To ignite the economy:

[editec]

It really cracks me up when you clueless devotees of conservatism complain about the Obama health care bill.

It was actaully modeled on the Republican plan.

You see, kids, it forces Americans to buy insurance from PRIVATE companies.

Now what do political sicentists call a government where the government works on behalf of private corporations, again?

Communism?

No that's obviously not the word.

Socialism?

No, not that, either

Start with an F, rhymes with CASHism...


You got it kids. In Poli-sci terms we call that kind of government a FASCIST government.

Kinda like socialism, only its social benefits only accrue to the wealthy who control the government.

 

[expat_panama]

...40,000 new agents is just a typical GOP lie.

We'll understand you made that up, unless you can provide links to GOP websites with the 40k number plus other links showing that the number was intentionally deceitfully false.

YOU are the one who posted the 40,000 number...

Hello, is anyone home? My posts are not a Republican website. I am not even a member of the Republican party. You made up the goofy idea that "...40,000 new agents is just a typical GOP lie..." because there are no Republican websites (not even atypical ones) with that number.

If you're not aware that you're saying things that aren't true then your lying may be pathological. I'm not trained in dealing with sick people so I'll have to sit the rest of this one out.

 

[code1211]

I stand corrected. I was also in error as to the exponential expansion from law to regulation as shown below:

6 Pages of Obamacare Equals 429 Pages of Regulations - US News and World Report

Giving proof to Main Street's worries that President Obama's healthcare reform will lead to thousands of new and costly regulations, the Department of Health and Human Services has taken one small section of the law and written enough new rules to every page of Obama's campaign book, The Audacity of Hope—plus another 45 pages. [Check out a roundup of political cartoons on healthcare.]

Section 3022 of the law, which is about the Medicare shared savings program, take up just six pages in the 907-page Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. But HHS has turned that into 429 pages of new regulations and that's too much, says Republican Wyoming Sen. John Barrasso, a practicing doctor.

"Regulations increase the cost of doing business," he says. He distributed a fact sheet on the book of regulations to fellow Republicans this week. [See photos of the Obamas behind the scenes.]

You can see for yourself what he's talking about. Here is the link to the actual law. Section 3022 is on pages 297-302.

Same bullshit. Those regulations are 17 pages long (and that's being generous). The new regulatory language going into the CFR starts at page 172 of this 189 page document.

US News and World report is lying?

 

[code1211]

Who really cares how long the law and the regulations are? It's the effect that's important. I could write a government regulation that would bring American business to a screeching halt in one sentence: "All for-profit organizations in the United States must have all their business decisions approved by Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid". There you go. Everyone's completely fucked from that point on. Conversely I could write 10,000 pages of bullshit that won't have any effect whatsoever.

The point is that whether it's one page or 10,000 pages, Obamacare is a financial disaster for American business and any liberal argument to the contrary is simply laughable.

Pure dogma.

Why, in your own words, do you feel it's a financial disaster? I got a tax cut as a result of the legislation.

I got a tax cut, too, but that was not a part of Obamacare.

It was another tactic to spur the economy. Interesting approach that this guy has. If he wants to help the economy, he cuts taxes. If he wants to get votes he demands that the Congress increase taxes. All he ever talks about is raising taxes.

Is his real goal to get re-elected or to help the economy? Does he think a bad economy is good for or hurtful for his chances to get re-elected?

If his campaign is to keep the economy in the dumper, what does this tell us?

 

[code1211]

It really cracks me up when you clueless devotees of conservatism complain about the Obama health care bill.

It was actaully modeled on the Republican plan.

You see, kids, it forces Americans to buy insurance from PRIVATE companies.

Now what do political sicentists call a government where the government works on behalf of private corporations, again?

Communism?

No that's obviously not the word.

Socialism?

No, not that, either

Start with an F, rhymes with CASHism...


You got it kids. In Poli-sci terms we call that kind of government a FASCIST government.

Kinda like socialism, only its social benefits only accrue to the wealthy who control the government.

When did Republicans propose this? Who sponsored the bill?

