Great: Obama regulations cost 20x admin’s estimate, annually

[Stephanie]

lol, but hey vote for him AGAIN and see what he has in store for you....SUCKERS
links in article at site

SNIP:
posted at 2:01 pm on September 20, 2012 by Erika Johnsen

This is getting old. Painfully, egregiously old.

Despite President Obama’s assiduous promises that he would scrupulously avoid raising taxes whatsoever on the middle class, the CBO released yet another of its revised reports yesterday, informing us that the ObamaCare mandate tax is going to overwhelmingly impose itself upon members of the middle class, with an average penalty to the tune of $1,200.
Lovely.

And today, the Competitive Enterprise Institute via the Washington Examiner has more info concluding that current federal regulations, in addition to ObamaCare’s upcoming regulations, impose a cost on individuals and businesses that amounts to more than twenty times what the Obama administration originally anticipates, annually. (Say it with me: But, who could’ve seen this coming?)

Current federal regulations plus those coming under Obamacare will cost American taxpayers and businesses $1.8 trillion annually, more than twenty times the $88 billion the administration estimates, according to a new roundup provided to Secrets from the libertarian Competitive Enterprise Institute.

And it could grow, warned the author of the report, Clyde Wayne Crews, a CEI vice president.

Complying with Health and Human Services Department requirements alone, he revealed, costs $184 billion a year, yet regulators are still drafting the rules for the 2,400-page Obamacare law that kicks into gear in 2014.

Crews has made a working project of his “Tip of the Costberg” report which he regularly updates. In it, he compares the cost of regulations estimated by federal agencies to a much broader list of estimates from multiple federal and independent sources.

all of it here
Great: Obama regulations cost 20x admin’s estimate, annually « Hot Air

 

[ScienceRocks]

Let's vote this anti-American cock sucker out in nov!!!

 

[Stephanie]

Well he did say he wanted to FUNDALMENTALY TRANSFORM THE COUNTRY..

wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

 

[ScienceRocks]

Well he did say he wanted to FUNDALMENTALY TRANSFORM THE COUNTRY..

wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

right into the toilet!

 

[depotoo]

anyone seen the ad for him by Bill Clinton where he states he wants to rebuild America from the ground up? I wondered when I saw it if he had a subliminal message there for us by way of his expression when he said it.

 

[g5000]

Confabulating ObamaCare with all federal regulations is a lot of smoke and mirrors. Stating the costs of regulations without also providing the savings created by federal regulations is one of the more disingenuous tactics out there. If regulations cost me a hundred bucks to install a guard on a bandsaw, but saves me thousands of dollars in lost work time and workforce injuries that I was previously experiencing, then those regulations are a net savings.

These kinds of bogus tactics are why the losers are losing. Instead of attacking ObamaCare head-on and actually reading the legislation and laying out its consequences, its opponents just made some shit up out of whole cloth about "death panels" and never bothered to actually read the relevant section, much less the entire legislation. And now we are going to toss in some completely unrelated shit about other regulations and their costs? Seriously? Are you that far off the reservation now?

This is not a winning strategy.

Rather than cutting and pasting a bunch of stupid shit coming from the UnConservative Manchurian candidates like Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Sarah Palin, et al. who are destroying the GOP from within, the hordes of piss drinkers should instead have been reading, analyzing and commenting on the mountain of false premises, lies, costs, and real effects of that legislation.

But that takes work, see. That takes real work. And it takes a lot of critical thinking. If all the energy that was expended by the ALL CAPS crowd fllicking foam from their mouths had been directed at productive communication, we could beat the Left's asses with our little fingers.

Before you go off half-cocked trying to say that you did all that, I would ask you to answer a simple question. What is a better plan to handle the millions of uninsured?

I have never heard a single person ever offer one up. Except myself. When the Left asked that question all during the run-up to the passage of ObamaCare, no one who opposed ObamaCare ever came up with a reply except to deflect and throw up more smoke and mirrors.

That is why the losers lost. That is why we are stuck with ObamaCare and Obama.



.

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

Well he did say he wanted to FUNDALMENTALY TRANSFORM THE COUNTRY..

wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

Yeah. And when Obama said that Reagan and even Clinton took the nation in the wrong direction, those of us who could read between the lines knew we were in big trouble . . . especially when we looked around and saw that growing throng of zombies clamoring around the messianic one.

For me, it was like that creepy feeling you get at the back of your neck sometimes, a little deja vu action out of the Twilight Zone, that dark-alley-full-of-bad-smell-and-moving-shadows feelin'. Not a pleasant tickle . . . nothing like that thrill that ran up Chris Matthews' leg.

Lots of mush-filled-head college boys and girls who got their jiggy on with hopey-change are waking up in Daddy's basement from that long-goodbye binge drunk wondering where the jobs are and . . . just what the hell happened anyway?! There's a certain brand of Koolaid they won't be drinking again anytime soon.

