Bait And Switch on Obamacare

Stephanie

Diamond Member
Jul 11, 2004
70,230
10,864
2,040
vote this administation out people

SNIP:

Cal Thomas

Jun 29, 2012

When is a tax not a tax? When President Obama says it isn't, or when the Supreme Court says it is?

Obamacare was sold on several fraudulent lines. The president knows the country doesn't want to pay higher taxes, given the deplorable way their government spends the money. And so the administration packaged it as something different.

That's called bait and switch, which is defined as "an illegal tactic in which a seller advertises a product with the intention of persuading customers to purchase a more expensive product." And Obamacare, if it is not repealed, is guaranteed to be more expensive, not to mention more bureaucratic, delivering lower-quality care and eventually rationing to save money.

Does it matter what this president promises since so many have turned up empty?

This ruling will impose a massive tax increase during a lingering recession. Twenty-one new taxes are associated with Obamacare, according to the House Ways and Means Committee. That doesn't include the scheduled year-end expiration of the Bush tax cuts. President Obama has said taxes shouldn't be raised during a recession.

Simply put, if government is going to take more money from the people who earn it -- mostly small businesses -- it will result in those businesses hiring fewer people, or laying off more employees, or both, thus increasing already high unemployment. People who have never run a business, or made a payroll, like most in this administration, have no sense of that.

The list of lies and deceptions by this administration is long and growing. When campaigning for president in 2008, candidate Obama made "a firm pledge" not to raise taxes: "Not your income taxes, not your payroll taxes, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes." In 2009, he vigorously denied to George Stephanopoulos of ABC that the individual mandate is a tax. Now Chief Justice John Roberts says it is. If money leaves your pocket and goes to government, it's a tax, no matter the label.

Some congressional Democrats, especially those running for re-election in traditionally Republican districts, might not have voted for this law had it been presented as a tax increase. They will now have to either defend the tax hike or vow to repeal the law. One way, they appear not to have known what they were doing. The other way, they will be portrayed as having lied.

read it all here
Bait And Switch on Obamacare - Cal Thomas - Page 1
 
Almost everyone with a brain knew right from the beginning that you cannot add 30 million people to the rolls without it costing a huge amount of money. Approximately 20 million of those won't be able to pay so the TAXPAER will pick up the bill. Every time you buy an over the counter medication you are paying a TAX on the bill. There are 21 other tax hikes embedded within this bill. And their other source of revenue is the 500 Billion dollars they are going to steal from the people who need the most care. The seniors.
 
Bullshit. They're not stealing from seniors. The people who can pay...the higher tax brackets...will pay for this. As they should.

But don't let something crazy like reality sink into your head.

I think it's funny that so many threads on this topic keep popping up as conservative brains are imploding about it. Can't say it's not constitutional, can ya ;)

Oh and by the way...yer boy Romney can't really debate this issue with Obama...unless he wants to be called a hypocrite.

539604_555280258080_1960409740_n.jpg


Want the video to prove the quote isn't taken out of context?? Sure. Here ya go.
Romney: "It's not a tax hike. It is a fee, an assessment." - YouTube

Fun times.
 
Bullshit. They're not stealing from seniors. The people who can pay...the higher tax brackets...will pay for this. As they should.

But don't let something crazy like reality sink into your head.

I think it's funny that so many threads on this topic keep popping up as conservative brains are imploding about it. Can't say it's not constitutional, can ya ;)

Oh and by the way...yer boy Romney can't really debate this issue with Obama...unless he wants to be called a hypocrite.

539604_555280258080_1960409740_n.jpg


Want the video to prove the quote isn't taken out of context?? Sure. Here ya go.
Romney: "It's not a tax hike. It is a fee, an assessment." - YouTube

Fun times.

Bullshit. OBAMATAX is stealing 500 Billion dollars from Medicare (seniors) to pay for his OBAMABILL.
 
Bullshit. They're not stealing from seniors. The people who can pay...the higher tax brackets...will pay for this. As they should.

But don't let something crazy like reality sink into your head.

I think it's funny that so many threads on this topic keep popping up as conservative brains are imploding about it. Can't say it's not constitutional, can ya ;)

Oh and by the way...yer boy Romney can't really debate this issue with Obama...unless he wants to be called a hypocrite.

