Dems; "Agree with us or STFU"

[rushmc 18]

And something still stinks about the "militia" arrests this weekend but that is another story (but it is related IMO)

Back to the thread

Quote

Obamacare's Prescription for Disaster: $14 Billion Cost to Industry
Wednesday, 31 Mar 2010 07:53 PM


By: David A. Patten

Major business groups want a provision of healthcare-reform repealed because it could cost American corporations up to $14 billion at a time when people desperately need jobs.

James A. Klein, president of the American Benefits Council, warns the same tax-law change that led AT&T to take a $1 billion charge last week represents "a serious mistake that is having negative and unintended consequences."

On Wednesday, Boeing became the latest company to announce a write down of value due to healthcare reform, deducting $150 million from its first quarter earnings.

Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a former director of the Congressional Budget Office, and the head of President George W. Bush's council of economic advisers, tells Newsmax that the higher taxes incurred by AT&T and other corporations reflect the deep flaws in the healthcare reform measure, which he calls "a dreadful bill, one this country really can't afford and shouldn't have pursued."

He adds that the tax changes will burden the American economy's ability to create jobs.

"That money's going to come out of the ability to invest in capital, the ability to hire new workers, the ability to do R & D -- all the things that are at the heart of making the economy grow faster," he says.

At the heart of the controversy are changes in subsidies first offered to businesses when the system to provide prescription drug benefits to seniors, known as Medicare Part D, was enacted in 2003.

Many major companies that already paid to provide prescription-drug benefits to their retirees would simply shift them onto Medicare Part D, disrupting seniors' healthcare plans while increasing the costs of Medicare Part D.

To encourage businesses to keep the retirees on the corporate plans, two incentives were offered: The corporations would receive a federal subsidy of $1,330 per retiree, and they would be able to deduct the value of the subsidy from their corporate tax bills.

Congressional Democrats and White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs have referred to the double incentive as a "tax loophole." Not so, according to Holtz-Eakin, who says Congress "carefully calibrated" the precise, smallest subsidy necessary to keep companies from cancelling prescription-drug coverage from retirees' plans.

The healthcare plan signed by President Obama changes that structure, however, continuing the subsidy while ending the tax deductibility of the program costs. The change affects the profitability of a wide range of companies struggling to remain competitive in a tough economy.

In addition to AT&T's whopping $1 billion write-off in value and Boeing’s $150 million, the other companies taking charges read like a Who's Who of American industry:

* Deere & Company - $150 million
* Caterpillar - $100 million
* 3 M - $90 million
* Goodrich - $10 million
* Valero - $15-$20 million
* AK Steel - $31 million

In addition, telecommunications giant Verizon has sent a letter to employees warning that their healthcare plans may change as a result of healthcare reform.

No one knows exactly how deep the tax hike will bite, or how many jobs will evaporate from the U.S. economy as a result. More than 3,500 companies now receive the tax break. Credit Suisse has estimated the impact on U.S. business at $4.5 billion. But a U.S. consulting firm, Towers Watson, has estimated the true cost at $14 billion over several years.

"There is no question what's going to happen in terms of the direction," Holtz-Eakin tells Newsmax. "This is bad news. The question is how quickly does it happen, and whether it shows up as higher unemployment, or simply as more discouraged workers who don't show up in the measure of unemployment rate, but in the end represent a real economic loss."

Holtz-Eakin adds that the impact will be amplified by the bill's overall impact of the bill, which he says will increase the federal deficit despite the findings of the CBO that he used to direct.

"So it adds to the pressures for higher interest rates, higher taxes," he says.

"None of that is good economic news. There's nothing in this that would generally cause the economy to grow faster, create more jobs, or provide more income to individuals."

Holtz-Eakin predicts that some companies will simply drop prescription-drug coverage for retirees, thereby dumping them onto Medicare Part D. And the worst fallout from healthcare still lies ahead, he says.

"I think we're just starting to get the bad news," Holtz-Eakin tells Newsmax. "Think about what the bill does. It has terribly intrusive regulatory structure. A lot of insurance companies simply won't be able to survive. We know they'll be closing their doors, with direct job losses as the consequence.

"We also know that the states have been severely handicapped in their ability to go forward because of the new Medicaid obligations. They'll turn around to the business community and start raising taxes because their budgets are a mess. That will hurt the economy," he says.

That dour evaluation may help explain why The Wall Street Journal earlier this week editorialized that the new provisions amount to “a wholesale destruction of wealth and capital."

The announcements by the corporations -- who were complying with SEC-enforced accounting rules that require sharing of information on the objective value of their corporations -- has set off quick retaliation by Democrats.

House Energy and Commerce Chairman Henry Waxman declared the write-downs appear to "conflict with independent analyses."

