Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Now, now, now... You folks quit calling it a penalty.
It's a tax
-Geaux
What is a TAX but a penalty for living your life>? Gubmint has to get their pound of flesh out of it as to allow YOU to exist...
It's a collective contribution we agree to submit to a government body to improve the lives of all citizens.
If you don't want to pay any taxes...there's this place called Somalia...
Why don't Republicans do this...
Let Obamacare run for a year. Within a year, the public will be so outraged that they will give Republicans major majorities in both Houses
Then they can do what they want
Why don't Republicans do this...
Let Obamacare run for a year. Within a year, the public will be so outraged that they will give Republicans major majorities in both Houses
Then they can do what they want
I didn't agree to it. A bunch of damn liberals decided for me...then decided for themselves that the law shouldn't apply to them.Now, now, now... You folks quit calling it a penalty.
It's a tax
-Geaux
What is a TAX but a penalty for living your life>? Gubmint has to get their pound of flesh out of it as to allow YOU to exist...
It's a collective contribution we agree to submit to a government body to improve the lives of all citizens.
If you don't want to pay any taxes...there's this place called Somalia...
I didn't agree to it. A bunch of damn liberals decided for me...then decided for themselves that the law shouldn't apply to them.What is a TAX but a penalty for living your life>? Gubmint has to get their pound of flesh out of it as to allow YOU to exist...
It's a collective contribution we agree to submit to a government body to improve the lives of all citizens.
If you don't want to pay any taxes...there's this place called Somalia...
When you take a tax deduction, you are forcing someone else to make up the difference. You are forcing someone else to pay more of their income to the government. You are part of the more than one trillion dollars a year being forced onto the backs of others to pay for all those deductions.
Too funny, like a true progressive you assume the people's money actually belongs to the Gov and anything we get to keep we should be "thankful" for...not a very ":enlightened position of old time "republican".
At least ObamaCare made a half-hearted attempt to pay for itself. But to pay for your tax deductions, we are borrowing trillions from foreign governments and forcing everyone to pay higher tax rates.
LOL...again same bullshit. Cut spending...but that escapes your "Progressive" mind.
It's a simple economic fact. Tax expenditures are a cost. They are on the SPENDING side of the ledger. Ask any economist and learn something. The American people are addicted to the sugar of tax expenditures and the GOP is a big supporter of them.
You've been brainwashed for so long you can't see straight. Both parties rely on a dependent class, and you are a member of the Republican dependent class. The parties are two sides of the same coin, spending $trillions a year to keep 535 people employed.
LOL, you mean you have bought into the progressive spin.
Sorry, the money "belongs" to the people who EARN it, and that is what is lost on Washington and progressives like yourself.
Again I can think logically about this and not simply parrot the Gov line.
Letting people keep their own money is not a Gov "expenditure" unless one is a Gov stooge...get the picture?
Please, stop pretending to be a "Republican", you look silly.
It's a simple economic fact. Tax expenditures are a cost. They are on the SPENDING side of the ledger. Ask any economist and learn something. The American people are addicted to the sugar of tax expenditures and the GOP is a big supporter of them.
You've been brainwashed for so long you can't see straight. Both parties rely on a dependent class, and you are a member of the Republican dependent class. The parties are two sides of the same coin, spending $trillions a year to keep 535 people employed.
LOL, you mean you have bought into the progressive spin.
Sorry, the money "belongs" to the people who EARN it, and that is what is lost on Washington and progressives like yourself.
Again I can think logically about this and not simply parrot the Gov line.
Letting people keep their own money is not a Gov "expenditure" unless one is a Gov stooge...get the picture?
Please, stop pretending to be a "Republican", you look silly.
You were probably too young to remember when Republicans were the party of reason and responsibility - you know, the adults in the room.
LOL, you mean you have bought into the progressive spin.
Sorry, the money "belongs" to the people who EARN it, and that is what is lost on Washington and progressives like yourself.
Again I can think logically about this and not simply parrot the Gov line.
Letting people keep their own money is not a Gov "expenditure" unless one is a Gov stooge...get the picture?
Please, stop pretending to be a "Republican", you look silly.
You were probably too young to remember when Republicans were the party of reason and responsibility - you know, the adults in the room.
Sorry pop, you aren't up for this, no more than g was.
It the less intelligent among us that buy the whole "whatever monies you keep is a Gov expenditure".
NOBODY buys that shit except the collectivist progressives.
You were probably too young to remember when Republicans were the party of reason and responsibility - you know, the adults in the room.
Sorry pop, you aren't up for this, no more than g was.
It the less intelligent among us that buy the whole "whatever monies you keep is a Gov expenditure".
NOBODY buys that shit except the collectivist progressives.
I think g is one of the most balanced posters on this mostly partisan site. It's a little sad that you think you're even in his league.
Sorry pop, you aren't up for this, no more than g was.
It the less intelligent among us that buy the whole "whatever monies you keep is a Gov expenditure".
NOBODY buys that shit except the collectivist progressives.
