patrick.net

thomaswong.1986 says

than you have nothing to worry about..

Of course I have nothing to worry about.

thomaswong.1986 says

357 days till 2014 mid term elections.

Yes, that is when the Elephant becomes an extinct animal.

I wonder if this if franchise-able? Perhaps I should pitch it on Shark Tank. I think they guy Kevin might invest, as long as he gets a cut on every rental.

Homeboy says

"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."

Stop being dishonest. Post the rest of the story:

" 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."

Reduce revenues means roll back the ACA tax increases plain and simple. You know that so why try to pass it off as savings? Increasing taxes isn't savings. Make you case on facts, not playing semantical games. Your credibility is getting lower all the time.

I think guys who bang dolls are still a few steps above Bronies and Furries.

Those guys are messed up.

bob2356 says

Stop being dishonest. Post the rest of the story:

" 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."

What the FUCK are you talking about? How was I "dishonest"? Average Bear claimed the CBO said Obamacare was a "fiscal shit storm". They did NOT say that.

Fiscal - of or relating to government revenue, esp. taxes.

If it's revenue neutral, it is NOT a "fiscal shit storm". There is no "rest of the story". If you think I was claiming that there is no cost, you didn't read what I wrote. OF COURSE subsidies cost money. Duh. But they are PAID for, according to the CBO analysis. Engage your brain a bit before you throw out false charges of "dishonesty".

bob2356 says

Reduce revenues means roll back the ACA tax increases plain and simple.

Of course it does. Is that not obvious? Sheesh, I'm glad we agree on what "revenue" means.

bob2356 says

You know that so why try to pass it off as savings? Increasing taxes isn't savings. Make you case on facts, not playing semantical games. Your credibility is getting lower all the time.

That's a wonderful strawman argument you made up there. If I had actually said "increased taxes are savings", you would really have me there. Good thing I never said any such thing.

Look, this is a chart of wealth disparity in the U.S.:

Do I care if the wealthy have to pay slightly more in taxes so that we can all have a guaranteed right to health insurance? Nope. Yes, it costs more money to allow everyone to have insurance, rather than the old system of simply dumping anyone who becomes high risk and forcing them into bankruptcy. Think of the tax on the wealthy as a clawback of a tiny portion of the insane financial gains the elite has plundered from the economy.

Funny, of our two most loud-mouthed right wingers, zzyzzx and CaptainShuddup, one thinks ACA is TOO socialist, and the other thinks it is not socialist ENOUGH.

When the detractors can't even agree on the fundamental reason they are against something, it calls their whole position into question, don't you think?

WOW! The UNtrustworthy are certainly in control of what information is apparent to the people!

Say hey! This was in the Wall Street Journal on March 30, 1999. Note "... how much it will buy."

Holy cow/interesting/compelling ...!

And where is it up to date??? Right here ... see the first chart shown in this thread.
Recent Dow day is Monday, November 11, 2013 __ Level is 100.7

WOW! It is hideous that this is hidden! Is there any such "Homes, Inflation Adjusted"? Yes! This was in the New York Times on August 27, 2006:

And up to date (by me) is here:
http://patrick.net/?p=1219038&c=999083#comment-999083

WOW! The UNtrustworthy are certainly in control of what information is apparent to the people!

And http://patrick.net/?p=1230886

egads101 says

Say! this post is just as fucking useless as it was the last time you bumped it, dumbfuck!

Define "Leadershit".
Include in your definition the absence of this from the public eye:
The Public Be Suckered
http://patrick.net/?p=1230886

ttsmyf says

egads101 says

Say! this post is just as fucking useless as it was the last time you bumped it, dumbfuck!

Define "Leadershit".

Include in your definition the absence of this from the public eye:

The Public Be Suckered

http://patrick.net/?p=1230886

LoL! 10,700 views and counting
Buyers Beware!

False flag.

Call it Crazy says

even if it takes a change to the law,

EVEN IF?

STFU Bubba and resume traversing 3rd-world countries and continue telling them how you single handedly abolished their poverty and hunger problems, from the podium in the conclave to those 3 tyrannical people, after getting there in a mostly limo and SUV convoy.

The Weekly 'Standard'. LOL

The monthly chart clearly shows gold speculation fueled by the threat of government default.

Quigley says

The monthly chart clearly shows gold speculation fueled by the threat of
government default.

Ya think???

And maybe some hype by selfish individuals.

Plans usually term at the end of the year. Are they going to let people grandfather into old plans forever?

WOW! The UNtrustworthy are certainly in control of what information is apparent to the people!

Say hey! This was in the Wall Street Journal on March 30, 1999. Note "... how much it will buy."