 

[code1211]

We'll understand you made that up, unless you can provide links to GOP websites with the 40k number plus other links showing that the number was intentionally deceitfully false.

YOU are the one who posted the 40,000 number...

Hello, is anyone home? My posts are not a Republican website. I am not even a member of the Republican party. You made up the goofy idea that "...40,000 new agents is just a typical GOP lie..." because there are no Republican websites (not even atypical ones) with that number.

If you're not aware that you're saying things that aren't true then your lying may be pathological. I'm not trained in dealing with sick people so I'll have to sit the rest of this one out.

Again, moral of the story: More IRS agents are needed to enforce the ever more complex and unintelligible rules and regulations of our tax code. Weather it's just the same old social engineering, picking winners and losers, paying back the party faithful or enforcing the injustices of Obamacare, we are going to need more and more agents of Big Brother to keep us in line.


Review & Outlook: 5,100 More IRS Agents - WSJ.com
President Obama's fiscal 2012 budget doesn't cut much of anything (see above), and certainly not the Internal Revenue Service. The White House is requesting that the most beloved of all government agencies get an additional 5,100 agents next year, no doubt to wring further tax revenue from Americans. The White ...

16,500 more IRS agents needed to enforce Obamacare | J.P. Freire | Beltway Confidential | Washington Examiner
A new analysis by the Joint Economic Committee and the House Ways & Means Committee minority staff estimates up to 16,500 new IRS personnel will be needed to collect, examine and audit new tax information mandated on families and small businesses in the ‘reconciliation’ bill being taken up by the U.S. House of Representatives this weekend. .



IRS Needs 1,054 New Agents for Obamacare Including 81 to Enforce Racist Tanning Spa Tax | The Gateway Pundit
The Internal Revenue Service says it will need an battalion of 1,054 new auditors and staffers and new facilities at a cost to taxpayers of more than $359 million in fiscal 2012 just to watch over the initial implementation of President Obama’s healthcare reforms. Among the new corps will be 81 workers assigned to make sure tanning salons pay a new 10 percent excise tax. Their cost: $11.5 million.

 

[Greenbeard]

US News and World report is lying?

"But HHS has turned that into 429 pages of new regulations and that's too much, says Republican Wyoming Sen. John Barrasso, a practicing doctor." More like John Barrasso is lying (or, perhaps, doesn't know how to read regs) and US News is being a shitty news outlet.

Again, the Medicare shared savings final regs take up 17 pages. Final regs come with an extended call-and-response in which virtually every comment made on the draft regs during the comment period (when the public and stakeholders get to weigh in with suggested changes to the proposed rule) is laid out and addressed; HHS explains its reaction to each public comment and how it incorporated it or why it chose not to. It walks through every line/section of the final regulations, offering that background and explaining its rationale for why that section came out the way it did. The document also includes things like an extended introduction that provides the context and legal authority for the regulation, as well as the required impact analysis of the regs conducted by HHS.

All that gets packaged together in the Federal Register and you come out with a few hundred pages. But those aren't hundreds of pages of regulations, the actual regulations are at the end of the document. And, in this case, the actual regulations take up about 17 pages.

I linked to them so you can see what this actually looks like.

When did Republicans propose this? Who sponsored the bill?

1993: Bill Summary & Status - 103rd Congress (1993 - 1994) - S.1770 - THOMAS (Library of Congress)

Senator John Chaffee introduced it but the co-sponsors included the Senate Republican leadership (i.e. Bob Dole):

