Supreme Court Upholds Health Care Mandate

[quote=12thMan;923206]

You should be confidant if everything stays as is. It will be close but so are all elections these days.

Election Forecasts - FiveThirtyEight Blog - NYTimes.com (http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/)I've been following this one:
RealClearPolitics - 2012 Election Maps - Electoral Map (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/2012_elections_electoral_college_map.html)

but as you said, this will be close.

..but not showing how much costs are being cut from Medicare?




Fact Checking the GOP debate: $500 billion in cuts to Medicare? - The Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/fact-checking-the-gop-debate-500-billion-in-cuts-to-medicare/2011/06/14/AGsnGAVH_blog.html)numbers take into account Medicare cuts.

Given all the benefits in the healthcare law, If you don't see this as victory for the American people, maybe you should revisit some of the provisions. I won't bother to list any.

FYI, the level of federal spending under Obama has risen at the slowest pace since Ike. That's nearly a generation. He's hardly running up the tab on the American people. Nice try though.I don't think anything you said above is true. For example:

http://www.fiscalaccountability.org/userfiles/federal%20spending%20as%20percentage%20of%20gdp.jp g

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/usgs_line.php?title=Total%20Spending&units=b&size=m&year=1950_2017&sname=US&bar=0&stack=1&col=c&legend=&source=a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a _a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a _a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_a_b_b_b_b_b_b&spending0=44.80_48.94_71.57_79.99_77.69_73.44_75.9 9_81.78_86.05_93.53_97.28_104.86_106.82_111.32_118 .53_118.23_134.53_157.46_178.13_183.64_195.65_210. 17_230.68_245.71_269.36_332.33_371.79_409.22_458.7 5_504.03_590.94_678.24_745.74_808.36_851.81_946.34 _990.38_1004.02_1064.42_1143.74_1252.99_1324.23_13 81.53_1409.39_1461.75_1515.74_1560.48_1601.12_1652 .46_1701.84_1788.95_1862.85_2010.89_2159.90_2292.8 4_2471.96_2655.05_2728.69_2982.54_3517.68_3456.21_ 3603.06_3795.55_3803.36_3883.10_4059.87_4328.84_45 31.72

I know I come off as abrasive sometimes, call me on it when I do please. I want to stay civil. Could we lay off the "nice try" sarcasm?

If health care insurance is fundamentally reformed now, why is everybody with a solid paper trail being forced to buy into it?

[quote=12thMan;923218]"Benefits" of Obamacare
Another one:
- an even more powerful and intrusive IRS...yaaaayy
SCOTUS Ruling Means Bigger, More Intrusive IRS | Fox Business (http://www.foxbusiness.com/government/2012/06/29/scotus-ruling-means-bigger-more-intrusive-irs/)

Could we lay off the "nice try" sarcasm?


Well, if you not once, but twice try to make a false insinuation about the health care program, what do you expect?

It was said twice that Massachusetts had the highest premiums in the nation and it was implied heavily that it was all due to Romneycare (aka..obamacare). Now this person doesn't do any research into the state. Didn't find out they also have one of the highest costs of living AND also have one of the highest averages of income in then the nation as well. In the end, we find out that the people of Mass. are paying LESS of a % of their income towards health care premiums than say the people in the southern states.

It's slanted and false misinformation that's going to land you a "nice try" from people like myself. It's the least that should be afforded to me since I have to research and debunk the misleading info. :)

[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;923225]Another one:
- an even more powerful and intrusive IRS...yaaaayy
SCOTUS Ruling Means Bigger, More Intrusive IRS | Fox Business (http://www.foxbusiness.com/government/2012/06/29/scotus-ruling-means-bigger-more-intrusive-irs/)


Can you use any non-biased sources please? First Romney's main web page, now Fox business news? See the Presidential thread to see my breakdown on the "independent of each other" agencies of Fox.


http://www.thewarpath.net/debating-with-the-enemy/47853-2012-presidential-election-free-all-edition-8.html#post923029

It's slanted and false misinformation that's going to land you a "nice try" from people like myself. It's the least that should be afforded to me since I have to research and debunk the misleading info. :)Did you give 12th a "nice try" for his earlier post that HG28 commented on?

