Factcheck.org: increasing health care costs not because of ObamaCare

[Freewill]

Obama?s Numbers (January 2014 Update)

This increase is modest by historical standards.

Other bonuses about changes since Obama took office from this report:

1) 3,246,000 net gain of private sector jobs since Obama took office. 2.5x more jobs in 5 year than in Bush's 8.

2) The unemployment rate in December was 6.7%. Lowest in 5 years.

3) "discouraged workers" is hardly the only reason for the low participation in the workforce. The other major factors are retirees and more disabled workers. Also the declining participation rate started before Obama took office.

4) All energy industries, including Big Oil, are booming.

Some negatives:

1) Public debt has risen greatly.

2) state and local jobs are declining. However federal jobs have increased.

One at at time, from the BLS:Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

 

[Freewill]

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

Employment, Hours, and Earnings from the Current Employment Statistics survey (National)

Looks to me that the country is back before the housing bubble burst. Yeah it is easy to start counting when the economy hit bottom due to democrat weak lending practices.

 

[Freewill]

Nonsense. You're ignoring the growth that took place and only counting the losses caused by Democrat policies. Raising the minimum-wage, extending unemployment.

Let's forget about how liberals cheered on illegal immigration, or encouraged borrowers to default on loans, and withdraw their savings. Let's forget how Democrats whined about how bad the economy was even before it took a nosedive, as if they wanted it. Democrats screwed everything up on purpose, then blamed it on Republicans. Wanna know why nothing gets done in Washington? Because the Dems decided that a sound economy doesn't assure they'll win elections. They took opposing views on every GOP talking-point. Smaller government, lower taxes, helping businesses to create jobs. Nope, they believe only in a welfare state. Nobody has the freedom to make their own choices in life. You have to ask for permission from the government on what to eat. How much you can earn. Where to shit.

Gee and how do you explain what happened in sept of 2008? We lost millions of millions of jobs.

IT WAS A BIPARTISAN FUCKING PROBLEM YOU FUCKING UNBELIEVABLE HACK!

Oh and here is a timeline of facts in regards to the housing bubble. What Frank and Dodd did in regards to Fannie and Freddie.

The fact you ignore that fact that Clinton repealed Glass Steagall speaks volumes. You cannot handle that fact in regards to what caused deregulated derivatives.

Try this hack boy.

2001

April: The Administration's FY02 budget declares that the size of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is "a potential problem," because "financial trouble of a large GSE could cause strong repercussions in financial markets, affecting Federally insured entities and economic activity." (2002 Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 142)
2002

May: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) calls for the disclosure and corporate governance principles contained in the President's 10-point plan for corporate responsibility to apply to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. (OMB Prompt Letter to OFHEO, 5/29/02)

2003

February: The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) releases a report explaining that unexpected problems at a GSE could immediately spread into financial sectors beyond the housing market.


September: Then-Treasury Secretary John Snow testifies before the House Financial Services Committee to recommend that Congress enact "legislation to create a new Federal agency to regulate and supervise the financial activities of our housing-related government sponsored enterprises" and set prudent and appropriate minimum capital adequacy requirements.


September: Then-House Financial Services Committee Ranking Member Barney Frank (D-MA) strongly disagrees with the Administration's assessment, saying "these two entities – Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac – are not facing any kind of financial crisis … The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing." (Stephen Labaton, "New Agency Proposed To Oversee Freddie Mac And Fannie Mae," The New York Times, 9/11/03)


October: Senator Thomas Carper (D-DE) refuses to acknowledge any necessity for GSE reforms, saying "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." (Sen. Carper, Hearing of Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, 10/16/03)


November: Then-Council of the Economic Advisers (CEA) Chairman Greg Mankiw explains that any "legislation to reform GSE regulation should empower the new regulator with sufficient strength and credibility to reduce systemic risk." To reduce the potential for systemic instability, the regulator would have "broad authority to set both risk-based and minimum capital standards" and "receivership powers necessary to wind down the affairs of a troubled GSE." (N. Gregory Mankiw, Remarks At The Conference Of State Bank Supervisors State Banking Summit And Leadership, 11/6/03)

