by Jack Lee
Democrats knew they had the Republicans beaten down and cornered, so they thought why not use this opportunity to sneak in a little pork spending? It’s not like anyone will notice, right? Well, we did notice Mr. Reid and Ms. Pelosi and we’re not pleased.
CONGRESSIONAL PORK taints government funding agreement. There was $2.2 billion for a river project in Kentucky, $450 million for Colorado for flood rebuilding projects, and that’s well over the limit of $100 million for the Department of Transportation as allowed in the Disaster Relief Appropriations Act. There was an appropriation of one year’s salary for the widow of Sen. Frank Lautenberg. He did this year, but he had been on the gov payroll for 30 years. The thing here is … Lautenberg was worth more than $59 million. But, even in death he’s going to gouge us one last time for $174,000, a full years salary for his family because they want to honor him. And the last bit of pork was more money for agencies that fight wildfires. They could get as much as $636 million, depending on how bad it gets in the next year. The mine safety department is getting a bump in the fees it can keep, a $1 million increase to $2.49 million. A government cyberintelligence committee will get $3.1 million for their five members. The Hill, a political newspaper, reports that’s double the top amount the five-member panel has been given before. That should have them in FAX and COPY paper for a long, long time.
First of all, don’t go calling disaster relief and fire-fighting “pork”. Very few people would agree with that characterization, and it weakens your argument.
Now, the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, Jack, it does have staff, you know, that do research, take testimony, write reports, all that sort of thing … and they’re doing a lot more of that now, what with the Snowden revelations. The OA wants a real showing of this sort of activity just now.
But that river project in Kentucky, that would seem to qualify. Mitch must be compensated, after all. He did stick his political neck out to get our government back online, and he’ll likely have a nasty primary fight next year on that account. Fair is fair.
I should hit “The Hill” more often. They had a good piece about how, now the smoke has cleared, the O-man is going after those federal employees responsible for contracting the ACA website and the rollout: they got some splainin’ to do.
Libby: ” Mitch must be compensated”
Actually the provision was inserted by Diane Feinstein (D) and Lamar Alexander (R) who serve on the Senate Appropriations subcommittee, which handles water projects. The project, already approved by the House and Senate, is a lock and dam project on the Ohio River, part in Illinois, part in Kentucky, and a benefit to Tennessee.
The explanation given was that the government stood to lose $160 million in contracts from being cancelled by the Army Corps of Engineers. Lamar Alexander:
The Washington Post reported that the request also came from President Obama.
So there is plenty of room for blame. And how easily that funding number jumped from $160 million to $2.4 billion.
Never let a crisis go to waste.
The O-man needs someone to blame for the mess; why not lowly employees doing their jobs as they have been directed. Speaking of the O-man he was in perfect Alinsky mode this morning.
So Mitch McConnell got himself a $2.2billion river project in Kentucky. Maybe that was a little pork pie to help him keep his job since he is going to get his a$$ handed to him by tea party backed Matt Bevin.
“And how easily that funding number jumped from $160 million to $2.4 billion.”
Twister.
The $160M is already spent, and for naught, if the project does not go forward. The $2.4B is what it’s actually going to cost.
And the fact is, there really is no such thing as “pork”. That’s just what people, who don’t get to have $2.4 billion in increased employment in their state, call it.
And the point about the money is that they stuck it in this “budget ceiling deal” instead of passing a bill transparently…already spending toward the ceiling…only…
Turns out there is also no ceiling. That’s what I heard, It doesn’t have an upper limit. So what does that date in February mean?
Nope it’s pork right out of the hide of every taxpaying American. There is a limit especially considering how much is wasted…
Obamacare is a striking example, they didn’t even test the thing until two days before it was supposed to be opened to the public…morons! Wasteful, elitist, morons.
Libby: “First of all, don’t go calling disaster relief and fire-fighting “pork”. Very few people would agree with that characterization, and it weakens your argument.”