 

[francoHFW]

Pure Pubcrappe. Voodoo for 30 years and a SECOND cronyism and corruption Pub DEPRESSION happened. DUH.

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

Confabulating ObamaCare with all federal regulations is a lot of smoke and mirrors. Stating the costs of regulations without also providing the savings created by federal regulations is one of the more disingenuous tactics out there. If regulations cost me a hundred bucks to install a guard on a bandsaw, but saves me thousands of dollars in lost work time and workforce injuries that I was previously experiencing, then those regulations are a net savings.

These kinds of bogus tactics are why the losers are losing. Instead of attacking ObamaCare head-on and actually reading the legislation and laying out its consequences, its opponents just made some shit up out of whole cloth about "death panels" and never bothered to actually read the relevant section, much less the entire legislation. And now we are going to toss in some completely unrelated shit about other regulations and their costs? Seriously? Are you that far off the reservation now?

This is not a winning strategy.

Rather than cutting and pasting a bunch of stupid shit coming from the UnConservative Manchurian candidates like Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Sarah Palin, et al. who are destroying the GOP from within, the hordes of piss drinkers should instead have been reading, analyzing and commenting on the mountain of false premises, lies, costs, and real effects of that legislation.

But that takes work, see. That takes real work. And it takes a lot of critical thinking. If all the energy that was expended by the ALL CAPS crowd fllicking foam from their mouths had been directed at productive communication, we could beat the Left's asses with our little fingers.

Before you go off half-cocked trying to say that you did all that, I would ask you to answer a simple question. What is a better plan to handle the millions of uninsured?

I have never heard a single person ever offer one up. Except myself. When the Left asked that question all during the run-up to the passage of ObamaCare, no one who opposed ObamaCare ever came up with a reply except to deflect and throw up more smoke and mirrors.

That is why the losers lost. That is why we are stuck with ObamaCare and Obama.

Funny, I didn't come away with the notion that the author was necessarily "[c]onfabulating ObamaCare with all federal regulations". Alluding to the costs of the excessive, unproductive government regulations piled on the marketplace by the current administration, much of it by way of executive directives, is not, in my opinion, a losing tactic, but just another plank in the strategy of exposing the stupidity of progressivism.

The operative term here is unproductive, as opposed to the example you gave.

Moreover, plenty of conservative politicians and thinkers have boldly championed sterling plans that would readily resolve the nation's healthcare woes infinitely better than any of lefty's big government schemes, but it's a little hard to get that argument past the obstacles thrown up by the mostly corrupt media of popular culture. It must be gotten into the minds of the critical, persuadable middle, a faction of society that does not think ideologically in terms of any established worldview but follows the latest trend.

No.

In my experience, conservatives have to startle the mind with fresh presentations of an old, albeit, proven philosophy, implement policy, succeed and thereby win allegiance. The transformation of thinking is always fleeting. Allegiance is the key. Most people don't embrace a thing until they see it in action, and even then it's just a temporary mood.

The sentimental emotionalism of progressivism is easy, it's the stuff of slogans and, therefore, trite sound bites. To grasp the inherent benefits of liberty requires an appreciation for a complex set of dynamics, even though they be readily self-evident to the open and engaged mind. Except in America, the latter has never been a durable commodity in this world, and it is a commodity that has been assiduously degraded in America as well during the last 60 years by a subversive public education system.

As for Beck and Hannity, you would do better to name O'Reilly of the Factor. Hannity and Beck grasp the enduring facilities of liberty just fine. They own them. They are quite adept at dealing with "the mountain of false premises, lies, costs and real effects. . . ."

Unconservative Manchurians, eh? Hmm.

O'Reilly is the slogan spouter, an accidental tourist of a good upbringing, a coincidental habit of birth and parenting, a man who thinks that implementing the free market strategies of Romney-Ryan, for example, are not a sure bet, just better than the alternative. O'Reilly doesn't grasp the surety of certain universal imperatives; Beck and Hannity do.

Nah. We are stuck for the moment with ObamaCare and Obama for reasons that have little to do with the arguments of conservative pundits. This tragedy has more to do with the quality of mind and attention of the American people . . . nearly half of whom are going to vote for the messianic one again no matter how well the alternative is presented.

Why?

Because their minds can't get past the slogans of their education.

Bring a man up in such, it takes more than good talk to snap him out of it. Hell, an economy that according to every indicator is even worse off now than it was before Obama took office isn't enough to snap them out of it. They can't even compute the obvious fact that Obama always intended to grow the national debt, an extension of the strategy to further ensnarl the American people in the constituency of entitlement dependency. They're still waiting for him to reduce it by half. LOL! The sane among us understood that he was lying about that long before he raised his hand and took the oath.

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

Pure Pubcrappe. Voodoo for 30 years and a SECOND cronyism and corruption Pub DEPRESSION happened. DUH.

Hush, child, the adults are talking.

 

[g5000]

Funny, I didn't come away with the notion that the author was necessarily "[c]onfabulating ObamaCare with all federal regulations".