2004

February: The President's FY05 Budget again highlights the risk posed by the explosive growth of the GSEs and their low levels of required capital and calls for creation of a new, world-class regulator: "The Administration has determined that the safety and soundness regulators of the housing GSEs lack sufficient power and stature to meet their responsibilities, and therefore … should be replaced with a new strengthened regulator." (2005 Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 83)


February: Then-CEA Chairman Mankiw cautions Congress to "not take [the financial market's] strength for granted." Again, the call from the Administration was to reduce this risk by "ensuring that the housing GSEs are overseen by an effective regulator." (N. Gregory Mankiw, Op-Ed, "Keeping Fannie And Freddie's House In Order," Financial Times, 2/24/04)


April: Rep. Frank ignores the warnings, accusing the Administration of creating an "artificial issue." At a speech to the Mortgage Bankers Association conference, Rep. Frank said "people tend to pay their mortgages. I don't think we are in any remote danger here. This focus on receivership, I think, is intended to create fears that aren't there." ("Frank: GSE Failure A Phony Issue," American Banker, 4/21/04)


June: Then-Treasury Deputy Secretary Samuel Bodman spotlights the risk posed by the GSEs and calls for reform, saying "We do not have a world-class system of supervision of the housing government sponsored enterprises (GSEs), even though the importance of the housing financial system that the GSEs serve demands the best in supervision to ensure the long-term vitality of that system. Therefore, the Administration has called for a new, first class, regulatory supervisor for the three housing GSEs: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Banking System." (Samuel Bodman, House Financial Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Testimony, 6/16/04)

2005

April: Then-Secretary Snow repeats his call for GSE reform, saying "Events that have transpired since I testified before this Committee in 2003 reinforce concerns over the systemic risks posed by the GSEs and further highlight the need for real GSE reform to ensure that our housing finance system remains a strong and vibrant source of funding for expanding homeownership opportunities in America … Half-measures will only exacerbate the risks to our financial system." (Secretary John W. Snow, "Testimony Before The U.S. House Financial Services Committee," 4/13/05)


July: Then-Minority Leader Harry Reid rejects legislation reforming GSEs, "while I favor improving oversight by our federal housing regulators to ensure safety and soundness, we cannot pass legislation that could limit Americans from owning homes and potentially harm our economy in the process." ("Dems Rip New Fannie Mae Regulatory Measure," United Press International, 7/28/05)


2007

August: President Bush emphatically calls on Congress to pass a reform package for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, saying "first things first when it comes to those two institutions. Congress needs to get them reformed, get them streamlined, get them focused, and then I will consider other options." (President George W. Bush, Press Conference, the White House, 8/9/07)


August: Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Chairman Christopher Dodd ignores the President's warnings and calls on him to "immediately reconsider his ill-advised" position. (Eric Dash, "Fannie Mae's Offer To Help Ease Credit Squeeze Is Rejected, As Critics Complain Of Opportunism," The New York Times, 8/11/07)


December: President Bush again warns Congress of the need to pass legislation reforming GSEs, saying "These institutions provide liquidity in the mortgage market that benefits millions of homeowners, and it is vital they operate safely and operate soundly. So I've called on Congress to pass legislation that strengthens independent regulation of the GSEs – and ensures they focus on their important housing mission. The GSE reform bill passed by the House earlier this year is a good start. But the Senate has not acted. And the United States Senate needs to pass this legislation soon." (President George W. Bush, Discusses Housing, the White House, 12/6/07)


2008

February: Assistant Treasury Secretary David Nason reiterates the urgency of reforms, saying "A new regulatory structure for the housing GSEs is essential if these entities are to continue to perform their public mission successfully." (David Nason, Testimony On Reforming GSE Regulation, Senate Committee On Banking, Housing And Urban Affairs, 2/7/08)


March: President Bush calls on Congress to take action and "move forward with reforms on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. They need to continue to modernize the FHA, as well as allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to homeowners to refinance their mortgages." (President George W. Bush, Remarks To The Economic Club Of New York, New York, NY, 3/14/08)


April: President Bush urges Congress to pass the much needed legislation and "modernize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. [There are] constructive things Congress can do that will encourage the housing market to correct quickly by … helping people stay in their homes." (President George W. Bush, Meeting With Cabinet, the White House, 4/14/08)


May: President Bush issues several pleas to Congress to pass legislation reforming Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac before the situation deteriorates further.

