL $7,000+ a year.

Math doesn't lie and anyone who thinks ObamaCare is good for America (not to mention it's completely unconstitutional), needs their head examined.

Much love to all my RVF brethen but it is what it is.

[K Galt]

This is all political theater designed to get the masses to accept radical changes to the Governmental and economic involvement in the Healthcare Industry.

For those in this thread arguing partisan politics...please. Just stop.

Republicons want More guns, less butter.
Demorats want more butter, less guns.

Neither address the problem that whether we're spending on guns or butter or both, we are "spending" money we don't have.

That's what the national debt means.

We're like an unemployed family living on welfare in a section-8 housing ghetto, arguing about buying a car or a boat on our maxed out credit cards. When someone says "hey, how can we afford either, when our credit cards are almost maxed out and we have no money or jobs? Oh, don't worry about that...they're going to increase our credit limit. They always do!"

Spending money we don't have on shit we don't need is the name of the Game, regardless of whether or not it's a Pachyderm or a Jackass in the Oval office, or which party supposedly "controls" congress.

Finally, the time to truly worry will be when civil society starts breaking down in the advent of a true "shutdown" aka what we saw in Greece last year. The American version of "Austerity measures." But it will be far more violent and destructive than what we saw in Greece.

When the social security checks, Government pension checks, medicare and medicaid reimbursement checks, WIC, SNAP and EBT benefits are no longer disbursed, we are going to have an awful lot of the citizenry who depend on those entitlement programs to keep a roof over their heads, clothes on their backs, food in their bellies and their daily dose of prescription meds from Big Pharma that so many folks cannot live without.

Once those things are no longer being paid for, in about 2-3 weeks we're gonna find out that the "Zombie Apocalypse" scenario is not just syfy fictional fantasy...but hordes of starving, homeless, in the throes of withdrawals from going cold turkey on all of Big Pharma's anti-depressants and pain killers they've been taking daily for months/years, are going to fill the streets with desperate, hungry and violent masses demanding their entitlements.

THAT'S when martial law by executive order goes into effect...then we'll all get to go camping!

[Easy E]

(10-01-2013 02:52 PM)McQueensPlayboyRules Wrote:  

Let's talk math.

With ObamaCare the AVERAGE family was going to save around $2,500 a year; now it's been established it's going to cost them an ADDITIONAL $7,000+ a year.

Math doesn't lie and anyone who thinks ObamaCare is good for America (not to mention it's completely unconstitutional), needs their head examined.

Much love to all my RVF brethen but it is what it is.

Where did you get this statistic from?

[It_is_my_time]

(10-01-2013 03:09 PM)Easy E Wrote:  

(10-01-2013 02:52 PM)McQueensPlayboyRules Wrote:  

Let's talk math.

With ObamaCare the AVERAGE family was going to save around $2,500 a year; now it's been established it's going to cost them an ADDITIONAL $7,000+ a year.

Math doesn't lie and anyone who thinks ObamaCare is good for America (not to mention it's completely unconstitutional), needs their head examined.

Much love to all my RVF brethen but it is what it is.

Where did you get this statistic from?

I've heard it before, recently, and I believe it was from the CBO.

[Easy E]

(10-01-2013 03:12 PM)It_is_my_time Wrote:  

(10-01-2013 03:09 PM)Easy E Wrote:  

(10-01-2013 02:52 PM)McQueensPlayboyRules Wrote:  

Let's talk math.

With ObamaCare the AVERAGE family was going to save around $2,500 a year; now it's been established it's going to cost them an ADDITIONAL $7,000+ a year.

Math doesn't lie and anyone who thinks ObamaCare is good for America (not to mention it's completely unconstitutional), needs their head examined.

Much love to all my RVF brethen but it is what it is.

Where did you get this statistic from?

I've heard it before, recently, and I believe it was from the CBO.

Link to it. Don't just say "You heard."

[JayJuanGee]

(10-01-2013 02:39 PM)Aliblahba Wrote:  

(10-01-2013 11:44 AM)Cattle Rustler Wrote:  

On the other hand, I'm happy that defense contractors are not getting paid.

Ali: are you a defense contractor?

I kind of agree with CR, but ultimately it is my hunch that all federal govt workers are going to get paid after this all passes - everyone gets back pay for their furlough.. that is my hunch.. but what do I know? I am just going based on the shutdown/furlough that took place in 1996.

