JakeStarkey
Diamond Member
- Aug 10, 2009
- 168,037
- 16,540
- 2,165
- Banned
- #101
The lying like that on your part is some of the problem.
Our far right has real trouble realizing they are not the mainstream of America.
John Boehner trashes conservative groups who force agenda
- Thread starter Blackrook
- Start date
Our far right has real trouble realizing they are not the mainstream of America.
C_Clayton_Jones
Diamond Member
Democrats will be happy to hear that.
Dad2three
Gold Member
The lying like that on your part is some of the problem.
Our far right has real trouble realizing they are not the mainstream of America.
WHAT'S THE LIE?
bripat9643
Diamond Member
- Apr 1, 2011
- 170,170
- 47,418
- 2,180
I don't know weather it's the largest tax increase EVER, it's definitely not funded. Only scumbags would claim Obamacare is funded.
Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
Seawytch
Information isnt Advocacy
Dad2three
Gold Member
Obamacare law was ‘funded’ and expected to save billions; not so for Medicare Part D
National Bureau of Economic Research (a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization), told us by email, "It's certainly true that the ACA was funded while Medicare Part D was not."
"The ACA was funded in the sense that taxes were increased to pay for the estimated expenditure cost. Medicare Part D provided a new benefit with a substantial long-run cost... and did not raise any taxes."
Obamacare law was ‘funded’ and expected to save billions; not so for Medicare Part D
MORON POS LIAR
Stephanie
Diamond Member
- Jul 11, 2004
- 70,230
- 10,872
- 2,040
yeah right it's funded blaa blaa blaaa. and it is one of the largest tax increases on top of creating a FASCIST Federal government by FORCING the people to BUY a product or be fined. take a gander. 65 BILLION DOLLARS off the uninsured and that would be your young adult CHILDREN. the ALREADY insured 32BILLION. Parents of special needs children: 13.2BILLION
and the MIDDLE CLASS: 13BILLION
and the MIDDLE CLASS: 13BILLION
Dad2three
Gold Member
yeah right it's funded blaa blaa blaaa. and it is one of the largest tax increases on top of creating a FASCIST Federal government by FORCING the people to BUY a product or be fined. take a gander. 65 BILLION DOLLARS off the uninsured and that would be your young adult CHILDREN. the ALREADY insured 32BILLION. Parents of special needs children: 13.2BILLION
and the MIDDLE CLASS: 13BILLION
Congress Passes Socialized Medicine and Mandates Health Insurance -In 1798
Congress Passes Socialized Medicine and Mandates Health Insurance -In 1798
The law imposes a 3.8 percent tax on net investment income that applies to people who earn more than $200,000 a year for singles, or $250,000 for joint filers. It also levies an additional Medicare tax of 0.9 percent on wages, salaries and self-employment income for people in those income groups
False Tax Claims
Most of Those Outraged by Obamacare Enjoy Big Taxpayer Subsidies Themselves
Why do conservatives have such a visceral hatred of a market-based expansion of health care coverage once championed by the Heritage Foundation – a scheme that their last presidential candidate called an expression of “the ultimate conservatism”?
It’s not only because it was passed by a Democratic president they loathe. According to a recent study of Republican base voters conducted by Democracy Corps, Obamacare “goes to the heart of Republican base thinking about the essential political battle.”
They think they face a victorious Democratic Party that is intent on expanding government to increase dependency and therefore electoral support… [They believe that] insuring the uninsured dramatically grows those dependent on government.
Tea Party participants, in particular, were very focused on those who claim “rights” in the form of government services, without taking responsibility for themselves.
Race, according to the study’s authors, plays an unspoken role in determining who is and isn’t counted among the “deserving” poor.
It also dovetails perfectly with the overarching mythology that animates today’s conservative movement: the belief that there exists a large group of shiftless people whose lifestyles are subsidized by an increasingly overburdened class of hard-working Americans. It’s the ‘makers versus takers’ narrative that animates the movement – from the lowliest right-wing blogger to Mitt Romney’s claim that 47 percent of Americans don’t pay taxes and refuse to take care of themselves.
It’s also complete nonsense. The reality is that virtually all Americans are, at various stages in their lives, both “makers” and “takers.”