I think g is one of the most balanced posters on this mostly partisan site. It's a little sad that you think you're even in his league.
(smile) You know.....opinions are like assholes.....
g thinks he is gods gift...he isn't.
His weakness is that he simply lies.
He is no more a Republican than Obama is.
He toes the progressive line and that is an EASILY dispatched position....it require no real intelligence to demand everybody pay for everything for everybody else.....but that is beyond you...I get it.
Anyone who says anyone else is a Gov leech because he wants to keep more of the money he earns i simply not real bright.
As for my "assumption" that millions of people are going to love and depend on ObamaCare as much as you depend on your government tit, you are forgetting there is a precedent: RomneyCare. And RomneyCare is very popular in Massachusetts, and that is how we know ObamaCare is also going to become very popular.
Just like you, other people also fall madly (literally) in love with their goverment tit.
And that is why the GOP is shutting down the government. They know that if ObamaCare gets off the ground, it will be very popular.
State House News Service
BOSTON -- Health-insurance deductibles in Massachusetts surged by more than 40 percent between 2009 and 2011, a period when health benefits were reduced by 5 percent and premiums rose by nearly 10 percent, according to a new state report on market trends.
At a briefing, Center for Health Information and Analysis Executive Director Aron Boros said premiums are outpacing inflation and state officials "see the quality of the benefit declining." He said, "This is the paying-more, getting-less headline. We see this throughout every group in the market."
The report also found that 97 percent of the state's 6.6 million residents held some form of health-insurance coverage each year from 2009 to 2011, a level of coverage that the state describes as "near-universal." That means about 198,000 are uninsured each year in Massachusetts.
Read more: Study: Mass. health-care costs rise as benefits fall - Sentinel & Enterprise
The Massachusetts Medical Society recently reported that the state law has resulted in longer patient wait times [and] continued difficult access to primary care physicians. The average wait time in Massachusetts to see an internal medicine physician is now 48 days double the national average. Over half of primary care practices are no longer accepting new patients. Fewer physicians are accepting the state-run Commonwealth Care and Commonwealth Choice insurance plans. So although Massachusetts politicians frequently boast that they have increased coverage, many patients cannot find doctors to provide them with actual medical care.
Meanwhile health costs continue to skyrocket out of control, both for the state government and for privately insured patients. In a recent Forbes article, Sally Pipes notes that over the next 10 years, the plan will cost the state government $2 billion more than predicted. Similarly, prior to the new law insurance prices in Massachusetts increased at a rate 3.7% slower than the national average; after the reform, theyre increasing 5.8% faster.
PJ Media » Massachusetts: The Canary in the Coal Mine for ObamaCare
Massachusetts legislature passed a first-in-the-nation bill limits the growth of health care costs in the state.
The bill would not allow spending on health care to grow any faster than the states economy through 2017. For five years after that, any rise in health care costs would need to be half a percentage point lower than the increase in the states gross domestic product.
How does the bill aim to achieve this goal?
The bill sets up a new commission would monitor the growth in health costs and enforce the spending targets. But the bill contains no real penalty for missing the targets, and some consumer advocates are skeptical.
The bill also dedicates $60 million collected from insurers over the next four years to prevention efforts and encouraging the creation of accountable care organizations.
Rationing comes to Massachusetts « Healthcare Economist
The analysis, by Wakely Consulting Group, projects President Obamas health care law supported by the Patrick administration will tack an average of 3.7 percent on to premiums.
That would be on top of typical base rate increases, driven by hospital and doctor fees and demand for medical care, which have ranged from 2 to 4 percent in recent years.
National health overhaul rules could drive up premiums in Massachusetts, new study says - Business - The Boston Globe
Massachusetts Senate proposal MA 2170. This bill stipulates that physicians must participate in government run programs (Medicare, Medicaid, Massachusetts' state plan) in order to maintain state medical licensure. Furthermore, the bill states that physicians "must accept payment at the lowest of the statutory 20 reimbursement rate." Reimbursement rates would be set at 110% of Medicare billing, leaving physicians with very little to pay the general business expenses necessary to run a practice.
More than 70% of physicians polled indicated that the passage of such a law would encourage them to leave the state or retire early. They also expressed concern regarding the lower reimbursement rates, which would simply not allow them to earn enough income to stay in practice.
70% of Physicians Polled Would Consider Leaving Medicine if the Bill MA 2170,... -- CAMBRIDGE, Mass., April 28 /PRNewswire/ --
That would be the Democrats. No one believes that what the Democrats peddle is good for America, particularly Obamacare.both sides are to blame, but the GOP takes the bulk of it. They both have had numerous chances to deal with this and nothing has been done about it. They both kicked the can down the road till what we have now.
The Gop is to blame more so this time for trying to get rid of obamacare.
Both sides are chock full of politicians and both sides cater to special interests. But only one side is willing to fuck this country over to protect them.