12th, you can't quote the spokeskid without fact-checking him, c'mon man!

OMB: 4 Yrs of Spending 24%+ of GDP; WH: “Demonstrated Significant Fiscal Restraint’ | CNSNews.com (http://cnsnews.com/blog/terence-p-jeffrey/omb-4-yrs-spending-24-gdp-wh-demonstrated-significant-fiscal-restraint)

HG28, nice find on the charts BTW....and you're definitely not abrasive in my book.

Did you give 12th a "nice try" for his earlier post that HG28 commented on?

12th, you can't quote the spokeskid without fact-checking him, c'mon man!

OMB: 4 Yrs of Spending 24%+ of GDP; WH: “Demonstrated Significant Fiscal Restraint’ | CNSNews.com (http://cnsnews.com/blog/terence-p-jeffrey/omb-4-yrs-spending-24-gdp-wh-demonstrated-significant-fiscal-restraint)

HG28, nice find on the charts BTW....and you're definitely not abrasive in my book.

I haven't been keeping up with the side arguments. It's tough enough following my own. :cheeky-sm


I also did it to FD because he seemed to keep hammering that point down that Mass had the highest insurance premiums, and that he implied it was due to Romneycare.

[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;923232]


Can you use any non-biased sources please? First Romney's main web page, now Fox business news? See the Presidential thread to see my breakdown on the "independent of each other" agencies of Fox.


http://www.thewarpath.net/debating-with-the-enemy/47853-2012-presidential-election-free-all-edition-8.html#post923029 (http://www.thewarpath.net/debating-with-the-enemy/47853-2012-presidential-election-free-all-edition-8.html#post923029)
You can't discredit the source without reading the info, if the facts are correct, they're correct. I'd try to find sources in the lamestream media, but they bury anything that might hurt the "chosen one" and doctor video/voice tapes to advance their political agendas.

But to appease you, directly from the House Ways & Means Committee....oops they're biased too because the House is in GOP hands...
http://republicans.waysandmeans.house.gov/UploadedFiles/IRS_Power_Report.pdf

Many of the numbers come from GAO btw.

FYI, the level of federal spending under Obama has risen at the slowest pace since Ike. That's nearly a generation. He's hardly running up the tab on the American people. Nice try though.


I don't think anything you said above is true. For example:

You sure about that? He may be right.


Obama spending binge never happened - Rex Nutting - MarketWatch (http://www.marketwatch.com/story/obama-spending-binge-never-happened-2012-05-22?pagenumber=1)

Even hapless Herbert Hoover managed to increase spending more than Obama has.

Here are the facts, according to the official government statistics:

• In the 2009 fiscal year — the last of George W. Bush’s presidency — federal spending rose by 17.9% from $2.98 trillion to $3.52 trillion. Check the official numbers at the Office of Management and Budget.

• In fiscal 2010 — the first budget under Obama — spending fell 1.8% to $3.46 trillion.

• In fiscal 2011, spending rose 4.3% to $3.60 trillion.

• In fiscal 2012, spending is set to rise 0.7% to $3.63 trillion, according to the Congressional Budget Office’s estimate of the budget that was agreed to last August.

• Finally in fiscal 2013 — the final budget of Obama’s term — spending is scheduled to fall 1.3% to $3.58 trillion. Read the CBO’s latest budget outlook.

Over Obama’s four budget years, federal spending is on track to rise from $3.52 trillion to $3.58 trillion, an annualized increase of just 0.4%.


Reagan, 1982-85: Annual increase of 8.7 percent
Reagan, 1986-89: Annual increase of 4.9 percent
Bush I, 1990-93: Annual increase of 5.4 percent
Clinton, 1994-1997: Annual increase of 3.2 percent
Clinton, 1998-2001: Annual increase of 3.9 percent
Bush II, 2002-2005: Annual increase of 7.3 percent
Bush II, 2006-2009: Annual increase of 8.1 percent
Obama, 2010-2013: Annual increase of 1.4 percent


http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/250x250/22325682.jpg