Most of Those Outraged by Obamacare Enjoy Big Taxpayer Subsidies Themselves | BillMoyers.com
bripat9643
Diamond Member
- Apr 1, 2011
- 170,170
- 47,418
- 2,180
Obamacare law was ‘funded’ and expected to save billions; not so for Medicare Part D
National Bureau of Economic Research (a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization), told us by email, "It's certainly true that the ACA was funded while Medicare Part D was not."
"The ACA was funded in the sense that taxes were increased to pay for the estimated expenditure cost. Medicare Part D provided a new benefit with a substantial long-run cost... and did not raise any taxes."
Obamacare law was ‘funded’ and expected to save billions; not so for Medicare Part D
MORON POS LIAR
!0 years of revenue were used to fund 6 years of the program. That isn't "funded." That's fraud.
Furthermore, the costs are running way above predictions. Who would have ever predicted that?
bripat9643
Diamond Member
- Apr 1, 2011
- 170,170
- 47,418
- 2,180
What does "getting real" entail? Please be specific. What policy changes should Republican support?
Dad2three
Gold Member
Dad2three
Gold Member
Obamacare law was ‘funded’ and expected to save billions; not so for Medicare Part D
National Bureau of Economic Research (a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization), told us by email, "It's certainly true that the ACA was funded while Medicare Part D was not."
"The ACA was funded in the sense that taxes were increased to pay for the estimated expenditure cost. Medicare Part D provided a new benefit with a substantial long-run cost... and did not raise any taxes."
Obamacare law was ‘funded’ and expected to save billions; not so for Medicare Part D
MORON POS LIAR
!0 years of revenue were used to fund 6 years of the program. That isn't "funded." That's fraud.
Furthermore, the costs are running way above predictions. Who would have ever predicted that?
MORE right wing bullshit NOT based in reality. Shocking
YOU posited it wasn't funded. You lied. Simple moron
bripat9643
Diamond Member
- Apr 1, 2011
- 170,170
- 47,418
- 2,180
Obamacare law was ‘funded’ and expected to save billions; not so for Medicare Part D
National Bureau of Economic Research (a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization), told us by email, "It's certainly true that the ACA was funded while Medicare Part D was not."
"The ACA was funded in the sense that taxes were increased to pay for the estimated expenditure cost. Medicare Part D provided a new benefit with a substantial long-run cost... and did not raise any taxes."
Obamacare law was ‘funded’ and expected to save billions; not so for Medicare Part D
MORON POS LIAR
!0 years of revenue were used to fund 6 years of the program. That isn't "funded." That's fraud.
Furthermore, the costs are running way above predictions. Who would have ever predicted that?
MORE right wing bullshit NOT based in reality. Shocking
YOU posited it wasn't funded. You lied. Simple moron
Those are the facts as published by the CBO.
Obamacare is a colossal fraud. Any private company that tried to put something like that over on the public would have all its executives doing a perp walk while being escorted by the FBI.
Dad2three
Gold Member
Obamacare law was ‘funded’ and expected to save billions; not so for Medicare Part D
National Bureau of Economic Research (a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization), told us by email, "It's certainly true that the ACA was funded while Medicare Part D was not."
"The ACA was funded in the sense that taxes were increased to pay for the estimated expenditure cost. Medicare Part D provided a new benefit with a substantial long-run cost... and did not raise any taxes."
Obamacare law was ‘funded’ and expected to save billions; not so for Medicare Part D
MORON POS LIAR
!0 years of revenue were used to fund 6 years of the program. That isn't "funded." That's fraud.
Furthermore, the costs are running way above predictions. Who would have ever predicted that?
MORE right wing bullshit NOT based in reality. Shocking
YOU posited it wasn't funded. You lied. Simple moron
Those are the facts as published by the CBO.
Obamacare is a colossal fraud. Any private company that tried to put something like that over on the public would have all its executives doing a perp walk while being escorted by the FBI.
According to CBO it's 100%+ funded dumbass
CBO estimates that on net the ACA is expected to reduce the federal deficit, but since the passage of the law, CBO has only continued to update the estimates for the coverage provisions of the ACA which are expected to result in increases in federal spending. Overall, the coverage provisions in the ACA are expected to increase gross federal costs by $1.8 trillion over the 2015-2024 period. Medicaid and CHIP outlays are expected to increase by $792 billion over the 2015 to 2024 period as a result of the ACA coverage provisions accounting for 43 percent of the total gross costs.