"Americans are concerned about making their mortgage payments and keeping their homes. Yet Congress has failed to pass legislation I have repeatedly requested to modernize the Federal Housing Administration that will help more families stay in their homes, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow state housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance sub-prime loans." (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/3/08)


"[T]he government ought to be helping creditworthy people stay in their homes. And one way we can do that – and Congress is making progress on this – is the reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. That reform will come with a strong, independent regulator." (President George W. Bush, Meeting With The Secretary Of The Treasury, the White House, 5/19/08)


"Congress needs to pass legislation to modernize the Federal Housing Administration, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance subprime loans." (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/31/08)

June: As foreclosure rates continued to rise in the first quarter, the President once again asks Congress to take the necessary measures to address this challenge, saying "we need to pass legislation to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac." (President George W. Bush, Remarks At Swearing In Ceremony For Secretary Of Housing And Urban Development, Washington, D.C., 6/6/08)


July: Congress heeds the President's call for action and passes reform legislation for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as it becomes clear that the institutions are failing.


September: Democrats in Congress forget their previous objections to GSE reforms, as Senator Dodd questions "why weren't we doing more, why did we wait almost a year before there were any significant steps taken to try to deal with this problem? … I have a lot of questions about where was the administration over the last eight years." (Dawn Kopecki, "Fannie Mae, Freddie 'House Of Cards' Prompts Takeover," Bloomberg, 9/9/08


Official White House archives.

Setting the Record Straight: Six Years of Unheeded Warnings for GSE Reform

How does it feel? How the fuck does it feel for the facts to utterly crush you and your stupid diatribe of left wing shit?

How does it feel that this country truly sank into unreal layers of shit only after the democrats took over power?

How the fuck does that feel?

Are you going to comment on the democrats propagating WMDs in Iraq before Bush took office?

Thought not. I know and you know you will not read the timeline.

Liberals, utterly fucking destroyed. What will they do? They will some how obfuscate, lie, pout and claim they really know what is going on.

Hypocrites.

the whole problem was that Bush only said it would be easier to be a dictator he didn't act like one. He could have solved all the problems through executive order but decided to follow the constitution.

 

[Jroc]

Obama?s Numbers (January 2014 Update)

This increase is modest by historical standards.

Other bonuses about changes since Obama took office from this report:

1) 3,246,000 net gain of private sector jobs since Obama took office. 2.5x more jobs in 5 year than in Bush's 8.

2) The unemployment rate in December was 6.7%. Lowest in 5 years.

3) "discouraged workers" is hardly the only reason for the low participation in the workforce. The other major factors are retirees and more disabled workers. Also the declining participation rate started before Obama took office.

4) All energy industries, including Big Oil, are booming.

Some negatives:

1) Public debt has risen greatly.

2) state and local jobs are declining. However federal jobs have increased.

There are fewer people working now than when Obama took office. there is a larger % of part time workers which do count as employed. The rich are getting richer and the income gap is widening because of Obama's failed policies and the fed artificially propping up the economy and the stock market. Only 31% of people approve of the way Obama is handling the economy. More people on food stamps, disability and Obamacare has not even fully kicked in yet. 17 trillion dollar debt ...... Obama's a disaster

 

[chuckklr98]

Your ignorance is astounding. You can't compare the number of people in the work force from the beginning of his term to the number at the end. That isn't how you measure net job gain. Any economist will tell you that. The reality is that job growth under bush was pathetic.

So how do you measure net job gain? I'm wondering how Obama can possibly come out ahead any way you measure it.

Do me a favor and google "more new jobs under Obama than Bush" and see how many links you find that back up my claims.

Any bullshit coming from Fox News or Forbes doesn't count. Non partisan sources.

Of more jobs were made under O's reign. All those full time jobs were split into 1=2 to part time.

 

[chuckklr98]

Obama?s Numbers (January 2014 Update)

This increase is modest by historical standards.

Other bonuses about changes since Obama took office from this report:

1) 3,246,000 net gain of private sector jobs since Obama took office. 2.5x more jobs in 5 year than in Bush's 8.

2) The unemployment rate in December was 6.7%. Lowest in 5 years.

3) "discouraged workers" is hardly the only reason for the low participation in the workforce. The other major factors are retirees and more disabled workers. Also the declining participation rate started before Obama took office.

4) All energy industries, including Big Oil, are booming.

Some negatives:

1) Public debt has risen greatly.

2) state and local jobs are declining. However federal jobs have increased.

There are fewer people working now than when Obama took office. there is a larger % of part time workers which do count as employed. The rich are getting richer and the income gap is widening because of Obama's failed policies and the fed artificially propping up the economy and the stock market. Only 31% of people approve of the way Obama is handling the economy. More people on food stamps, disability and Obamacare has not even fully kicked in yet. 17 trillion dollar debt ...... Obama's a disaster

Exactly! Obama claims we are in a recovery and 6.7 unemployment, yet the food stamp rolls have not gone down. Seems to me they would drop at the same rate as the unemployment #'s.

 

[P@triot]

Fraud is easy to look up.

Yes and you can't explain what makes my OP fraudulent.

Billy, are you asking a bunch of lying mother fucking right wing red neck republicans to engage in a serious perusal of facts and cause of something as complicated as heath care costs?

Why? You got a dog? You would get better conversation from your dog. Dog is smarter to.
But it is nice that you TRY and educated the retarded rethugs.

Ah yes - projecting. The favorite technique of the Dumbocrats. Lets see - lying (the market cornered by liberals) - Check! Red Necks (another market cornered by trailer park liberals who live off of government) - Check!

By the way, how fall down hilarious is is that [MENTION=35352]zeke[/MENTION] here thinks that costs (healthcare or otherwise) is a complicated issue?

Lets see - costs have risen under Obamacare while Obama guaranteed that costs would go down. People have lost their health insurance under Obamacare, while Obama guaranteed "if you like your plan, you can keep your plan". People have lost their doctor under Obamacare, while Obama guaranteed "if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor".

Wow....this is sooooo "complicated" (if you're a high school drop out liberal who spends all of their time getting high and desperate to live off of the government so that you don't have to work).

 

[P@triot]

Lol what are you 14? Again I never even mentioned Clinton. I never even assigned blame. You did.

You stupid ignorant ass. Clinton repealing Glass Steagall is very fucking relevant to the economic collapse. It created the deregulated derivatives.

Since that was a bipartisan act, I also hold republicans to account for that.

The fact you keep on ignoring that fact, is your way of saying you have no clue what the Glass Steagall Act was, or what significance it was in contributing to the economic problems.

Along with the notion that you had no clue about the timeline in regards to the Bush Administration warning Fannie and Freddie no less than 17 times from 2001 to 1008. All ignored by Dodd and Frank.

Go giggle away like the demented liberal you are. You have been utterly crushed in this debate.

Holding your own side accountable and placing blame on them when it is justified - something Dumbocrats are completely incapable of for some reason....

 

[oreo]

Ha.Ha. nice try. I seem to remember Obama PROMISING that a family of 4 would save $2500.00 dollars in premiums a year under Obamacare aka the Affordable Health Care Act--that is the not so Affordable Health care act.

Now how anyone actually believed that you could add 30 million of the uninsured to the insured in this country--pay for all the new FREE Medicade enrollees--subsidize certain incomes--so they could get medical insurance--and it wouldn't cost anyone another single penny and wouldn't add a dime to the deficit as Obama promised--is beyond my comprehension. Obamacare keeps this promise by raising premiums on middle class Americans. The have's are paying for the have nots.

Obamacare is nothing more than a sucker punch to the middle class of this country. Millions will be seeing higher medical monthly premiums (if they haven't seen it already) to off-set all of those that are getting it for free--and for all of those that are getting subsidized to obtain it. FACT OF SECOND GRADE MATH. BTW--My premium more than doubled. It went from $238.00 per month to $495.00 per month under Obamacare.

Welcome to your hope and change!

 

[zeke]

Hey owley. You still slobbering and spitting all over your damn keyboard? LMAO.