He ordered the CEO's of major corporations to defend their write-offs during congressional hearings next month, asking them to provide "any analyses" that the companies had conducted on healthcare costs, "including e-mail messages, sent to or prepared or reviewed by senior company officials related to the projected impact of health care reform…"

House Minority Leader John Boehner shot back: "Instead of interrogating America's private-sector job creators, Congress should be listening to them, heeding their warnings about the effects of this deeply flawed new law, and replacing it with reforms that will help them get back to creating jobs."

Megan McArdle, business and economics editor for The Atlantic, wrote Tuesday that a failure to announce a reduction in company value would amount to misleading investors.

"Obviously, Waxman is incensed because this seems to put the lie to the promise that if you like your current plan, nothing will change," she wrote.

"But this was never true. Medicare Advantage beneficiaries are basically going to see their generous benefits slashed, retiree drug benefits suddenly cost more and may now be discontinued, and ultimately, more than a few employers will almost certainly find it cheaper to shut down their plans.

"If Congress didn't want those things to happen, it should have passed a different law," McArdle concluded.

Whether the charges have much impact on actual business operations is problematic. Many investors anticipated that reform could have an effect on short-term corporate results, and the only immediate impact appears to be a slight downward pressure on the firms' stock evaluations.

The American Benefits Council, an association representing 300 large corporations, is urging President Obama and Congress to repeal the tax increases on companies that provide prescription-drug benefits to their retirees.

U.S. Chamber of Commerce President Thomas J. Donahue blasted Waxman's decision to haul the companies before Congress simply because they've complied with legal requirements to inform investors of how the changes enacted by Congress impact their viability.

"They're searching for a way to blame these businesses for a mess that the lawmakers themselves have made," Donohue wrote.
© Newsmax. All rights reserved.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[matthewcline 0]

Did you forget the link?

Matt

An Instructors first concern is student safety.
So, start being safe, first!!!

[quade 3]

Marc, I did a search of the article you linked. Nowhere in the article does any person say, "Agree with us or STFU".

Can you link that or are you just making stuff up?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[fasted3 0]

Who needs a link? He posted the whole story.
To the title of the thread:
Yes, that is what the Dems are saying. I think they would rather give the Repubs a little ground to get some bipartisan agreement, but that hasn't worked. The R's have opposed anything and everything, and now have to live with the results of that strategy. Good! when they had the ball, the average American got screwed, so I'm for giving the other team a chance. Instead of saying NO to everything, I think the R's should abstain from voting altogether.

But what do I know?

[Andy9o8 0]

In all seriousness: So what? The corporate controllers of The Message who want to scare the shit out of the common folk that their children will be eaten alive by the Big Bad Boogeyman are the very same people who stand most to benefit (read: profit handsomely) from maintaining the status quo.

And the people lap it up like sugary porridge.

[yourmomma 0]

If the health care bill does not result in your chicken little apocalyptic world view coming to fruition. Will you admit it or will you cling to the propaganda, and in lock step with master declare it utter failure. Then propagate the explanation to everyone that the only way to fix the problem is to go back to the days when an ex propagandist with altzhimers decided lower taxes on the rich and ever increasing spending was the answer to everything. Health care included.

[rhaig 0]

Quote

Did you forget the link?

Matt

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Obamacare%27s+Prescription+for+Disaster%3A+%2414+Billion+Cost+to+Industry&l=1

--
Rob

[kallend 1,683]

NEWSMAX always gives the unbiased truth.

Must be why the stock market has tanked since the HC law was passed.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

If the health care bill does not result in your chicken little apocalyptic world view coming to fruition, will you admit it, or will you cling to the propaganda, and in lock step with master declare it utter failure.

You mean if he's proven wrong will he STFU? Not likely.

[riddler 0]

Republicans: "we're not happy. Ever. Period."

I figured you all would be chanting "drill, baby, drill" right now, instead of pining over a watered-down healthcare bill that actually saves the government money.

Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

[quade 3]

Quote

Republicans: "we're not happy. Ever. Period."
I figured you all would be chanting "drill, baby, drill" right now, instead of pining over a watered-down healthcare bill that actually saves the government money.

Even if Obama's doing things FOR Republicans, things they specifically asked for in legislation or as a campaign rallying cry, they're against it if Obama does it. They, as a party, simply don't make a lot of sense.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[rushmc 18]

Hmm
Nice occupation you have

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Republicans: "we're not happy. Ever. Period."

I figured you all would be chanting "drill, baby, drill" right now, instead of pining over a watered-down healthcare bill that actually saves the government money.

Drill?

Better take a closer look at what he is saying and offering
Not much there

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Marc, I did a search of the article you linked. Nowhere in the article does any person say, "Agree with us or STFU".

Can you link that or are you just making stuff up?

Has to be printed in the article to have an opinion on it?