CBO estimates that state spending would increase by about $46 billion from 2015 to 2024 as a result of the ACA coverage provisions. Compared to the February 2014 estimates, the federal cost estimates did not change but the estimate for state costs declined from $70 billion to $46 billion. (Figure 9) While CBO does not provide a direct explanation for this, the majority of this change is likely tied to reducing the estimate of those eligible for coverage without the ACA Medicaid expansion (reimbursed at the regular state match rate). Since overall enrollment and federal costs are the same as February, the higher estimate of newly eligible enrollees appears to be offset by a lower estimate of cost per enrollee.
Figure 9: CBO’s latest estimates show a drop in state spending for Medicaid and CHIP from 2015-2024 due to the coverage provisions in the ACA.
A Look At CBO Projections For Medicaid and CHIP
bripat9643
Diamond Member
- Apr 1, 2011
- 170,170
- 47,418
- 2,180
Obamacare law was ‘funded’ and expected to save billions; not so for Medicare Part D
National Bureau of Economic Research (a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization), told us by email, "It's certainly true that the ACA was funded while Medicare Part D was not."
"The ACA was funded in the sense that taxes were increased to pay for the estimated expenditure cost. Medicare Part D provided a new benefit with a substantial long-run cost... and did not raise any taxes."
Obamacare law was ‘funded’ and expected to save billions; not so for Medicare Part D
MORON POS LIAR
!0 years of revenue were used to fund 6 years of the program. That isn't "funded." That's fraud.
Furthermore, the costs are running way above predictions. Who would have ever predicted that?
MORE right wing bullshit NOT based in reality. Shocking
YOU posited it wasn't funded. You lied. Simple moron
Those are the facts as published by the CBO.
Obamacare is a colossal fraud. Any private company that tried to put something like that over on the public would have all its executives doing a perp walk while being escorted by the FBI.
According to CBO it's 100%+ funded dumbass
CBO estimates that on net the ACA is expected to reduce the federal deficit, but since the passage of the law, CBO has only continued to update the estimates for the coverage provisions of the ACA which are expected to result in increases in federal spending. Overall, the coverage provisions in the ACA are expected to increase gross federal costs by $1.8 trillion over the 2015-2024 period. Medicaid and CHIP outlays are expected to increase by $792 billion over the 2015 to 2024 period as a result of the ACA coverage provisions accounting for 43 percent of the total gross costs.
CBO estimates that state spending would increase by about $46 billion from 2015 to 2024 as a result of the ACA coverage provisions. Compared to the February 2014 estimates, the federal cost estimates did not change but the estimate for state costs declined from $70 billion to $46 billion. (Figure 9) While CBO does not provide a direct explanation for this, the majority of this change is likely tied to reducing the estimate of those eligible for coverage without the ACA Medicaid expansion (reimbursed at the regular state match rate). Since overall enrollment and federal costs are the same as February, the higher estimate of newly eligible enrollees appears to be offset by a lower estimate of cost per enrollee.
Figure 9: CBO’s latest estimates show a drop in state spending for Medicaid and CHIP from 2015-2024 due to the coverage provisions in the ACA.
A Look At CBO Projections For Medicaid and CHIP
Nothing you posted shows ACA is fully funded. The CBO reported that 10 years of revenue would be used to fund 6 years of the program. That isn't "fully funded."
You claim is obvious bullshit.
Dad2three
Gold Member
Obamacare law was ‘funded’ and expected to save billions; not so for Medicare Part D
National Bureau of Economic Research (a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization), told us by email, "It's certainly true that the ACA was funded while Medicare Part D was not."
"The ACA was funded in the sense that taxes were increased to pay for the estimated expenditure cost. Medicare Part D provided a new benefit with a substantial long-run cost... and did not raise any taxes."
Obamacare law was ‘funded’ and expected to save billions; not so for Medicare Part D
MORON POS LIAR
!0 years of revenue were used to fund 6 years of the program. That isn't "funded." That's fraud.
Furthermore, the costs are running way above predictions. Who would have ever predicted that?
MORE right wing bullshit NOT based in reality. Shocking
YOU posited it wasn't funded. You lied. Simple moron
Those are the facts as published by the CBO.
Obamacare is a colossal fraud. Any private company that tried to put something like that over on the public would have all its executives doing a perp walk while being escorted by the FBI.
