After Ruinous Federal ShutDown, Sebelius Shows GOP Completely Business Unfriendly!

[mascale]

HHS Secretary, Kathleen Sebelius, was put on display, by the GOP, at the ObamaCare website hearings. Great CongressRep, Democrat Henry Waxman--Clearly representing Venice Beach, in California--got the hearings on track from the start as Ranking Member of the particular committee. These were not going to be just website hearings. Without so-stating, he noted that the Republicans were out to showcase--opposition to the Health Care Act itself! Well. . . .except that he did!

95% of U. S. business is unaffected by the business insurance rules, for example. The stock market seems to have noticed. The new Anti-Business Party, GOP, appears to have not noticed that at all. Secretary Sebelius made the point--time and again at the GOP showcase hearings. Yes, millions had their health plans cancelled since they were not what they were when the whole thing started.

So now even FOX notices this:
__________________________________

"The secretary denied that Obama had broken his promise and claimed that for the most part, people who had coverage as of March 2010 can keep their current plans -- provided their insurance companies haven't changed them significantly. That wrinkle, however, was rarely explained by Obama before now."
__________________________________

So since the insurance companies have gutted all the old plans, then under ObamaCare patient rights--then actually they have to charge people for real health plans, instead! For that there is even federal money! GOP, of course, is opposed to insurance companies having all the revenue!

Only three weeks after the federal shutdown, the Republicans have managed to sink even further into less than friendly regard by U. S. Business!

GOP is even now showing itself to be business unfriendly(?), allowing HHS Secretary to explain The Health Care Act--hour after hour--on nationwide televised hearings! The Democrats now come across way more business friendly. There is no Speaker Pelosi, even: Shutting down the federal government, and putting all loans and credit at risk. There are mainly Republicans, wanting to take the federal money away from the people and the entire health plan industry!

Great Socialist, Karl Marx, in fact: Had originally opined for the widespread centralization of credit. Even China seems to be on board, with that--like Ben Bernanke.

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Stirred!"
(Many now on Lands of Many Nations, even, embrace new games and technology--as even way better than Republican beads and trinkets!)

 

[waltky]

Mebbe if dey'd shut down the gubmint, dey'd save enough money to pay off the debt...

Federal Debt Up $7K Per Household Since End of Shutdown
March 19, 2014 -- The federal government has increased its debt by $811,699,611,000.51—borrowing $7,057.89 per U.S. household—in the five months that have elapsed since Oct. 16, 2013.

That is the day the House Republican leadership agreed to a deal with President Barack Obama to pass legislation ending a two-week partial government shutdown. The deal funded the government into January 2014 and suspended the legal limit on the federal debt into February 2014. As of the close of business on Oct. 16, 2013, the total debt of the U.S. government stood at $16,747,360,549,057.23, according to the U.S. Treasury. Shortly after midnight on Oct. 17, Obama signed the debt-and-spending deal, reopening the partially shut government.

By the close of business on March 18, the latest day reported, the total U.S. government debt had climbed to $17,559,060,160,057.74—up $811,699,611,000.51 since Oct. 16 debt-and-spending deal. That equals $7,057.89 for each of the 115,006,000 households that the Census Bureau estimates are now in the United States. In the five months leading up to Oct. 16, the U.S. Treasury officially reported in its Daily Treasury Statement that the U.S. government debt-- which was then subject to the legal limit set by Congress--did not increase at all.

As of the close of business on May 17, 2013, the Treasury had said the debt subject to limit was $16,699,396,000,000. That was just about $25 million below the legal limit of $16,699,421,095,673.60. As of the close of business on Oct. 16, 2013, just hours before Obama signed the debt-and-spending deal, the debt subject to the legal limit was still $16,699,396,000,000, according to the U.S. Treasury. It had not moved in 150 days.

Testifying before the Senate Finance Committee on Oct. 10, 2013, Treasury Secretary Lew said that the Treasury had managed to keep the debt from exceeding the statutory limit for such an extended period of time by using what he called “extraordinary measures.” He told the committee, however, that the Treasury would no longer have the capacity to borrow money after Oct. 17—effectively setting that as the deadline for the House Republican leadershipt to consent to a debt-and-spending deal with Obama.

MORE

See also:

CBO: 'Surprised and Disappointed by Pace of Economic Recovery'
March 19, 2014 -- "Yes, we have been surprised and disappointed by the pace of economic recovery," Congressional Budget Office Director Douglas Elmendorf told a gathering in Washington on Tuesday.

Elmendorf said the CBO's own forecasts "put too much weight on the rapid monetary policy response (i.e., quantitative easing) and fiscal policy response (i.e., the stimulus and tax hikes) -- thinking those things would be enough to achieve a "fairly quick U-shaped recovery to bring the economy back more strongly than it has. And we've, in the past several years, marked down our projections for economic growth."

Elmendorf said there is "still considerable slack" in the economy and the labor market: "For example, labor force participation is down considerably over the past several years, and a big chunk of that, we think, is due to the demographic changes, particularly the aging of the population and the moving of the baby boomers into retirement. "But also we think a significant chunk of the decline in labor force participation rate stems from the weak economy. And some of the people who've left the labor force, we think will stay out permanently. But many others, we think, will come back as the economy strengthens.

"So our view now is the economy will, over the next four years, return back essentially to full employment; and we think that will come both from a healing of the underlying economic problems that stemmed from the housing boom and bust in the financial crisis. But also we think the economic growth will pick up this year because the fiscal drag that we've seen in the past few years (sequester) won't be in place this year. "So we do think that there are even stronger reasons today to expect the economy to rebound. But we have been wrong about that," Elmendorf admitted. "And I think we have learned, as many other economic forecasters have learned, just what a prolonged process it is to work off the excesses of a housing boom...to rebuild a financial system, to restore consumer and business confidence." The CBO predicts that the nation's unemployment rate will remain above 6 percent through late 2016 -- a presidential election year.

Elmendorf said the CBO estimates that the economy is currently "short" 6 million jobs: "And that has big economic costs, of course. Those people are not producing output. And it has very large personal costs for those people and their families." He also noted the "extraordinarily high" rate of long-term unemployment -- the share of people who have been out of work for half a year or more: "Some who left the labor force have taken up disability insurance, part of the Social Security program, and are likely to stay on that program or move into the Social Security retirement program. Others are just looking for work or have stopped and are reported as unemployed. Others have stopped looking for work and are out of the labor force. "So the consequences of having unemployment so high for so long are really profound and not just for now, but will have a long, long shadow."

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article...rised-and-disappointed-pace-economic-recovery