[It_is_my_time]

(10-01-2013 03:14 PM)Easy E Wrote:  

(10-01-2013 03:12 PM)It_is_my_time Wrote:  

(10-01-2013 03:09 PM)Easy E Wrote:  

(10-01-2013 02:52 PM)McQueensPlayboyRules Wrote:  

Let's talk math.

With ObamaCare the AVERAGE family was going to save around $2,500 a year; now it's been established it's going to cost them an ADDITIONAL $7,000+ a year.

Math doesn't lie and anyone who thinks ObamaCare is good for America (not to mention it's completely unconstitutional), needs their head examined.

Much love to all my RVF brethen but it is what it is.

Where did you get this statistic from?

I've heard it before, recently, and I believe it was from the CBO.

Link to it. Don't just say "You heard."

Yep, the CBO...

http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecar...y-of-four/

[Aliblahba]

Contractors fuel the government manpower. Do you guys really think actual gov't employees do anything? Contractors saved the taxpayer a fortune overseas, and countless lives of the warfighter. We work to keep our jobs and for the companies to continue contracts. Gov't employees can't get fired for shit, and don't really care.

[eradicator]

(10-01-2013 03:14 PM)Easy E Wrote:  

(10-01-2013 03:12 PM)It_is_my_time Wrote:  

(10-01-2013 03:09 PM)Easy E Wrote:  

(10-01-2013 02:52 PM)McQueensPlayboyRules Wrote:  

Let's talk math.

With ObamaCare the AVERAGE family was going to save around $2,500 a year; now it's been established it's going to cost them an ADDITIONAL $7,000+ a year.

Math doesn't lie and anyone who thinks ObamaCare is good for America (not to mention it's completely unconstitutional), needs their head examined.

Much love to all my RVF brethen but it is what it is.

Where did you get this statistic from?

I've heard it before, recently, and I believe it was from the CBO.

Link to it. Don't just say "You heard."

Looks like forbes had an article about it last week.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecar...y-of-four/

I am taking a more 'wait and see approach" as to whether the ACA will sink the economy or not.

[Que enspastic]

Why is American healthcare so expensive compared to the rest of the world?

Is there anyway you can make it cheaper?

[JayJuanGee]

(10-01-2013 02:52 PM)McQueensPlayboyRules Wrote:  

Let's talk math.

With ObamaCare the AVERAGE family was going to save around $2,500 a year; now it's been established it's going to cost them an ADDITIONAL $7,000+ a year.

Math doesn't lie and anyone who thinks ObamaCare is good for America (not to mention it's completely unconstitutional), needs their head examined.

Much love to all my RVF brethen but it is what it is.

McQ: You are mixing both data and opinion here.

The data that you provided does not make it a fact, but it could be persuasive one way or the other to some people. I don't have a problem with different opinions, but sometimes people make the statement of an opinion as if it is the only sane conclusion, which really is not fair.

We are still learning various facts and implementation issues about this fairly humongous legislation so it is going to play out differently for people in different circumstances.. we are not averages, but sometimes we may discover that something initially we thought was good to be bad or something that we initially thought was bad to be good.

Don't get me wrong, I am not exactly excited about this obamacare legislation, but likely it is gonna help some people. However, is it going to negatively impact others to such an extent that overall it is a negative rather than a positive, based on what i know so far is that I believe it is a net positive for the country and the American people. And, I am not going to get my head examined, yet. maybe later...

[Easy E]

(10-01-2013 03:21 PM)It_is_my_time Wrote:  

(10-01-2013 03:14 PM)Easy E Wrote:  

(10-01-2013 03:12 PM)It_is_my_time Wrote:  

(10-01-2013 03:09 PM)Easy E Wrote:  

(10-01-2013 02:52 PM)McQueensPlayboyRules Wrote:  

Let's talk math.

With ObamaCare the AVERAGE family was going to save around $2,500 a year; now it's been established it's going to cost them an ADDITIONAL $7,000+ a year.

Math doesn't lie and anyone who thinks ObamaCare is good for America (not to mention it's completely unconstitutional), needs their head examined.

Much love to all my RVF brethen but it is what it is.

Where did you get this statistic from?

I've heard it before, recently, and I believe it was from the CBO.

Link to it. Don't just say "You heard."

Yep, the CBO...

http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecar...y-of-four/

Did you read the article? It is not by the CBO. It is by Forbes. The author is constantly updating it due having several other critics point out the flaws in the calculation and methodology.

We really won't know how much more it will cost per family until the ACA has been in effect for a while. This is especially due to the fact that a lot of families (up to 400% of the poverty level) will get subsidies to help cover the cost of healthcare.