Ask yourself this, why would House Energy and Commerce Chairman Henry Waxman say what he is saying a call CEO's to congress in such a threatening manner?

They should all tell him to take a hike

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 18]

Quote

NEWSMAX always gives the unbiased truth.

Must be why the stock market has tanked since the HC law was passed.

Point out the lies or mis-characterizations kallend, if you can
Since the stock market has been mentioned a few times by you this week, you must be saying the US is not under the full impact of the Obama policies right?

With that, did you see the unemployment numbers?

How many months of job losses?
Oh ya, woulda been worse right?

Well, at this point, it is all Obamas or none of it is his. Which is it?

Oh, and I don't expect and answer. I do expect another kallend mis-direct or non-answer, so don't bother if you don't want to

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[yourmomma 0]

Well.. I'm a lot more honest.

[RonD1120 58]

Quote

I do expect another kallend mis-direct or non-answer, so don't bother if you don't want to

FYI and future reference (copy and save):

SARGE’S GUIDE TO LIBERAL DEBATE TACTICS

1. SHOW UP WITH YOUR TALKING POINTS. Make sure you have something that you feel will show your opponents in a negative light, and make that the subject of the discussion.

2. DEMONIZE YOU OPPONENT. Attempt to cover them with shame, the same way you would a 4 year old that touches his pee-pee.

3. IF YOU SEE SOMEONE DOING #2 ABOVE, SUPPORT HIM IMMEDIATELY.

4. ACCUSE YOU OPPONENT OF SAYING SOMETHING HE DIDN’T. Attempt to define his statements in a negative light. Interpret them this way and state it as fact that he did actually say it. NEVER ask him…always TELL him what his meaning was. 

5. CLAIM THAT IT IS “OLD NEWS” AND NOT WORTHY OF DISCUSSION. This applies especially when the discussion turns to the misdeeds of Democrat Party Leadership. 

6. QUOTE AN UNSOURCED NEW ARTICLE. Always quote the article selectively, or describe it in a general manner. 

7. IF ASKED DIRECT QUESTIONS ABOUT THE NEWS YOU HAVE PROVIDED, RESPOND INDIRECTLY. Never actually answer the specific of the question. 

8. IF ASKED TO SOURCE YOU NEWS ARTICLE, IGNORE THE QUESTION.

9. ACCUSE YOUR OPPONENT OF A MENTAL DEFECT OR LACK OF INTELLIGNCE. Personal attacks of this sort are especially useful as the target will almost always try to defend himself, thus changing the subject.

10. IF THE PARTY LEADERSHIP IS ATTACKED, ATTEMPT TO TURN THE TABLES BY INFERRING THAT SOMEONE IN YOUR OPPONENTS PARTY IS JUST AS BAD. 

11. ACCUSE YOUR OPPONENT OF NOT ANSWERING YOUR QUESTIONS. Try to do this before he has an opportunity to. Try to infer that it you have given him multiple opportunities to do so. Do it even if the question has been answered. If he misses the question and asks you to repeat it DO NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES REPEAT THE QUESTION FOR HIS BENEFIT). 

12. RESORT TO INSULTS. Try to question you opponent’s masculinity, his resolve, ANYTHING, but try to diminish and demean him. (This is know as the “LBJ Rule” codified by him thus: “Accuse your opponent of being a pig fornicator, then make him deny it.) REMEMBER, IF YOU HAVE TO RESORT TO THIS TACTIC, IT MEANS YOUR OPPONENT IS WINNING! 

13. ACCUSE YOUR OPPONENT OF BEING UNINFORMED. This works especially well when you are asked to provide your sources. It is especially effective if you work in a reference to someone you have already demonized. Rush Limbaugh is currently the Demon of Choice. 

14. SPEAK CRYPTICALLY. Try to make it difficult for people to divine your meaning

15. CHANGE THE SUBJECT. Try to get it back to your original talking points (see #1 above) 

16. APPEAR TO AGREE. You will need to do this in order to achieve #15. 

17. CLAIM YOUR OPPONENT IS BEING UNREASONABLE OR WON’T LISTEN TO REASON, AND LEAVE IN A HUFF. 

18. BAIT YOUR OPPONENT. Needle him, tease him, call him names until he makes an inappropriate post, then scream bloody murder to the Moderator.

19. DENY THE EVIDENCE EXISTS. Ask for evidence of wrongdoing by those you support. When that evidence is presented, continue denying that it exists.

http://battalions2.blogspot.com/2006/01/sarges-guide-to-liberal-debate-tactics.html

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

I do expect another kallend mis-direct or non-answer, so don't bother if you don't want to

FYI and future reference (copy and save):

SARGE’S GUIDE TO LIBERAL DEBATE TACTICS

1. SHOW UP WITH YOUR TALKING POINTS. Make sure you have something that you feel will show your opponents in a negative light, and make that the subject of the discussion.