Seriously! I couldn’t believe when I read that. I understand complaining about the “government cyberintelligence committee” (because we need more people to spy on us), and even the payments to the millionaire widow (may her honorable husband rest in peace), but the rest is exactly the kind of thing the government should be paying for. If you’re going to complain about wasteful government spending, mine safety is probably *literally* the most sympathetic target you can take aim at.
“Actually the provision was inserted by Diane Feinstein (D) and Lamar Alexander (R)….”
I never said it wasn’t. It was a Senate bill. The Dems have the majority in the Senate, though I understand it was a bipartisan coalition of the ladies that got things rolling. You really need to educate yourself about what “bipartisan” really means.
This “my way or the highway” … I would have thought it had been amply demonstrated, that’s just not how a democracy works.
It’s becoming clearer and clearer … Tea Partiers … they don’t espouse the founding principles at all.
Fascist, totalitarian … these are the words that come to the fore when a person examines the mindset of a Tea Partier.
In order for bills to be held up to the full light of day for Joe Taxpayer to see, you don’t sneak them on to a critically important bill in the 11th hour. That smacks of corruption and raises questions, for many good reasons! There has been a long and seedy history where attached bills were done for deceptive reasons, including extortion, i.e., in order to buy a needed vote from a Congressman or Senator on the main bill. This is why Candidate Obama disapproved of such practices and why both party’s agreed to refrain from this “pork” attachment, but they never really did. Obama said he wanted each bill to stand alone…for the sake of clarity and that actually makes sense. In each case noted in this article there was no reason why the bills could not have been done that way, but for reasons we may never fully know….it wasn’t. They were tacked on in the last minute and this raises some questions as well it should.
The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.
Notice how Chris and Libby think that have have won the hammer and yet to do so they had to completely ignore the core complaint.
Libby Obama is the epitome of “my way or the highway”…and we all know it.
This spending was attached without benefit of the normal legislative process. But who cares about that?
It is well known by some Tea Party persons that our elected leaders have been known to stick extra spending into bills AFTER they have been approved and signed by the President…members of both parties may have done this. If we don’t object to such shenanigans the standards of behavior are lowered. It’s irresponsible to not speak out against legislating and appropriating funds in this way….making it up as they go along.
We now know that at least one liberal Democrat who comments on these pages doesn’t mind if the elected members of the Democrat Party lie, cheat, and break the law…as long as they give her what she wants.
Arbitrarily sticking extra spending into a bill to raise the debt ceiling is not the way I’d prefer these guys do business.
Of course I would also prefer that Harry Reid put his ass on the line and actually pass a budget on time as required by law in the first place. Why was this money not included in the budget process if it is so damned critical?
This might be an appropriate time to object to the ad hominan attacks on the Tea Party. The relevance of the Tea Party has been questioned because it supposedly represents only 20% of voters. I don’t know where they get that figure since there are unaffiliated Tea Party groups all over the country…also, no way to count the number of people who support the TP but haven’t joined a group. But we’ll accept that figure as long as we also accept that all of them are reliable voters.
But here’s the thing…by this ridiculous standard, liberals have made African Americans even less relevant. They represent only 13.6% of the total population and only 60% of those voted in the 2008 election, an unusually high turnout.
Obama and others intimating that the Tea Party is irrelevant is equivalent to the Romney gaff in the last presidential election.
Democrats know that the Tea Party represents a real threat and so they will do all they can, Alinsky’s rule #12, to ridicule and demean these voters, these US citizens. The aim is to marginalize and silence them.
Liberals can’t win on ideas…not if they are truthful about them.
Ever notice how the “fascist, totalitarian” Tea Party gives a voice to al-Libby?
You left out “racist.”
Mindset.
“Of course I would also prefer that Harry Reid put his ass on the line ….”
Tina, he’s a Dem. The object of the game was to persuade Repugs. They don’t listen to Reid. Fer heaven’s sake, try to keep these things straight.
“I don’t know where they get that figure since there are unaffiliated Tea Party groups all over the country.”