539604_555280258080_1960409740_n.jpg


Want the video to prove the quote isn't taken out of context?? Sure. Here ya go.
Romney: "It's not a tax hike. It is a fee, an assessment." - YouTube

Fun times.

Bullshit. OBAMATAX is stealing 500 Billion dollars from Medicare (seniors) to pay for his OBAMABILL.

True.
 
Almost everyone with a brain knew right from the beginning that you cannot add 30 million people to the rolls without it costing a huge amount of money. Approximately 20 million of those won't be able to pay so the TAXPAER will pick up the bill. Every time you buy an over the counter medication you are paying a TAX on the bill. There are 21 other tax hikes embedded within this bill. And their other source of revenue is the 500 Billion dollars they are going to steal from the people who need the most care. The seniors.


I am a senior. Obamacare cost me about 20 bucks a month increase on my medical advantage plan. That is the money that was "taken" from social security.

Insurance companies offering "medical advantage" plans receive a payment of "x" dollars per month for each person enrolled. The last time I checked this was about $800. For this payment the company becomes totally responsible for the the benefits spelled out in the policy and I am effectively divorced from medicare.

Had I chosen to stay strictly on medicare there would have been no cost to me. There is no reduction in services to those on medicare just a reduction in payment to senior medical advantage plans.

My medical advantage insurance company is making a fortune in profits to the point where the state is getting pissed and it appears there will be no increase in premiums for a while. I can afford it and I presently have the best medical coverage of my life.

Anything that was "taken" WAS NOT taken from medicare. It takes a second to shout out the buzzwords and minutes to explain the real situation. Those doing the shouting are either ignorant or liars. There are no other choices.

The $20? I give it gladly. Call it a tax call it a fee, call it a premium. Call it anything you want. You seem to have no trouble doing that. The mechanics remain the same.

Oh yeah just to keep things factual. My medical advantage premium is $139 per month. Medicare takes out about $150 per month. Medicare gives the insurance company about $800 per month. That's the way it works. I pay $300. Medicare p ays about $800. The insurance company gets a total of about $1300 per month. You may not like it. Maybe with reason. That is no reason to be ignorant or to lie about it.
 
Well said onecut.

Furthermore, the bill doesn't take money out of the current Medicare budget but, rather, it attempts to slow the program's future growth, curtailing just over $500 billion in anticipated spending increases over the next 10 years. Medicare spending will still increase, however.

where does the $500 billion in future savings come from?

$220 billion = reducing annual increases in payments that health care providers would otherwise receive from Medicare.

$36 billion = increases in premiums for higher-income beneficiaries

$12 billion = administrative changes

$136 billion = projected savings from changes to Medicare Advantage

SAVINGS from Medicare help pay for other parts of the health care law so that the deficit doesn't go up. See how that works? Not stolen.
 
reducing annual increases in payments that health care providers would otherwise receive from Medicare.

well this should keep doctors wanting to stay in business

but the Guberment needs MORE TAXES from you peons..
 
The question that the line you quoted still leaves hanging is...is it a pro-forma increase that's unnecessary...or a necessary increase due to the cost of services or living increasing? Budgets are filled with mindless cost increases.

And btw, if medicine is such a noble profession...how about doctors realizing that their salaries aren't sacrosanct...and are subject to the market just like anyone elses? You're not making enough money? Either do it for a different reason or change jobs.
 
Bullshit. They're not stealing from seniors. The people who can pay...the higher tax brackets...will pay for this. As they should.

But don't let something crazy like reality sink into your head.

I think it's funny that so many threads on this topic keep popping up as conservative brains are imploding about it. Can't say it's not constitutional, can ya ;)

Oh and by the way...yer boy Romney can't really debate this issue with Obama...unless he wants to be called a hypocrite.

539604_555280258080_1960409740_n.jpg


Want the video to prove the quote isn't taken out of context?? Sure. Here ya go.
Romney: "It's not a tax hike. It is a fee, an assessment." - YouTube

Fun times.

Bullshit. OBAMATAX is stealing 500 Billion dollars from Medicare (seniors) to pay for his OBAMABILL.

The more you parrot on issues you don't understand the less of a 'force' you become protecting the ideology of the far, far, far right wing. Always remember, extremism in defense of Avarice, Bigotry and the Censorship of anyone who does not toe the ideological line is not a vice. Keep up the hard work of the anti-intelligentsia - it suit you fine.
 
vote this administation out people

SNIP:

Cal Thomas

Jun 29, 2012

When is a tax not a tax? When President Obama says it isn't, or when the Supreme Court says it is?

