democratic healthcare swindle

dagobaker

dagobaker

Well-Known Member
we have 47 million uninsured (im one of them)
12 million of those are illegal so that leaves 35 million
they want to spend 850 billion for health care from 2013 to 2019 or 7 years
but.....after spending thats we still have 18million uninsured
so for 121 billion a year the government can insure 17 million people
that works out to 7117 per person per year
WOW.......FUCK.....what a great idea
so a family of 5 costs how much? almost 35 THOUSAND per year for health care
yea pelosi and reid and obama are looking out for your tax dollars lol
 
MexicanWarlord420

MexicanWarlord420

Active Member
dagobaker said:
we have 47 million uninsured (im one of them)
12 million of those are illegal so that leaves 35 million
they want to spend 850 billion for health care from 2013 to 2019 or 7 years
but.....after spending thats we still have 18million uninsured
so for 121 billion a year the government can insure 17 million people
that works out to 7117 per person per year
WOW.......FUCK.....what a great idea
so a family of 5 costs how much? almost 35 THOUSAND per year for health care
yea pelosi and reid and obama are looking out for your tax dollars lol
Click to expand...
That's clearly 8 years.
 
I

Illegal Smile

Guest
The bill is 2000 pages long and the cost still comes to over $2 million PER WORD!
 
CrackerJax

CrackerJax

New Member
Forget that Mexi didn't bother to do the math (I'm being kind here :lol:)...7, 8....so what? Think a year invalidates the debt? :lol:


The Dem's are in hurry up mode because the polls tell each and every week that the more time the citizens have to examine the issue, they are turning against public health care.

The ppl don't want a new monstrous govt. program when the country is ON HOLD financially.

We have two wars going, massive debt, a crumbling dollar and a crumbling foreign policy. Taxes are going up up up and business is going down down down. The wealthy are fleeing with their assets and investors are holding their cash...waiting. waiting for a sign of fair weather.

What are we offered? More taxes, more regulation, and now a massive takeover of 17% of the GDP, and with a bill designed to explode in costs down the road.

How could the polls be going down??? What's wrong with the American ppl?

Nothing at all is wrong with them. It's the Democrats whom are wrong. P.S. ... They know it, and they don't care.

They want what they want and they want it now. Like 5 year olds they are.

Obama reversed his priorities the day he got elected.

It's the economy stupid ... sound familiar?
 
kjar

kjar

Active Member
lets not forget all the deficit spending for the wars. remember the gov't isn't allowed to do deficit spending on social issues. The Bill includes how it will be paid for. whether you agree with it is another issue. There is no plan to pay for the wars right now; it's all deficit spending with no return on investment. if your worried about money your being 'penny wise but pound foolish' here.

"...instead of spending billions on the war I can use that so I can feed the poor..." -wyclef jean
 
G

GoldenAss

Active Member
Meanwhile, from 2013-2019, assuming only a 3% annual growth rate, the defense budget will look like this:
650 billion this year, so
2013 = 710
2014 = 731
2015 = 753
2016 = 776
2017 = 800
2019 = 823

Total 7-year budget = 4593 billion dollars.

Or 14816.129 per citizen. So how much would that cost a family of five? Seventy four thousand dollars!!!!!111

Jesus fuck!

Well, at least the money will make peoples lives better.

Oh, wait.
 
G

GoldenAss

Active Member
"Obama reversed his priorities the day he got elected."

At least we can agree on this. I'm on the left, and decided to bite the bullet and hope that Obama, despite his lackluster legislative accomplishments, was something of the real deal. He postured as anti-war, but he's dithering on Iraq withdrawal and actually going to send 35,000 more kids to die in Afghanistan. He postured as pro-universal healthcare, and I can assure you the package being considered satisfies no one I know; it's not a government take-over. I wish it were, but it's not. He postured as change, but for all the right is up in arms, he's really not changing much.
 
kjar

kjar

Active Member
"dithering"

I love how when Cheney said this single word everyone started repeating it like crazy. funny thing is obama is doing more in Afghanistan then Cheney ever did. however, it still isn't working. it's time we instate a war tax. people will think twice about supporting wars and when we do go to war at least it won't be deficit spending.
 
CrackerJax

CrackerJax

New Member
Too bad u didn't run the numbers first. It takes $$$$$$$$$. He didn't have any.

I know what ur going to say. That isn't right, and ur right. But ... that's the way it is right now.

McCain stuck to his spending limits, Obama threw them away completely (after he said he wouldn't).

I'd vote for Paul, but only if I see a real groundswell. I didn't.

If Paul could get on the Rep. ticket as VP, that would be his very best chance at helping the country.

Unite the CLANS!!! I myself am an independent, but one must face reality. Take the Rep. money and get Paul in there.

Who cares what his label is, it's Ron Paul!!! :peace:
 
I

Illegal Smile

Guest
I could never support Ron Paul because of his myopic isolationist views. It was hard enough to support McCain.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
CrackerJax said:
Too bad u didn't run the numbers first. It takes $$$$$$$$$. He didn't have any.

I know what ur going to say. That isn't right, and ur right. But ... that's the way it is right now.

McCain stuck to his spending limits, Obama threw them away completely (after he said he wouldn't).

I'd vote for Paul, but only if I see a real groundswell. I didn't.

If Paul could get on the Rep. ticket as VP, that would be his very best chance at helping the country.

Unite the CLANS!!! I myself am an independent, but one must face reality. Take the Rep. money and get Paul in there.

Who cares what his label is, it's Ron Paul!!! :peace:
Click to expand...
If everybody that "was going to" vote for Ron Paul had there may have been a groundswell. Voting for the status quo ensures the continuance of the status quo.

Obama or McCain? Both are fiscally irresponsible, support the U.S. sticking it's nose where it doesn't belong and wouldn't know freedom if it bit them in the nuts. Both think government should run your life for you...Ron Paul doesn't. THAT is a huge difference.
 
CrackerJax

CrackerJax

New Member
If you want the highest office in the world, you need a heavy campaign footprint. So far, the Independent party has not been able to deliver the dough.

Just one of those sad facts one can't get around.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
Illegal Smile said:
I could never support Ron Paul because of his myopic isolationist views. It was hard enough to support McCain.
Click to expand...
Isolationist? Incorrect. He was all about free trade.

If you mean "non interventionist" where the USA doesn't go trying to occupy other countries you'd be correct.

You have my condolences for supporting McCain. You do realize that fool is married to an alcohol heiress, yet is fine with imprisoning pot smokers?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top