I’m sure there are, but what’s that got to do with the percentage of the electorate that espouses the TP philosophy? Nothing. It’s just more denial.
Libby that is pure horse pucky and you know it. Reid is “dead on arrival man”.
He allowed his true nature to erupt during this budget battle and it isn’t the first time.
Washington Times:
Washington Post:
Unh huh.
Daily Kos:
The writer of this piece says that Democrats have appeased the Tea Party, caving to their demands. When?
The President has gotten everything he wanted…everything!
Harry Reid, Mr No, has not passed budgets and refuses to consoder almost all House bills House bills to create jobs, for instance, have been dead on arrival.
JOBS! Do you think there might be some room for negotiations (not appeasement) on a subject as important to all Americans right now as jobs.
Eric Cantor:
40 bills and all of them different and the Senate not only won’t negotiate, they will not even consider them. Harry Reid will not let elected Sentors discuss much less vote on them.
Disgraceful.
In August 6.9 million people were working part time that wanted full time work. 11.3 million were unemployed. The civilian labor force participation rate was 63.2 percent…that’s awful! 866,000 people are “discouraged workers”. they have given up looking because they believe there is no work.
Harry Reid has no intention of working with Republicans…none unless they cave to his will.
This is the kind of government we get with extremists in power. Bush worked with Democrats and passed a lot of legislation that conservatives opposed…you still crucified him.
You’re all a bunch of liars and cheats.
The American people deserve better…we need good jobs. We need reforms to healthcare that work for us not for the ego driven Democrat Party of “no”.
Excellent read!!!
October 19, 2013
The strategy to repeal Obamacare by winning serial elections is not even a Hail Mary pass.
By Andrew C. McCarthy
“Could Democrats have been made fearful that the public would hold Obama responsible for keeping the government shut down solely over Obamacare in spite of the law’s unreadiness and unpopularity? It was a long shot in which three things had to go right: (a) The public had to see that the government shutdown was not as painful in reality as the media had predicted it would be; (b) Obamacare’s deleterious consequences had to begin to emerge such that they were seen as a bigger problem than the shutdown; and (c) the Republicans had to stay united — they had to keep pounding these themes with unwavering conviction.
Significantly, Democrats were being asked to delay Obamacare under circumstances in which the program is undeniably not ready for implementation. The president could have been made to see that he could look reasonable by delaying and simultaneously mitigate what has been a disastrous rollout — “excruciatingly embarrassing,” as even Robert Gibbs put it.
Democrats were being asked to defund or delay Obamacare under circumstances in which Obama himself had already defunded and delayed major portions of it. The president could have been made to see that he was just being asked to do for everyone what he had already done for corporations, cronies, and Congress.
Contrary to what you’d believe from reading press accounts over the last two weeks, Obama has a history of reversing himself — to take just a few examples: on closing Guantanamo Bay, on a civilian trial for Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, on the Bush tax cuts, even on the near-term desirability of single-payer health insurance. It was never delusional to believe Obama and congressional Democrats could be persuaded that political expedience counseled what Obama has famously called “flexibility.” But you could not get there absent intense political pressure.
To create the pressure necessary to give defund/delay a Hail Mary’s chance to work, Republicans had to demonstrate that they were so fearful of Obamacare’s harmful effects on the country that they were firmly resolved not to fund it. If this ended up meaning the government got (very partially) shut down, they had to tee that up in a way that could persuade the public that it was Obama, not the Republicans, who was forcing the shutdown. That could be done only by agreeing to fund all the rest of the government, and sticking together on the single, clear message that Obama could reopen the government anytime he wanted by signing the funding bills the GOP had willingly given him.”
Full article:
http://nationalreview.com/article/361655/art-impossible-andrew-c-mccarthy/page/0/2
Excellent points made, this is exactly what happened. But, as usual we gave the public too much credit.
I thought the author clarified some critical issues. He pointed out why those of us outside of the beltway cheered on Cruz and Lee and were vilified by those inside the beltway.