Obamacare was sold on several fraudulent lines. The president knows the country doesn't want to pay higher taxes, given the deplorable way their government spends the money. And so the administration packaged it as something different.

That's called bait and switch, which is defined as "an illegal tactic in which a seller advertises a product with the intention of persuading customers to purchase a more expensive product." And Obamacare, if it is not repealed, is guaranteed to be more expensive, not to mention more bureaucratic, delivering lower-quality care and eventually rationing to save money.

Does it matter what this president promises since so many have turned up empty?

This ruling will impose a massive tax increase during a lingering recession. Twenty-one new taxes are associated with Obamacare, according to the House Ways and Means Committee. That doesn't include the scheduled year-end expiration of the Bush tax cuts. President Obama has said taxes shouldn't be raised during a recession.

Simply put, if government is going to take more money from the people who earn it -- mostly small businesses -- it will result in those businesses hiring fewer people, or laying off more employees, or both, thus increasing already high unemployment. People who have never run a business, or made a payroll, like most in this administration, have no sense of that.

The list of lies and deceptions by this administration is long and growing. When campaigning for president in 2008, candidate Obama made "a firm pledge" not to raise taxes: "Not your income taxes, not your payroll taxes, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes." In 2009, he vigorously denied to George Stephanopoulos of ABC that the individual mandate is a tax. Now Chief Justice John Roberts says it is. If money leaves your pocket and goes to government, it's a tax, no matter the label.

Some congressional Democrats, especially those running for re-election in traditionally Republican districts, might not have voted for this law had it been presented as a tax increase. They will now have to either defend the tax hike or vow to repeal the law. One way, they appear not to have known what they were doing. The other way, they will be portrayed as having lied.

read it all here
Bait And Switch on Obamacare - Cal Thomas - Page 1

waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahaha....
 
Bullshit. They're not stealing from seniors. The people who can pay...the higher tax brackets...will pay for this. As they should.

But don't let something crazy like reality sink into your head.

I think it's funny that so many threads on this topic keep popping up as conservative brains are imploding about it. Can't say it's not constitutional, can ya ;)

Oh and by the way...yer boy Romney can't really debate this issue with Obama...unless he wants to be called a hypocrite.

539604_555280258080_1960409740_n.jpg


Want the video to prove the quote isn't taken out of context?? Sure. Here ya go.
Romney: "It's not a tax hike. It is a fee, an assessment." - YouTube

Fun times.

Bullshit. OBAMATAX is stealing 500 Billion dollars from Medicare (seniors) to pay for his OBAMABILL.

The more you parrot on issues you don't understand the less of a 'force' you become protecting the ideology of the far, far, far right wing. Always remember, extremism in defense of Avarice, Bigotry and the Censorship of anyone who does not toe the ideological line is not a vice. Keep up the hard work of the anti-intelligentsia - it suit you fine.

you truly are a intolerant and condescending person
 
That's exactly what Obamacare was. Bait and switch.

That's what the whole Obama phenomenon was.




Liberals heads would be going nuclear if it was a Republican who did this. But they're okay since it's their guy whose agenda is being shoehorned through. I can hardly wait until we get back in. Payback's gonna be fun.

Oh and thank G*d for Citizens United.
 
Last edited:
Bullshit. They're not stealing from seniors. The people who can pay...the higher tax brackets...will pay for this. As they should.

But don't let something crazy like reality sink into your head.

I think it's funny that so many threads on this topic keep popping up as conservative brains are imploding about it. Can't say it's not constitutional, can ya ;)

Oh and by the way...yer boy Romney can't really debate this issue with Obama...unless he wants to be called a hypocrite.



Want the video to prove the quote isn't taken out of context?? Sure. Here ya go.
Romney: "It's not a tax hike. It is a fee, an assessment." - YouTube

Fun times.

Quick question from your post... why should the 'higher tax bracket' pay for it?
 
Bullshit. They're not stealing from seniors. The people who can pay...the higher tax brackets...will pay for this. As they should.

But don't let something crazy like reality sink into your head.