2. DEMONIZE YOU OPPONENT. Attempt to cover them with shame, the same way you would a 4 year old that touches his pee-pee.

3. IF YOU SEE SOMEONE DOING #2 ABOVE, SUPPORT HIM IMMEDIATELY.

4. ACCUSE YOU OPPONENT OF SAYING SOMETHING HE DIDN’T. Attempt to define his statements in a negative light. Interpret them this way and state it as fact that he did actually say it. NEVER ask him…always TELL him what his meaning was. 

5. CLAIM THAT IT IS “OLD NEWS” AND NOT WORTHY OF DISCUSSION. This applies especially when the discussion turns to the misdeeds of Democrat Party Leadership. 

6. QUOTE AN UNSOURCED NEW ARTICLE. Always quote the article selectively, or describe it in a general manner. 

7. IF ASKED DIRECT QUESTIONS ABOUT THE NEWS YOU HAVE PROVIDED, RESPOND INDIRECTLY. Never actually answer the specific of the question. 

8. IF ASKED TO SOURCE YOU NEWS ARTICLE, IGNORE THE QUESTION.

9. ACCUSE YOUR OPPONENT OF A MENTAL DEFECT OR LACK OF INTELLIGNCE. Personal attacks of this sort are especially useful as the target will almost always try to defend himself, thus changing the subject.

10. IF THE PARTY LEADERSHIP IS ATTACKED, ATTEMPT TO TURN THE TABLES BY INFERRING THAT SOMEONE IN YOUR OPPONENTS PARTY IS JUST AS BAD. 

11. ACCUSE YOUR OPPONENT OF NOT ANSWERING YOUR QUESTIONS. Try to do this before he has an opportunity to. Try to infer that it you have given him multiple opportunities to do so. Do it even if the question has been answered. If he misses the question and asks you to repeat it DO NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES REPEAT THE QUESTION FOR HIS BENEFIT). 

12. RESORT TO INSULTS. Try to question you opponent’s masculinity, his resolve, ANYTHING, but try to diminish and demean him. (This is know as the “LBJ Rule” codified by him thus: “Accuse your opponent of being a pig fornicator, then make him deny it.) REMEMBER, IF YOU HAVE TO RESORT TO THIS TACTIC, IT MEANS YOUR OPPONENT IS WINNING! 

13. ACCUSE YOUR OPPONENT OF BEING UNINFORMED. This works especially well when you are asked to provide your sources. It is especially effective if you work in a reference to someone you have already demonized. Rush Limbaugh is currently the Demon of Choice. 

14. SPEAK CRYPTICALLY. Try to make it difficult for people to divine your meaning

15. CHANGE THE SUBJECT. Try to get it back to your original talking points (see #1 above) 

16. APPEAR TO AGREE. You will need to do this in order to achieve #15. 

17. CLAIM YOUR OPPONENT IS BEING UNREASONABLE OR WON’T LISTEN TO REASON, AND LEAVE IN A HUFF. 

18. BAIT YOUR OPPONENT. Needle him, tease him, call him names until he makes an inappropriate post, then scream bloody murder to the Moderator.

19. DENY THE EVIDENCE EXISTS. Ask for evidence of wrongdoing by those you support. When that evidence is presented, continue denying that it exists.

http://battalions2.blogspot.com/2006/01/sarges-guide-to-liberal-debate-tactics.html

Is there a picture of someone who posts here with this definition? Maybe a group picture?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[tkhayes 154]

Quote

Agree with us or STFU

Sounds like the Bush/Cheney era doesn't it?

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

Agree with us or STFU

Sounds like the Bush/Cheney era doesn't it?

Sounds like government ea al


Do you agree with what the hansome waxman is doing?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[yourmomma 0]

Whoa, you figured me out. I guess I will half to tri listening for the first time. Please refraine from correcting mu spelling as it is far to ahrd to akomplash it on meh own. Member I'm lazy y-el u r undeicydid

[yourmomma 0]

I thoight fer ser that u couldn't out sewtpid de bible. But sure as fuck you proved me wrong.

[RonD1120 58]

Quote

Is there a picture of someone who posts here with this definition? Maybe a group picture?

I guess not. Just the following info on his profile:

SargeVining
Age: 57
Gender: Male
Astrological Sign: Pisces
Zodiac Year: Snake
Industry: Engineering
Location: Rosenberg : Texas : United States

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Whoa, you figured me out. I guess I will half to tri listening for the first time. Please refraine from correcting mu spelling as it is far to ahrd to akomplash it on meh own. Member I'm lazy y-el u r undeicydid

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[yourmomma 0]

The greater at the walmart next to my favorite 475" freestander smiles the same way.