The “Hail Mary pass,” has very low odds of success, but every football team from high school to pro uses it when there’s no other options left. Doing nothing and just walking off of the field like the established republicans within the beltway wanted to do was a sign of defeat. Instead Cruz and Lee picked up the ball and said let’s at least try.
I also liked how he explained why republicans stayed home instead of showing up at the polls for McCain and Romney. We haven’t had the candidates that reflected who we are and who we want to represent us since Reagan. McCain was a Hilary-light and Romney was a supporter of the state version of ObamaCare. Both were on parallel paths headed in the same direction as the liberals while we were looking for someone on a different path headed in a different direction to take our country from the socialist dependent state. McCain proved his true colors when he attacked Cruz and showed why he lost to Obama. He didn’t just lose to Obama he was rejected by conservatives. Romney may have been better for the country than Obama because of his business background, but we’ll never know if he would have been good enough to undo the mess we’re in with the democrats still in control of the Senate. Could-of, should-of, would-of…water under the bridge.
Time to move on. How many of us are there outside of the beltway that like what Cruz did? Are there enough? Will more join us? I’ve made my contribution to FreedomWorks to support more like him and also gave to the candidate running against Mitch McConnell. Also talked to Doug LaMalfa at Jim Nielsen’s open house the other day and thanked him for voting with Cruz and told him I was watching his voting record on FreedomWorks. Hopefully, he’ll continue to stand with us conservatives and not lose his soul to the liberal-light republicans.
2014 elections is only a year away. Lots to do in just twelve months.
This Stunning Chart SHOULD Wake People Up About America’s Debt:
http://www.ijreview.com/2013/10/88091-stunning-chart-wake-people-americas-debt/
Very Interesting!!
Shock Stat: 15 of Last 18 Government Shutdowns Came Under This House Party’s Watch:
Here’s the government shutdown score for each party, counted by whoever held office or was in the majority at the time. While many insist that the Republicans own the shutdown, both parties are involved in divided government shutdowns historically.
When Presidents will not negotiate with a branch of Congress, there is a threat of a shutdown. The government has “shut down” part of its services for far less consequential reasons than dispute over a huge entitlement program passed along party lines that does virtually nothing what was promised.
First, the Republicans’ shutdown statistics:
◾Presidents: 10
◾Senate: 9
◾House: 3
◾Avg. shutdown length (days): 14
And now, the Democrats’ shutdown statistics:
◾Presidents: 8
◾Senate: 9
◾House: 15
◾Avg. shutdown length (days): 5.6
More fun facts:
◾The longest shutdown was the 1995-6 shutdown under GOP House Speaker Newt Gingrich at 21 days.
◾After the 1995-6 shutdown, the Republicans maintained control of the House for the next 5 elections.
◾The 2013 shutdown lasted 16 days – shorter than the 18 days Jimmy Carter shut down the government over a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier in 1978.
◾Depending on if you go by Fiscal Year 2014 or the already passed Fiscal Year 2013, only between 13% and 17% of the U.S. federal government was “shut down.”
Government shutdown statistics by party based on research published at the Washington Post and the Heritage Foundation.
https://www.ijreview.com/2013/10/88297-shock-stat-15-last-18-government-shutdowns-house-democrats/
Peggy: “The “Hail Mary pass,” has very low odds of success, but every football team from high school to pro uses it when there’s no other options left. Doing nothing and just walking off of the field like the established republicans within the beltway wanted to do was a sign of defeat. Instead Cruz and Lee picked up the ball and said let’s at least try.”
And you wasted $24 billion in taxpayer money for the effort. And instead of saying “boy, that was a bad play,” you’re still saluting the coach.
Your fiscal conservative stance is a sham.
That $24 billion is a made up number. Obama is setting up for the next election.
I don’t buy it, and I want to see an accounting! You do have a breakdown of the costs? You didn’t just repeat something without checking it for accuracy? Right?
Or does it actually cost that much to pay park rangers to set up barriers and harass people?