The blame is not equal. The GOP has engineered a calculated effort to turn back the progress that we have made in this country.......poke holes in the safety net, kill unions, supress wages, fuck over the poor, divide based on race, gender and socio-economic status and supress the vote.
ThenDemocratic party has been playing defense for half a century. Both to blame my ass.
Ted Cruz called the ObamaCare subsidies "sugar" which the Democrats were trying to get Americans addicted to. Creating more dependence on government, and in this he is absolutely correct.
Unfortunately, the GOP is not true to the philosophy which opposes this dependence on government. The GOP is equally guilty in creating a dependent class. It's all about the sugar.
When you take a tax deduction, you are forcing someone else to make up the difference. You are forcing someone else to pay more of their income to the government. You are part of the more than one trillion dollars a year being forced onto the backs of others to pay for all those deductions. Your combined sugar dwarfs that of the people who are on welfare.
And just like someone on welfare or receiving a subsidy, you will rationalize taking that handout. And you will argue that it would be stupid to leave it on the table if the government is giving it away. Your thinking is identical to that of someone on food stamps or who is going to receive a federal subsidy on the health insurance exchanges.
We are ALL addicted to the sugar. We all sold our souls.
Gimme gimme gimme, and make that guy over there pay for it.
If Ted Cruz or the Tea Party or the GOP were really about eliminating government dependence, they would be targeting the astronomically biggest tit of them all: tax expenditures.
At least ObamaCare made a half-hearted attempt to pay for itself. But to pay for your tax deductions, we are borrowing trillions from foreign governments and forcing everyone to pay higher tax rates.
Let's see Cruz lead a charge to shut the government down over home mortgage interest deductions. Then I will believe he is sincere.
The quicker they get millions DEPENDENT? The harder it will be to get rid of bad law...the way of the Statists...I want to know the reason for the objection to the delay.
After all if unions and business can get a delay why not the average Joe?
All laws should be applied equally across the board btw, that includes Congress.
.
The GOP knows that if ObamaCare launches and then runs for a whole year, a lot of the kinks will get worked out, and millions and millions and millions and millions of people will grow to like it. A lot..
As for my "assumption" that millions of people are going to love and depend on ObamaCare as much as you depend on your government tit, you are forgetting there is a precedent: RomneyCare. And RomneyCare is very popular in Massachusetts, and that is how we know ObamaCare is also going to become very popular.
Just like you, other people also fall madly (literally) in love with their goverment tit.
And that is why the GOP is shutting down the government. They know that if ObamaCare gets off the ground, it will be very popular.
You really haven't done any research on government run healthcare, rather you are just going off all the hype that the Democrats and Obama are trying to create. When you look at consequences that are a direct result of government stepping in and taking control, exactly what part of this is more beneficial to people when you look at the results many have to now live with as a consequence?
MASSCARE
State House News Service
BOSTON -- Health-insurance deductibles in Massachusetts surged by more than 40 percent between 2009 and 2011, a period when health benefits were reduced by 5 percent and premiums rose by nearly 10 percent, according to a new state report on market trends.
At a briefing, Center for Health Information and Analysis Executive Director Aron Boros said premiums are outpacing inflation and state officials "see the quality of the benefit declining." He said, "This is the paying-more, getting-less headline. We see this throughout every group in the market."
The report also found that 97 percent of the state's 6.6 million residents held some form of health-insurance coverage each year from 2009 to 2011, a level of coverage that the state describes as "near-universal." That means about 198,000 are uninsured each year in Massachusetts.
Read more: Study: Mass. health-care costs rise as benefits fall - Sentinel & Enterprise
The analysis, by Wakely Consulting Group, projects President Obamas health care law supported by the Patrick administration will tack an average of 3.7 percent on to premiums.
That would be on top of typical base rate increases, driven by hospital and doctor fees and demand for medical care, which have ranged from 2 to 4 percent in recent years.
National health overhaul rules could drive up premiums in Massachusetts, new study says - Business - The Boston Globe
Massachusetts Senate proposal MA 2170. This bill stipulates that physicians must participate in government run programs (Medicare, Medicaid, Massachusetts' state plan) in order to maintain state medical licensure. Furthermore, the bill states that physicians "must accept payment at the lowest of the statutory 20 reimbursement rate." Reimbursement rates would be set at 110% of Medicare billing, leaving physicians with very little to pay the general business expenses necessary to run a practice.
More than 70% of physicians polled indicated that the passage of such a law would encourage them to leave the state or retire early. They also expressed concern regarding the lower reimbursement rates, which would simply not allow them to earn enough income to stay in practice.
70% of Physicians Polled Would Consider Leaving Medicine if the Bill MA 2170,... -- CAMBRIDGE, Mass., April 28 /PRNewswire/ --
Now, now, now... You folks quit calling it a penalty.
It's a tax
-Geaux
What is a TAX but a penalty for living your life>? Gubmint has to get their pound of flesh out of it as to allow YOU to exist...
It's a collective contribution we agree to submit to a government body to improve the lives of all citizens.