According to CBO it's 100%+ funded dumbass
CBO estimates that on net the ACA is expected to reduce the federal deficit, but since the passage of the law, CBO has only continued to update the estimates for the coverage provisions of the ACA which are expected to result in increases in federal spending. Overall, the coverage provisions in the ACA are expected to increase gross federal costs by $1.8 trillion over the 2015-2024 period. Medicaid and CHIP outlays are expected to increase by $792 billion over the 2015 to 2024 period as a result of the ACA coverage provisions accounting for 43 percent of the total gross costs.
CBO estimates that state spending would increase by about $46 billion from 2015 to 2024 as a result of the ACA coverage provisions. Compared to the February 2014 estimates, the federal cost estimates did not change but the estimate for state costs declined from $70 billion to $46 billion. (Figure 9) While CBO does not provide a direct explanation for this, the majority of this change is likely tied to reducing the estimate of those eligible for coverage without the ACA Medicaid expansion (reimbursed at the regular state match rate). Since overall enrollment and federal costs are the same as February, the higher estimate of newly eligible enrollees appears to be offset by a lower estimate of cost per enrollee.
Figure 9: CBO’s latest estimates show a drop in state spending for Medicaid and CHIP from 2015-2024 due to the coverage provisions in the ACA.
A Look At CBO Projections For Medicaid and CHIP
Nothing you posted shows ACA is fully funded. The CBO reported that 10 years of revenue would be used to fund 6 years of the program. That isn't "fully funded."
You claim is obvious bullshit.
WHAT THE FUK DO YOU "THINK" THIS MEAN DUMBAS?
What Would Be the Major Effects of Repealing the ACA?
CBO and JCT estimate that repealing the ACA would have several major effects, relative to the projections under current law:
Including the budgetary effects of macroeconomic feedback, repealing the ACA would increase federal budget deficits by $137 billion over the 2016–2025 period. That estimate takes into account the proposal’s impact on federal revenues and direct (or mandatory) spending, incorporating the net effects of two components:
- Excluding the effects of macroeconomic feedback—as has been done for previous estimates related to the ACA (and most other CBO cost estimates)—CBO and JCT estimate that federal deficits would increase by $353 billion over the 2016–2025 period if the ACA was repealed.
Budgetary and Economic Effects of Repealing the Affordable Care Act
bripat9643
Diamond Member
- Apr 1, 2011
- 170,170
- 47,418
- 2,180
According to CBO it's 100%+ funded dumbass
CBO estimates that on net the ACA is expected to reduce the federal deficit, but since the passage of the law, CBO has only continued to update the estimates for the coverage provisions of the ACA which are expected to result in increases in federal spending. Overall, the coverage provisions in the ACA are expected to increase gross federal costs by $1.8 trillion over the 2015-2024 period. Medicaid and CHIP outlays are expected to increase by $792 billion over the 2015 to 2024 period as a result of the ACA coverage provisions accounting for 43 percent of the total gross costs.
CBO estimates that state spending would increase by about $46 billion from 2015 to 2024 as a result of the ACA coverage provisions. Compared to the February 2014 estimates, the federal cost estimates did not change but the estimate for state costs declined from $70 billion to $46 billion. (Figure 9) While CBO does not provide a direct explanation for this, the majority of this change is likely tied to reducing the estimate of those eligible for coverage without the ACA Medicaid expansion (reimbursed at the regular state match rate). Since overall enrollment and federal costs are the same as February, the higher estimate of newly eligible enrollees appears to be offset by a lower estimate of cost per enrollee.
Figure 9: CBO’s latest estimates show a drop in state spending for Medicaid and CHIP from 2015-2024 due to the coverage provisions in the ACA.
A Look At CBO Projections For Medicaid and CHIP
Nothing you posted shows ACA is fully funded. The CBO reported that 10 years of revenue would be used to fund 6 years of the program. That isn't "fully funded."
You claim is obvious bullshit.
WHAT THE FUK DO YOU "THINK" THIS MEAN DUMBAS?
What Would Be the Major Effects of Repealing the ACA?
CBO and JCT estimate that repealing the ACA would have several major effects, relative to the projections under current law:
Including the budgetary effects of macroeconomic feedback, repealing the ACA would increase federal budget deficits by $137 billion over the 2016–2025 period. That estimate takes into account the proposal’s impact on federal revenues and direct (or mandatory) spending, incorporating the net effects of two components:
- Excluding the effects of macroeconomic feedback—as has been done for previous estimates related to the ACA (and most other CBO cost estimates)—CBO and JCT estimate that federal deficits would increase by $353 billion over the 2016–2025 period if the ACA was repealed.