Since when did this president, or any Democrat legislator, ever give a rats butt about saving taxpayer money?
Since never…they live to spend our money, waste our money, and use our money to advance their crap agenda.
And talk about a sham stance! How about President Obama’s lies about his ugly nightmarish healthcare law:
It will save money. CBO said the law would only cost $940 billion )only) and over time, because of cost savings, bring the debt down…but, uh oh, down the road CBO said it would cost more:
But that wasn’t the last word.
The dirty secret is they front loaded the law so that the cost would look low in the early years. Medical Progress Today – Manhattan Institute:
And just like Medicare and all other government programs the original estimated costs will be miniscule compared to actual costs over the long haul.
Obama also promised we could keep our insurance if we liked it…but uh oh, turns out that’s not true. The regulations added to Obamacare change everyone’s insurance…policies are being cancelled. A lot of people are losing insurance at work…it’s also gonna cost people a lot more money in premiums, deductibles and co-pays.
Speaking of premiums, Obama promised the average American would see his premiums reduced by $2500!
Oops…ha ha ha…his bad!
Obamacare Premiums Rise 45%
Study: Premiums for Young People to Rise in All 50 States:
Obama called it the Patient Protection and “Affordable” Care Act…it’s anything but! He made a lot of pretty promises to sell the public on this law but they were lies. Obamacare offers no way to protect patients or taxpayers and his plan is definitely not affordable.
Obama’s empty promises are proof that the President will say anything to advance his agenda! He is the king of sham artists!
I hope we find out how much was spent on renting all of those Barryers and signs printed weeks in advance that appeared the very first day of the slim-down. Someone planned this whole thing weeks ago to be able to have the same signs printed and distributed across the country. What was the cost of paying guards to patrol all of the open-aid parks to keep Vets and others out that didn’t have guards before Oct. 1st?
No price can be put on the loss America took and will take in the future with the loss of tourist dollars from all the vacationers from other countries. Many because of their limited understanding of English believed they were being arrested and/or turned away from parks they’d saved to see.
Many of us won’t go to Mexico or on a cruise any more. How many have cancelled trips here that supports our tourism and supporting industry? How many billions will be lost because of Barry and his Barrycades?
Oops, forgot this video of Trey Gowdy going off on the NPS director.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ZX8AoB3zX0o
Tina: “That $24 billion is a made up number. Obama is setting up for the next election.”
The number was calculated by Standard and Poors. Obama does not run Standard and Poors.
Your confidence is astounding, though; you didn’t so much as run a Google search on the number you’re criticizing before you concluded that it was “made up,” simply because you didn’t want to hear it. The disgusting combo of arrogance and ignorance strikes again.
“Or does it actually cost that much to pay park rangers to set up barriers and harass people?”
I genuinely don’t understand why you insist on appearing so stupid. Park rangers were not paid to set up barriers during the shutdown; that was done on a volunteer basis. And there have been no credible reports of any “harassment.” Furthermore, the shutdown–which your party orchestrated for no discernable reason–did a lot more than close national parks. TIME has the breakdown:
“–About $3.1 billion in lost government services, according to the research firm IHS
–$152 million per day in lost travel spending, according to the U.S. Travel Association
–$76 million per day lost because of National Parks being shut down, according to the National Park Service
–$217 million per day in lost federal and contractor wages in the Washington D.C. metropolitan area alone
Hundreds of thousands of federal workers bore the economic brunt of the shutdown. But small businesses also suffered from frozen government contracts and stalled business loans. Tourism suffered from closed national parks, and military families had to cope without childcare and other services. Federal workers will receive back-pay under the deal, but contractors will probably not get their lost wages. The stall in cash-flow could affect spending during the holiday shopping season.”
http://swampland.time.com/2013/10/17/heres-what-the-government-shutdown-cost-the-economy/#ixzz2iDsiaFBr
“And talk about a sham stance! How about President Obama’s lies about his ugly nightmarish healthcare law:
It will save money. CBO said the law would only cost $940 billion )only) and over time, because of cost savings, bring the debt down…but, uh oh, down the road CBO said it would cost more:”
You’re still misleading. The very CBO report you link to confirms that the law will still save money in the long run, saying,”The ACA includes many other provisions that, on net, will reduce federal budget deficits. Taking the coverage provisions and other provisions together, CBO and JCT estimated that the ACA will reduce deficits over the next decade.”