I think it's funny that so many threads on this topic keep popping up as conservative brains are imploding about it. Can't say it's not constitutional, can ya ;)

Oh and by the way...yer boy Romney can't really debate this issue with Obama...unless he wants to be called a hypocrite.



Want the video to prove the quote isn't taken out of context?? Sure. Here ya go.
Romney: "It's not a tax hike. It is a fee, an assessment." - YouTube

Fun times.

Quick question from your post... why should the 'higher tax bracket' pay for it?

Wonderful question.

Follow the syllogism:

Taxes are an unavoidable pain of citizenship
The pain should be felt as close to equally by all citizens
Pain level is relative to income/net worth
Therefore, those with a higher income/net worth should pay more so that they share in the pain equally.

Now, the obvious follow to this is, but what about those who don't pay any taxes...they're not sharing in the pain equally! First, poverty is its own pain. As a double aside, I concede there are people who choose poverty, but their number is miniscule.

Second, assuming that you've cut government first and cut it healthily, still have a budget deficit, and want to balance the budget, the money has to come from somewhere. Does it make sense to take a disproportionate amount of resources from the part of the system that needs it most? Yes, I said need. But I also said system. The parts are grouped and interdependent. Sorry, that's how nations work. This is one of the things that I think many people forget is that by raising the level of the lowest, you're diminishing the negative effects they have on the rest of the system. (YOU'RE HELPING YOURSELF BY HELPING OTHERS!) Self-interest, who'da thunk it. Take Henry Ford. He raised workers' salaries to $5 a day so that supply would never outpace demand. They had the money to buy the cars he wanted to sell!

Third, as they rise up, they will indeed share in the pain. The goal has to be that we get people off assistance faster, meet their needs faster, and that they become productive themselves. Teach a man to fish...you get the point. You can dispute that public assistance ever helps. We can trade links until both of us are blue in the face. Jesus said, "The poor you will always have with you." Which means the problem will never be fully fixed from a discrete #'s point of view. What we CAN do, however, is create a process where the poor work hard, get a bit of help, and become self-sufficient.

If you're shaking your head at this point and thinking, "People never get off the dole"...why are we keeping companies on welfare then? Look at these welfare queens.

Honeywell Profits: $4.9 billion; Taxes: -$34 million
Fed Ex Profits: $3 billion; Taxes: -$23 million
Wells Fargo Profits: $49.37 billion; Taxes: -$681 million
Boeing Profits: $9.7 billion; Taxes: -$178 million
Verizon Profits: $32.5 billion;Taxes: -$951 million
Dupont Profits: $2.1 billion; Taxes -$72 million
American Electric Power Profits: $5.89 billion; Taxes -$545 million
General Electric Profits: $7.7 billion; Taxes: -$4.7 billion

Getting back to healthcare, the money's got to come from somewhere besides just cutting. Obama attempted to negotiate a $3 in cuts to $1 in revenue deal but was shot down. That seems pretty fair to me. Cutting alone would be great if we were in an ideal world where legislators, both Dem and Repub, didn't protect their own programs and states. Or the country's needs weren't growing. So....we compromise.

Look, the American capitalist system is a great one. Arguably the best in the world. But it's a system of laws that enforce competitive fairness, trade balance, and lots of other benefits that without them...successful people couldn't be successful. The moral is, you didn't become successful by yourself. I don't care who you are. You need the American system of laws and commerce. And for that, you support the system.

Please don't bring up the "if we confiscated all the wealth" argument, because it doesn't fly. The point is not a one-time garnishment... that of course wouldn't fix our problems. It's about getting cash flow in order so that revenues exceed spending. And if we stay on top of getting more spending cuts each year...instead of pro-forma budget increases...the amount of those revenues could go down.

Also, don't try to go down the "But you're taking away people's incentives to succeed." Really?? You think that because your taxes go up suddenly The Donald won't want to be the richest bloke on the planet? Would 99% of the planet ever think they have TOO MUCH money? People will always want to be successful.

Will this send more businesses off-shore? Sure. Some other country is always going to have lower taxes, lower average wage figures, and less restrictive employment laws. We will pay for our high standard of living and our employee/consumer protections until the world reaches some semblance of economic parity (NO! That's not a call for one world government and total economic equality). It's just reality.

Sorry for the long post. I just took an Adderall as prescribed and it kicked in.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top