Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 32

Hybrid View

  1. #1 75% of Obamacare costs falls on Americans making less than $120,000 a year 
    Senior Member Janice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Southern USA
    Posts
    2,809


    ECONOMIST: 75% of Obamacare costs to fall on Americans making less than $120,000 a year

    Take Your Medicine, America … Stephen Moore, Senior Economics Writer with the Wall Street Journal, told FOX and Friends this morning that nearly 75% of Obamacare costs will fall on the backs of those Americans making less than $120,000 a year.

    “It’s a big punch in the stomach to middle class families.”

    Obamacare: It’s not just a big f***ing deal… It’s a big f***ing tax.

    Argued in Court That It Was a Tax… Now They’re Saying It’s Not a Tax Again

    A Fraud Has Been Perpetrated On the American Citizenry

    ---------------------------------------

    Ho-hum. Another day in 0bamaville.
    http://i1220.photobucket.com/albums/dd445/JansGraphix/ConsUndergrd-Sig2.jpg
    Liberalism is just communism sold by the drink.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #2  
    Senior Member Gina's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Western MI
    Posts
    2,360
    Good men sleep peaceably in their beds at night because
    rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.



    Real superheroes don't wear capes. They wear dog tags.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #3  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    8,985
    And if the OP is right, it's a really regressive tax. The middle class gets screwed. Again.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #4  
    Our widdle friend. Wei Wu Wei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,414
    Quote Originally Posted by Elspeth View Post
    And if the OP is right, it's a really regressive tax. The middle class gets screwed. Again.
    Is it?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Househo...s#Distribution
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Be...S1989-2004.svg

    You need to be in the top 10% of households to have an income over $120,000.

    That means the top 10% is covering 25% of the cost while the bottom 90% is covering 75%


    I thought conservatives loved regressive taxes though.
    Quote Originally Posted by Adam Smith - Wealth of Nations
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #5  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    2,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Wei Wu Wei View Post

    You need to be in the top 10% of households to have an income over $120,000.
    With the rising cost of...everything...that's really not a lot of money.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #6  
    Ancient Fire Breather Retread's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    I came to Texas as soon as I could
    Posts
    4,693
    Quote Originally Posted by Wei Wu Wei View Post
    ......


    I thought conservatives loved regressive taxes though.
    Finally admitting your inability to think - good for you.
    It's not how old you are, it's how you got here.
    It's been a long road and not all of it was paved.
    Live every day as if it were your last, because one of these days, it will be.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #7  
    Senior Member Janice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Southern USA
    Posts
    2,809
    In Valerie Jarrett's response to 0bamacare being called a tax or a mandate, she says she doesn't care what it's called because this country is wealthy enough to give everybody health insurance. Of course this is a big liberal crap sandwich. A country that has to borrow a trillion a year to operate, isn't wealthy. The carve outs on 0bamcare violate equal protection. Rich people are pretty much excluded from having to finance this scheme, leaving almost the entire tab on the working middle class. And you're not only stuck with paying your own healthcare but millions of deadbeat citizens and non citizens.

    But this is exactly what Obama wants. The whole purpose of his strangling the energy supply with his drilling moratorium, closure of coal-fired generating plants and veto of the XL Keystone pipeline is to collapse the economy.

    If you are trying to fundamentally transform America, poor economic news could mean 'mission accomplished'. The U.S. doesn't only have a $15 trillion debt. It also has over $123 TRILLION in unfunded liabilities - and not a single penny to pay for them. The only thing left to ponder ... is the country is going to die before 0bamacare has a chance to put the final nail in its coffin?
    http://i1220.photobucket.com/albums/dd445/JansGraphix/ConsUndergrd-Sig2.jpg
    Liberalism is just communism sold by the drink.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #8  
    Senior Member Molon Labe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Jihad Me At Hello
    Posts
    4,769
    Quote Originally Posted by Wei Wu Wei View Post
    Is it?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Househo...s#Distribution
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Be...S1989-2004.svg

    You need to be in the top 10% of households to have an income over $120,000.

    That means the top 10% is covering 25% of the cost while the bottom 90% is covering 75%


    I thought conservatives loved regressive taxes though.
    I'm not rich and I don't have it easy. To be conservative means you are for little to NO taxation.
    Gun Control: The theory that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her panty hose, is somehow morally superior to a woman explaining to police how her attacker got that fatal bullet wound - Unknown


    The problem is Empty People, Not Loaded Guns - Linda Schrock Taylor
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #9  
    Sin City Moderator RobJohnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    16,358
    Quote Originally Posted by Wei Wu Wei View Post
    Is it?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Househo...s#Distribution
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Be...S1989-2004.svg

    You need to be in the top 10% of households to have an income over $120,000.

    That means the top 10% is covering 25% of the cost while the bottom 90% is covering 75%


    I thought conservatives loved regressive taxes though.
    You are a dumb ass.

    I'm not at that income level but eveything I own is paid off, including my house. I'm in my 40's. It's called hard work.
    I know idiots at work that won't pay the pretax money out of their pay check for medical insurnace because they need the money to support a dead beat husband, adult kids, and they need booze and cigs... But they have internet and Direct TV...they CHOOSE not to have insurance....I CHOOSE to pay for it, I also have life, disability, 401k, stock options, etc...all CHOICES that come out of my pay check.....why should I have to be punished for those that CHOOSE not to take such options?

    I don't like regressive taxes. A good friend of mine that retired from Congress due to Parkinson's, Lane Evans D-IL always would vote against regressive taxes because he understood them when his friends did not. He was also a Vietnam Vet and saved the Rock Island Arsenal from closing.

    I'm not sure of any conservative that like any type of new taxes. Unless we can tax assholes like you 90%, but we would have to tax your weed, as I doubt you have a job. You are just another free loading liberal.

    Why don't you shut your mouth until you at least half way know what the hell you are talking about.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #10  
    Our widdle friend. Wei Wu Wei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,414
    Quote Originally Posted by RobJohnson View Post
    You are a dumb ass.

    I'm not at that income level but eveything I own is paid off, including my house. I'm in my 40's. It's called hard work.
    I know idiots at work that won't pay the pretax money out of their pay check for medical insurnace because they need the money to support a dead beat husband, adult kids, and they need booze and cigs... But they have internet and Direct TV...they CHOOSE not to have insurance....I CHOOSE to pay for it, I also have life, disability, 401k, stock options, etc...all CHOICES that come out of my pay check.....why should I have to be punished for those that CHOOSE not to take such options?
    You realize this was the argument that the Heritage Foundation gave in support of an individual mandate?



    I don't like regressive taxes. A good friend of mine that retired from Congress due to Parkinson's, Lane Evans D-IL always would vote against regressive taxes because he understood them when his friends did not. He was also a Vietnam Vet and saved the Rock Island Arsenal from closing.

    I'm not sure of any conservative that like any type of new taxes. Unless we can tax assholes like you 90%, but we would have to tax your weed, as I doubt you have a job. You are just another free loading liberal.

    Why don't you shut your mouth until you at least half way know what the hell you are talking about.
    Conservatives tend to be in favor of cutting progressive taxes and raising or preserving regressive taxes.

    Capital gains taxes are always on the chopping block for the GOP while they tend to prefer excise taxes. A glance at tax data shows that the less money you make, the greater percentage of your income is spend on excise taxes.
    Quote Originally Posted by Adam Smith - Wealth of Nations
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •