they seem determined to undermine the us democracy and shut the government down hurting employees and veterans.. what a despicable bunch, hope they get their asses kicked for what they are doing..
Sorry, you can't borrow more money you can't repay to offset previous debt you can't repay and call it a win.
I didn't call it a win, I simply clarified what raising the debt ceiling is.
So rather than "growing", we are seeing consistent positive rather than negative numbers. Though they may be low.
The bottom line is that no good is going to come from the GOP's current stunt.
they seem determined to undermine the us democracy and shut the government down hurting employees and veterans.. what a despicable bunch, hope they get their asses kicked for what they are doing..
Assuming that H.R. 6079 is enacted near the beginning of fiscal year 2013, CBO and JCT estimate that, on balance, the direct spending and revenue effects of enacting that legislation would cause a net increase in federal budget deficits of $109 billion over the 2013–2022 period. Specifically, we estimate that H.R. 6079 would reduce direct spending by $890 billion and reduce revenues by $1 trillion between 2013 and 2022, thus adding $109 billion to federal budget deficits over that period.
they seem determined to undermine the us democracy and shut the government down hurting employees and veterans.. what a despicable bunch, hope they get their asses kicked for what they are doing..
attempting to raise its debt ceiling yet again in order to create more debt
This is incorrect. The debt ceiling is being raised to meet debt already incurred.
As for subsidies, why is health care for Americans more objectionable than tax breaks for the ultra wealthy, subsidies for agriculture and oil companies etc. etc. etc.?
The deficit is shrinking and the economy is growing. Retailers are expecting higher sales this holiday season..........................All this is in jeopardy if the GOP continues this stupid shut down and threatens default.
they seem determined to undermine the us democracy and shut the government down hurting employees and veterans.. what a despicable bunch, hope they get their asses kicked for what they are doing..
No, Simon, the "terrorists" care about fiscal responsibilities. You and your crew sound just don't understand how the Democrats' out of control spending is wreaking havoc here in America.
Ummmm not actually true Min. If you look at numbers going back decades, the reality is that the Democrats have been more fiscally responsible.
they seem determined to undermine the us democracy and shut the government down hurting employees and veterans.. what a despicable bunch, hope they get their asses kicked for what they are doing..
Like I said, money will be an issue. Libtards can't understand this Until they THEYare affected.
Unlike Republicans who don't care about anyone else and how they are affected? My quote option isn't coming up
The thing is Simon that it is actually Blue states that pay more in tax dollars and Red states that recieve more in benefits. So essentially I am helping to support Minimus
they seem determined to undermine the us democracy and shut the government down hurting employees and veterans.. what a despicable bunch, hope they get their asses kicked for what they are doing..
Except that it's bogus. It's one of those mass Emails that was going around during the health care debates (2009?). There is no "United Nations International Health Organization".
Oooops, should have hit submit before getting my coffee!
they seem determined to undermine the us democracy and shut the government down hurting employees and veterans.. what a despicable bunch, hope they get their asses kicked for what they are doing..
It will take time to perfect any new, large system. What is not going to help anyone is trying to repeal reform before it's even had a chance to change anything and trying to shoot the economy in the knee caps as a form of retribution
they seem determined to undermine the us democracy and shut the government down hurting employees and veterans.. what a despicable bunch, hope they get their asses kicked for what they are doing..
trying to sound wise.
Well, ok. Certainly not something we could accuse you of.
they seem determined to undermine the us democracy and shut the government down hurting employees and veterans.. what a despicable bunch, hope they get their asses kicked for what they are doing..
I cringe when I see people up in arms about forcing corporations to pay their "fair share", whatever the hell that means. Take an economics class people. Corporations are simply entities made up of people. The corporation doesn't have a brain, its a collective of a dozen or a hundred or a hundred thousand people. Customers in the end pay the taxes 100% of the time, not corporations.
Actually, I am asking how many Economics classes you have taken. You did, after all, admonish the rest of us to do so.
they seem determined to undermine the us democracy and shut the government down hurting employees and veterans.. what a despicable bunch, hope they get their asses kicked for what they are doing..
I would also like to see some supporting information for Marvin's claims
Things I've learned:
- "Affordable" under the ACA is defined so that what many companies have historically offered employees as a benefit is, by comparison, very generous. The exchanges set up by the Federal government is a place employers can send employees to show how generous previous plans have been. But that was then. Now we have the ACA. Based on "affordable" under the ACA I predict a lot of companies will change the benefit they offer employees so that more of the cost is shifted to the employee and away from the employer.
- Though businesses offering health care insurance must offer dependent coverage, there is no requirement to make this coverage "affordable" by a company offer to cover part of the premium costs. When employees go to the health care exchange they'll get sticker shock at what the premium is going to cost them. Employers can offer very little in the way cost-sharing for dependent coverage and make it less costly than the exchange, which will steer employees back to the company's plan. Bottom line is that employees will be paying a lot more for dependent coverage.
- Based on how the ACA treats smoking and smokers, it will become much, much easier for companies to shift premium costs to employees who are smokers. Smokers better gird up their loins. They're about to meet Mr. Premium in ways they never did before. Alternately, smokers can successfully complete a cessation program. I'm sure that'll work. Right?