How many time did Repubs in Congress try and repeal Graham Leach? Was it one? Two? How many times before they finally found a damn weak ass President that was trying to gain favor with repubs for his upcoming impeachment?

But yea, Clinton should never be forgiven for signing that legislation. That was the housing collapse in a nut shell. It opened the door for every single shitty loan product that was put on the market.

But you are an idiot about Fannie and Freddie. They didn't start the ball rolling. And Franklin Raines should be in jail. But so should a lot of Wall Street people as well.

Of course the next words out of your mouth is how is was the CRA. Am I right? You know I am. Your bull shit is pretty predictable. Boring to. I win I win I win. LMAO.

 

[P@triot]

Hey owley. You still slobbering and spitting all over your damn keyboard? LMAO.

How many time did Repubs in Congress try and repeal Graham Leach? Was it one? Two? How many times before they finally found a damn weak ass President that was trying to gain favor with repubs for his upcoming impeachment?

But yea, Clinton should never be forgiven for signing that legislation. That was the housing collapse in a nut shell. It opened the door for every single shitty loan product that was put on the market.

But you are an idiot about Fannie and Freddie. They didn't start the ball rolling. And Franklin Raines should be in jail. But so should a lot of Wall Street people as well.

Of course the next words out of your mouth is how is was the CRA. Am I right? You know I am. Your bull shit is pretty predictable. Boring to. I win I win I win. LMAO.

Every time the government gets involved in something it shouldn't (healthcare, housing market, etc.), failure and ultimately collapses ensues.

Then the Dumbocrats step back, scratch their heads (because it is so "complicated" ) and then conclude the problem was the lack of government involvement. And the solution is more government (nothing like adding more of the problem to a problem!)

Lather. Rinese. Repeat.

 

[The Rabbi]

Hey owley. You still slobbering and spitting all over your damn keyboard? LMAO.

How many time did Repubs in Congress try and repeal Graham Leach? Was it one? Two? How many times before they finally found a damn weak ass President that was trying to gain favor with repubs for his upcoming impeachment?

But yea, Clinton should never be forgiven for signing that legislation. That was the housing collapse in a nut shell. It opened the door for every single shitty loan product that was put on the market.

But you are an idiot about Fannie and Freddie. They didn't start the ball rolling. And Franklin Raines should be in jail. But so should a lot of Wall Street people as well.

Of course the next words out of your mouth is how is was the CRA. Am I right? You know I am. Your bull shit is pretty predictable. Boring to. I win I win I win. LMAO.

It's Zeke, ignorant toothless stumpbroke of USMB, chiming in with his special brand of ignorance.
For starters, Gram,-Leach-Bliley was a GOP intiative that repealed Glass-Steagal. There was no need to repeal it, thus no initiative to do so.
Second, repeal of Glass Steagal in 1999 did not cause the financial meltdown 9 years later. Zero evidence of it.
Third, Clinton signed Gramm-Leach into law after his impeachment proceedings were over.

Really, look it up. You'd look less stupid before posting crap like this. Oh, too late.

 

[Spoonman]

Obama?s Numbers (January 2014 Update)

This increase is modest by historical standards.

Other bonuses about changes since Obama took office from this report:

1) 3,246,000 net gain of private sector jobs since Obama took office. 2.5x more jobs in 5 year than in Bush's 8.

2) The unemployment rate in December was 6.7%. Lowest in 5 years.

3) "discouraged workers" is hardly the only reason for the low participation in the workforce. The other major factors are retirees and more disabled workers. Also the declining participation rate started before Obama took office.

4) All energy industries, including Big Oil, are booming.

Some negatives:

1) Public debt has risen greatly.

2) state and local jobs are declining. However federal jobs have increased.

So you are telling us there is inflation - which the Obama administration is telling us there isn't

Wasn't one of the main objectives of a healthcare program to control healthcare costs and make it more affordable? So what you are telling me is the term the Affordable Care Act is a misnomer, it isn't really affordable. It should have been called the RDW Act. The Redistribution of Wealth Act. because that is all it seem to have achieved. It has taken healthcare from more people than it has given it to. that's pretty sad