You seriously just tried to prove that Obama was lying when he said the law would save money…by citing a report that confirms the law will save money.
“Obama also promised we could keep our insurance if we liked it…but uh oh, turns out that’s not true.”
It is true for the majority of people.
“The regulations added to Obamacare change everyone’s insurance…policies are being cancelled. A lot of people are losing insurance at work…”
You have an actual number, or are you just using the phrase “a lot” because of the anecdotes you’ve heard on the Internet? Actual analyses have shown that the ACA has not caused a significant increase in layoffs or cuts in hours. Even Mark Zandi, who expected to see those results, said that the research doesn’t support it.
“it’s also gonna cost people a lot more money in premiums, deductibles and co-pays.”
You’re not factoring in the federal subsidies for people on the exchanges, among other things. FactCheck has a good breakdown of who will pay more and who will pay less:
“As we wrote recently in our wrap-up of Obamacare myths, how much you pay depends on such things as your age, health and whether or not you are currently insured. Those who are uninsured and have a preexisting condition will likely pay less than they would have otherwise. Those who are uninsured but young and healthy will likely pay more (without accounting for any subsidies they may receive). Those who are insured through their employer likely won’t see much change either way. And some of the currently uninsured will pay little to nothing because they will join Medicaid — the program will expand by 13 million Americans by 2020 under the law, according to Congressional Budget Office estimates.
Employer-sponsored premiums did go up slightly due to the law from 2010 to 2011 (a 1 percent to 3 percent increase, according to experts), because of added benefits, such as coverage for dependents up to age 26, free preventive care and an increase in caps on coverage. Since then, premium growth has been 4 percent on average for 2012 and 2013, modest growth rates historically.
For those who buy their own insurance, it’s difficult to make generalizations about who will pay less or more. Many who had purchased on the individual market in the past will get more generous benefits. And the vast majority buying their own exchange plans — 80 percent, according to the Congressional Budget Office — will receive subsidies that bring their total out-of-pocket costs down.
Plans sold to individuals can no longer charge more based on health status or gender, but they can vary premiums based on geography, age and tobacco use. A RAND study, published in August and sponsored by the Department of Health and Human Services and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, estimated there would be “no widespread trend toward sharply higher prices in the individual market,” in the words of the lead author. Rates would likely vary from state to state and based on individual circumstances. So Paul is wrong to make the sweeping claim that “everybody is going to pay more.”
http://www.factcheck.org/2013/09/factchecking-pernicious-obamacare-claims/
POP QUIZ: What percentage of Senate Democrats got to vote on any of the funding bills House Republicans sent them to avoid shutting the Government down?
Chris: “The number was calculated by Standard and Poors”
Thanks Chris. Nice of you to let us in on the source. I’d still like to see the accounting. A portion of the government was stopped for a short time. The non use of the electrical alone would be an interesting figure…was that savings figured in?
One way or the other Obama’s big speech after the government opened, including that BS number, was anything but presidential. He was, isn’t he always, in full campaign mode. The man just does not lead…the government and the nation are a reflection of his lack of leadership and it ain’t pretty.
“I genuinely don’t understand why you insist on appearing so stupid.”
You can’t recognize sarcasm and you think I appear stupid?
“And there have been no credible reports of any ‘harassment.’”
There’s that word again. You really are something. The people that felt harassed are in a better position to decide. You’ve been spending too much time in the liberal echo machine to have heard their version of events.