Sen Bennett, Robert F. [UT] - 11/22/1993
Sen Bond, Christopher S. [MO] - 11/22/1993
Sen Boren, David L. [OK] - 5/17/1994
Sen Cohen, William S. [ME] - 11/22/1993
Sen Danforth, John C. [MO] - 11/22/1993
Sen Dole, Robert J. [KS] - 11/22/1993
Sen Domenici, Pete V. [NM] - 11/22/1993
Sen Durenberger, Dave [MN] - 11/22/1993
Sen Faircloth, Lauch [NC] - 11/22/1993
Sen Gorton, Slade [WA] - 11/22/1993
Sen Grassley, Chuck [IA] - 11/22/1993
Sen Hatch, Orrin G. [UT] - 11/22/1993
Sen Hatfield, Mark O. [OR] - 11/22/1993
Sen Kassebaum, Nancy Landon [KS] - 11/22/1993
Sen Kerrey, J. Robert [NE] - 5/17/1994
Sen Lugar, Richard G. [IN] - 11/22/1993
Sen Simpson, Alan K. [WY] - 11/22/1993
Sen Specter, Arlen [PA] - 11/22/1993
Sen Stevens, Ted [AK] - 11/22/1993
Sen Warner, John [VA] - 11/22/1993
Sen Brown, Hank [CO] - 11/22/1993(withdrawn - 10/4/1994)

This was the Senate Republican alternative to the Clinton health plan. Notable features of the legislation include:

• Universal access to health insurance coverage, in part through premium assistance to low-income individuals who don't quality for Medicaid (ultimately up to 240% of the federal poverty line)
• A mandate on employers to provide health insurance plans to employees
• Requirements for qualified heath plans to meet standards of
  • guaranteed eligibility, availability, and renewability of health insurance coverage
  • nondiscrimination based on health status (i.e. eliminating pre-existing conditions)
  • benefits offered
  • insurer financial solvency
  • enrollment process
  • premium rating limitations (allowing variation in premiums based only on age and family)
  • risk adjustment
  • consumer protection
• The formation of individual and small employer purchasing groups
• Requirements that the Secretary of Health and Human Services, in consultation with the Secretary of Labor, establish standards for large employer plans similar to requirements applicable to small employer plans
• Formation of a Benefits Commission to develop a standard (minimum) benefits package that any qualified health benefits plan must offer
• Enumeration of state responsibilities in implementing state insurance market reforms
• An individual mandate requiring all citizens to be covered by a health plan
• Certain alterations to tax law, including an excise tax for excess contributions to medical care savings accounts
• Quality assurance programs, including the creation of a national health data system

 

[dblack]

It really cracks me up when you clueless devotees of conservatism complain about the Obama health care bill.

It was actaully modeled on the Republican plan.

You see, kids, it forces Americans to buy insurance from PRIVATE companies.

Now what do political sicentists call a government where the government works on behalf of private corporations, again?

Communism?

No that's obviously not the word.

Socialism?

No, not that, either

Start with an F, rhymes with CASHism...


You got it kids. In Poli-sci terms we call that kind of government a FASCIST government.

Kinda like socialism, only its social benefits only accrue to the wealthy who control the government.

So, it is pretty funny (or sadly hypocritical perhaps) that the bill is based on a Republican plan. But it's even more pathetic the Democrats passed it, wouldn't you say?

That's what I really don't get overall about Republican bitterness toward Obama. You'd the think the bulk of Republicans, or at the very least those who supported Bush, would LOVE Obama. He's basically continued every one of Bush's policies. I'm not sure what they're so upset about.

 

[edthecynic]

...Obama cut taxes.

Sure, he said he cut taxes, and he didn't. Ramming though Obamacare alone meant so many new hikes it even included hiring 40,000 new IRS workers.

Every time CON$ mindlessly parrot this GOP scripted lie the number gets bigger!

We'll understand you made that up, unless you can provide links to GOP websites with the 40k number plus other links showing that the number was intentionally deceitfully false.

YOU are the one who posted the 40,000 number...

Hello, is anyone home? My posts are not a Republican website. I am not even a member of the Republican party. You made up the goofy idea that "...40,000 new agents is just a typical GOP lie..." because there are no Republican websites (not even atypical ones) with that number.

If you're not aware that you're saying things that aren't true then your lying may be pathological. I'm not trained in dealing with sick people so I'll have to sit the rest of this one out.

Whenever CON$ get caught with their foot in their lying mouth, they play dumb.

The GOP lie is that the health care bill calls for the hiring of new IRS agents. What I said was every time you stupid drones retell the lie the number of agents gets exaggerated even more, like YOUR 40,000 number. So it's obvious I was accusing YOU of PADDING the GOP lie. Nowhere did I say the 40,000 number came from the GOP, I clearly said the 40,000 number was YOUR exaggeration of the original GOP lie.