Budgetary and Economic Effects of Repealing the Affordable Care Act
You're quoting the same agency that said the ACA was "funded" even though it used 10 years of revenue to pay for 6 years of benefits.
You're a gullible dumbass.
Now crawl back into your hole.
Dad2three
Gold Member
According to CBO it's 100%+ funded dumbass
CBO estimates that on net the ACA is expected to reduce the federal deficit, but since the passage of the law, CBO has only continued to update the estimates for the coverage provisions of the ACA which are expected to result in increases in federal spending. Overall, the coverage provisions in the ACA are expected to increase gross federal costs by $1.8 trillion over the 2015-2024 period. Medicaid and CHIP outlays are expected to increase by $792 billion over the 2015 to 2024 period as a result of the ACA coverage provisions accounting for 43 percent of the total gross costs.
CBO estimates that state spending would increase by about $46 billion from 2015 to 2024 as a result of the ACA coverage provisions. Compared to the February 2014 estimates, the federal cost estimates did not change but the estimate for state costs declined from $70 billion to $46 billion. (Figure 9) While CBO does not provide a direct explanation for this, the majority of this change is likely tied to reducing the estimate of those eligible for coverage without the ACA Medicaid expansion (reimbursed at the regular state match rate). Since overall enrollment and federal costs are the same as February, the higher estimate of newly eligible enrollees appears to be offset by a lower estimate of cost per enrollee.
Figure 9: CBO’s latest estimates show a drop in state spending for Medicaid and CHIP from 2015-2024 due to the coverage provisions in the ACA.
A Look At CBO Projections For Medicaid and CHIP
Nothing you posted shows ACA is fully funded. The CBO reported that 10 years of revenue would be used to fund 6 years of the program. That isn't "fully funded."
You claim is obvious bullshit.
WHAT THE FUK DO YOU "THINK" THIS MEAN DUMBAS?
What Would Be the Major Effects of Repealing the ACA?
CBO and JCT estimate that repealing the ACA would have several major effects, relative to the projections under current law:
Including the budgetary effects of macroeconomic feedback, repealing the ACA would increase federal budget deficits by $137 billion over the 2016–2025 period. That estimate takes into account the proposal’s impact on federal revenues and direct (or mandatory) spending, incorporating the net effects of two components:
- Excluding the effects of macroeconomic feedback—as has been done for previous estimates related to the ACA (and most other CBO cost estimates)—CBO and JCT estimate that federal deficits would increase by $353 billion over the 2016–2025 period if the ACA was repealed.
Budgetary and Economic Effects of Repealing the Affordable Care Act
You're quoting the same agency that said the ACA was "funded" even though it used 10 years of revenue to pay for 6 years of benefits.
You're a gullible dumbass.
Now crawl back into your hole.
DUMBFUKK
CBO and JCT estimate that federal deficits would increase by $353 billion over the 2016–2025 period if the ACA was repealed.
oreo
Gold Member
Well, I am not certain what the minority of the "Reich" wing base expects. Do they understand that Obama has what is called a VETO pen. So when for the 300th time some right wing nut case brings up defunding Obamacare--it ain't gonna happen. Shutting down the government or threatening too, only backfires on the Republican party. That means that Republicans will lose the Presidential election--and we'll have to deal with another democrat, probably Hillary Clinton that won't do border security, that won't do anything about Obamacare, and that will refuse to do anything about Planned parenthood.
Boehner is right. False prophets, unrealistic goals. I don't blame Boehner at all for quitting--who could stand to listen to another 4 years of this, after Hillary Clinton wins.
Similar threads
New Topics
-
Are there here users of John Deere equipment. You may have a problem- Started by Robert W
- Replies: 0
-
Did Trump Start the War With Iran To Loosen Russian Oil Export Restrictions?- Started by citygator
- Replies: 0
-
Where Are The Democrats In Supporting Anything Positive?- Started by toobfreak
- Replies: 2
-
-
Feminist Director Fights Trump's War on Women By Making Terrible Movie that Loses Millions of Dollars- Started by Captain Creeper
- Replies: 7