Your breakdown of “lost government services” is a good indication of the high cost of government bureaucracy. How many days did a few people miss work and this is the cost to taxpayers? Incredible! Even more incredible is that this was never an issue when Democrats shut down government
Sorry Chris the revelation is purely political and another indication that Democrats are slime that put power and party above everything.
“Hundreds of thousands of federal workers bore the economic brunt of the shutdown.”
I wonder if Standard and Poors has evaluated the loss to the American people of the Obama economy? The rich are making out okay but the middle class is falling into poverty, millions are out of a job or working part time for low pay. I believe you are one of those people and you are expected to pay for that bureaucracy that cost MUCH MORE than a few days of shutdown.
It’s worth noting how bent you people get about money when you can use the issue as a hammer to beat up opponents. Sure wish you gave a damn about Obama racking up twice the debt in four years that Bush did in eight.
CBO and JCT estimated that the ACA will reduce deficits over the next decade.”
If it happens, which I doubt, it will be good for Obamas record. Considering what it will cost the people in higher premiums, high deductibles, and higher co-pays I’d say he accomplished it with what amounts to a hidden tax on the middle class and the rich…on retired people and on young people who will bear the brunt…if they sign up. And what incentive is there for them to sign up? they are young and healthy and more likely to just pay the fine (TAX). The last assessment I read indicated 30,000 would still not have insurance.
Talk about stupid…and deceitful! This wasn’t about reforming the industry to make healthcare and insurance more affordable and accessible. This is about power and control in the hands of what Democrats believe will become permanent one party government. Tyranny!
“Even Mark Zandi, who expected to see those results, said that the research doesn’t support it.”
Mark Zandi is as entitled to his guess as any other economist…they don’t all agree.
An article in Forbes looks at the opinions of economist that dismiss the job or hours loss claim. I found this to be particularly of interest because the left quite often uses changes in definitions to covertly fool the public:
Freedom works has compiled a list of companies that have announced layoffs. There are millions of small businesses that will never be counted or asked.
IBD is tracking reports of job losses and cuts in hours.
The loss of jobs and hours is a result of Obamacare but it is also a result of Obama’s overall economic policies as the linked article indicates.
Also this April 2013 blog post quotes Zandi from an appearance on CNBC”
The blogger concludes by writing: “Even the private Federal Reserve has admitted that Obamacare’s tenets have prompted employers to hire the bare minimum of employees, and to cut workers’ hours in order to avoid the burdensome requirements. Others, including many small businesses, have simply avoided hiring new employees altogether as a result of Obamacare, which proves that the legislation is stunting economic growth.”
How do you count the jobs lost when a small employer simply decides not to hire or to put off growing his business? It’s impossible to count personal decisions that are shared with no one except perhaps the wife or a few bowling buddies.
Think Chris. This is your life and your future. You are living the result of Obama policies and this horrible law. Healthcare reforms that don’t carry this destructive baggage can be made. It is crazy that you continue to defend this so vociferously.
“You’re not factoring in the federal subsidies for people…”
I’m talking about the people that don’t qualify for subsidies!
YOu keep making an argument as if you can prove this law will not harm anyone…that’s a comforting fantasy but it is not reality. This law is a massive redistribution gimmick that puts mega power in the hands of Democrats. They don’t care about the economic consequence for the people that are forced to pay the bill. You apparently don’t either even if it means you, a college graduate, will have little opportunity other than to work at WalMart and save nothing more than your mandated social security.
Obama misled the people (some of us didn’t buy it for a minute) when he made those promises. He was not being truthful about the changes that would happen. Nothing you say will change that for the people who are now experiencing the nightmare of exploding insurance and healthcare costs or losing their businesses.
Forbes
Peggy how about, zero? Just guessing. I didn’t bother to google…just so you know. I wasn’t trying to pull the wool over your eyes or anything. Please don’t report me to the thought police if I’m wrong 😉
Tina, you got it right. Just like there were ZERO republicans who voted for ObamaCare back in 2010.
The Democrats get 100% credit for both ObamaCare and the shutdown.