Then I guess you missed this: "Current federal regulations plus those coming under Obamacare will cost American taxpayers and businesses $1.8 trillion annually".


That's confabulating ObamaCare with ALL federal regulations.

.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

I took it as current HEALTHCARE regulations plus Obama Tax. federal regualtions are much more costly on the whole than 1.8 trillion.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

You're right. It states: Complying with Health and Human Services Department requirements alone, he revealed, costs $184 billion a year, yet regulators are still drafting the rules for the 2,400-page Obamacare law that kicks into gear in 2014.

My misread there.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

g5000 is correct. Which is a dishonest way of showing the increases. They could have just stuck tot he facts instead of inflating numbers to make it appear worse than it really is.

 

[Jarhead]

Pure Pubcrappe. Voodoo for 30 years and a SECOND cronyism and corruption Pub DEPRESSION happened. DUH.

And away you go Moron....into the depths with the likes of TruthMatters and NuddeLudde.

 

[LadyGunSlinger]

The burden placed upon small business has been crippling.. The numbers bear this out.. There's not an argument to be made by Leftists in regard to job creation/ unemployment/ growth.. THERE IS NONE in all sectors that keeps up with population growth. Obama's economic policy of SPEND SPEND SPEND has taken us to the edge of that proverbial cliff.. Liberals want American's vote to go over that cliff.. in to Martial law, a world economy of social justice.

Vote to keep America strong .. Vote Romney/Ryan 2012

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

Funny, I didn't come away with the notion that the author was necessarily "[c]onfabulating ObamaCare with all federal regulations".

Then I guess you missed this: "Current federal regulations plus those coming under Obamacare will cost American taxpayers and businesses $1.8 trillion annually".


That's confabulating ObamaCare with ALL federal regulations.

.

Uh . . . no, I didn't miss that. Current federal regulations would include those piled on by the Obama Administration-Democratic Congress for two years and those piled on via executive orders for nearly four years. Granted it's one part truth and one part political hyperbole intended to leave the impression that Obama is responsible for this debilitating trend. The point is that instead of pushing back against costly regulation, Obama wants more and more.

I'm aware of what the author is doing. You think this tactic undermines rather than helps the conservative cause. I disagree. You're obsessing over a certain detail that in fact flies right over the heads of most.

That's the thrust of my post.

Forget the details, the marketplace is over-regulated and has been for decades. You have to grab folks attention and gain their allegiance in order to change that.

It is the quality of the American mind and attention span that sets the agenda. The conservative has to seize that long enough to get his policies in the mix. His successes will improve the quality of the American mind . . . at least long enough to forestall the inevitable.

Ultimately, if we can't wrest control of the public education system from the entrenched progressive interests that dominate it, the Republic is finished anyway. More at, if we can't convince the majority of parents to demand control of the education system—universal school choice—the Republic is finished.

Look, we're on the same side here; I'm simply getting at something bigger, what really matters. The wonkish details or the distortion thereof have little or nothing to do with the winning or the losing of this fight. If they did, then we would be winning virtually every time and everywhere! Right? Isn't that your point? LOL! It's not conservatives but leftists that use the spin and distortion of political hyperbole virtually every time they open their pie holes. It's not even close, as conservatives have always been more truthful than leftists.

Hell, all of progressivism is one big fat lie.

The conservative message must be simple, blunt and overarching, a message that incessantly turns the progressive lie on its head. That's what wins.

Progressivism is the collusion of big government and big business to repress the working poor, the middleclass and small business!

Hell, I'm going to put that in my signature.

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

The burden placed upon small business has been crippling.. The numbers bear this out.. There's not an argument to be made by Leftists in regard to job creation/ unemployment/ growth.. THERE IS NONE in all sectors that keeps up with population growth. Obama's economic policy of SPEND SPEND SPEND has taken us to the edge of that proverbial cliff.. Liberals want American's vote to go over that cliff.. in to Martial law, a world economy of social justice.

Vote to keep America strong .. Vote Romney/Ryan 2012

Precisely! That is the winning argument. The details beyond that are irrelevant. No serious conservative is going to challenge genuine, resource-saving regulation. It is the regulation that is consciously, intentionally piled on for the purpose of controlling the marketplace, lefty's planned economy, that is at issue here, his attempt to dictate economic winners and losers. And it is this sort of regulation that keeps the working poor down, shrinks the size and saps the strength of the middleclass and allows big business to dominate the economic landscape at the expense of small, emerging businesses, blunts the innovations and competition they would otherwise bring to the marketplace.

What Romney-Ryan's message to American should be: Progressivism is the collusion of big government and big business to repress the working poor, the middleclass and small business!

Say it with me now . . . over and over and over again.

 

[Nova78]

Obama is a one man economy destroyer...........

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

g5000 is correct. Which is a dishonest way of showing the increases. They could have just stuck tot he facts instead of inflating numbers to make it appear worse than it really is.

g5000 misses the point and so do you. Nobody cares about that but wonks.