 

[edthecynic]

YOU are the one who posted the 40,000 number...

Hello, is anyone home? My posts are not a Republican website. I am not even a member of the Republican party. You made up the goofy idea that "...40,000 new agents is just a typical GOP lie..." because there are no Republican websites (not even atypical ones) with that number.

If you're not aware that you're saying things that aren't true then your lying may be pathological. I'm not trained in dealing with sick people so I'll have to sit the rest of this one out.

Again, moral of the story: More IRS agents are needed to enforce the ever more complex and unintelligible rules and regulations of our tax code. Weather it's just the same old social engineering, picking winners and losers, paying back the party faithful or enforcing the injustices of Obamacare, we are going to need more and more agents of Big Brother to keep us in line.


Review & Outlook: 5,100 More IRS Agents - WSJ.com
President Obama's fiscal 2012 budget doesn't cut much of anything (see above), and certainly not the Internal Revenue Service. The White House is requesting that the most beloved of all government agencies get an additional 5,100 agents next year, no doubt to wring further tax revenue from Americans. The White ...

16,500 more IRS agents needed to enforce Obamacare | J.P. Freire | Beltway Confidential | Washington Examiner
A new analysis by the Joint Economic Committee and the House Ways & Means Committee minority staff estimates up to 16,500 new IRS personnel will be needed to collect, examine and audit new tax information mandated on families and small businesses in the ‘reconciliation’ bill being taken up by the U.S. House of Representatives this weekend. .



IRS Needs 1,054 New Agents for Obamacare Including 81 to Enforce Racist Tanning Spa Tax | The Gateway Pundit
The Internal Revenue Service says it will need an battalion of 1,054 new auditors and staffers and new facilities at a cost to taxpayers of more than $359 million in fiscal 2012 just to watch over the initial implementation of President Obama’s healthcare reforms. Among the new corps will be 81 workers assigned to make sure tanning salons pay a new 10 percent excise tax. Their cost: $11.5 million.

So we see that the GOP said 16,500 agents and the IRS said only 1,054. So the GOP exaggerated the real number by a factor of 16 and expat_panama by a factor of 38.

 

[expat_panama]

...Obamacare has created uncertainty in business. No one has any idea what is coming their way and they won't have any certainty regarding the economic terrain they will be forced to deal with until the SCOTUS rules on it...

This uncertainty is exacerbated by the wild stories coming out of the leftist press, and regardless of what the courts say we're still stuck with White House's attempts at stonewalling. Those of us in the business community are left to piece to together bits of information under a hail of radical leftist rancor.

No problem. Running a business is supposed to be hard work, that's why it pays so well, and there's a lot we can see by forgetting the goofy press reports and going through readily available gov't docs. We find that after 1/5 of the US economy is expropriated by Obamacare and the rest gets taken with Obamacare's taxes.

First the IRS spells it out in the US Treasury's IRS Congressional budget request--

Implement the Affordable Care (ACA) Act.

Implementation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) of 2010 presents a major challenge to the IRS. ACA represents the largest set of tax law changes in more than 20 years, with more than 40 provisions that amend the tax laws. Although the new law goes into effect gradually over many years, many provisions required immediate action, including the Small Business Health Care Tax Credit, the Qualifying Therapeutic Discovery Credit, and the expanded Adoption Credit.

To enact the range of provisions that were retroactive to 2009 and immediately effective for calendar year 2010, the IRS focused on: developing new systems and business processes for near-term provisions; conducting initial planning for longer-term provisions; and defining appropriate outreach activities for each affected group.​

--and it included upping the IRS budget by several hundreds of millions of dollars. This means we've got to pay special attention to the bit about "...the largest set of tax law changes in more than 20 years, with more than 40 provisions that amend the tax laws..." because '20 years' (as reported by the U.S. Office of Personnel Management was when there we had 40,000 more T-men than there were when Obama got elected. The OPM table also shows that during Obama's first two years he's already begun by hiring the first 4,000.