Holy cow/interesting/compelling ...!

And where is it up to date??? Right here ... see the first chart shown in this thread.
Recent Dow day is Tuesday, November 12, 2013 __ Level is 100.5

WOW! It is hideous that this is hidden! Is there any such "Homes, Inflation Adjusted"? Yes! This was in the New York Times on August 27, 2006:

And up to date (by me) is here:
http://patrick.net/?p=1219038&c=999083#comment-999083

WOW! The UNtrustworthy are certainly in control of what information is apparent to the people!

And http://patrick.net/?p=1230886

What should Obama do, MANDATE that the insurers issue policies and dictate their terms?

Because, then he actually WOULD be a dictator. Funny the way Republicans feel free to fault Obama for failing to do this, when they've spent over 5 years hating him for being a socialist dictator who shoved Obamacare down America's throat.

Automan Empire says

What should Obama do, MANDATE that the insurers issue policies and dictate their terms?

Because, then he actually WOULD be a dictator. Funny the way Republicans feel free to fault Obama for failing to do this, when they've spent over 5 years hating him for being a socialist dictator who shoved Obamacare down America's throat.

Once he forces everyone to participate, all rules go out the window. Why do you hate Fascism?

Automan Empire says

What should Obama do, MANDATE that the insurers issue policies and dictate their terms?

No, I think Republicans would just want Obama to remove the MANDATED minimum requirement for the bronze, silver and gold plans, and then insurance companies would naturally offer whatever they were offering before.

upisdown says

The Weekly 'Standard'. LOL

the liberals are silent on the matter...

bgamall4 says

Bigsby says

I think you'll find that British savers (and consequently the average tax payer) were the ones swindled by Icelandic banks, you sad conspiracy nut.

You pathetic cockroach, the British had risk. They took the risk. What do you want, risk free? When you invest understand the risk. Trouble is the financial order is tied to derivatives so they refuse to allow risk and countries that should default cannot. You are pathetic.

The bloody article you link to talks about Icelandic banks peddling unrealistic interest rates to UK savers. The Icelandic government initially said that they'd meet the financial obligations of their banks and then reneged on that, leaving UK tax payers to foot the bill, and yet your headline says that Gordon Brown betrayed Iceland. FFS, you are one stupid so-and-so.

How did Iceland save Great Britain? IIRC Iceland was occupied by the Brits and later the US during the war...

Call it Crazy says

“There’s no way we can sugarcoat it anymore, and I don’t say that as a political shot at anyone.”

might as well skip the sugar and go straight to meth and crack...

thunderlips11 says

I think guys who bang dolls are still a few steps above Bronies and Furries.

Those guys are messed up.

I learn something new every day, now I know what a "bronie" is. Ewww!

Yaaaawwwwnnnn, just how many more of these are you going to post this week?

I take it that you know exactly how annoying that you are and how little attention is paid to you, otherwise you'd find a more effective way to be obnoxious by now.

Vicente says

What's with all the masculine features?

I can hear the one on the right now,,,"do I look fat?"

WOW! The UNtrustworthy are certainly in control of what information is apparent to the people!

Say hey! This was in the Wall Street Journal on March 30, 1999. Note "... how much it will buy."

Holy cow/interesting/compelling ...!

And where is it up to date??? Right here ... see the first chart shown in this thread.
Recent Dow day is Wednesday, November 13, 2013 __ Level is 100.9

WOW! It is hideous that this is hidden! Is there any such "Homes, Inflation Adjusted"? Yes! This was in the New York Times on August 27, 2006:

And up to date (by me) is here:
http://patrick.net/?p=1219038&c=999083#comment-999083

WOW! The UNtrustworthy are certainly in control of what information is apparent to the people!

And http://patrick.net/?p=1230886

Let's see, she could ... no not for that. Well, maybe ... no, ew, no never no way. Okay then she could, no she couldn't, she wouldn't and I wouldn't want her to. So there you go, no way, no how, never, ever, ever, ever, no matter what she did or didn't do - she won't get my vote.

The populace has voted. Death! Death! Death!

Fuck bitch piss cunt spooge cock-puking ass fuck shitter!

That is: No.

As long as she promises not to go nude-she has my vote.

She has my vote.

It's about time we had a cabinet consisting of sadistic power lesbians, they will kick the world's ass!

It would help if she would put the video of her caning Bill after the Monica scandal with a bamboo rod on you tube.

If she can prove that she will be more competent and less liberal than GOP candidate.

MSNBC...LMAO

too bad they didnt break out Chris Mattews on the poll..

egads101 says

19% of this country is bat shit stupid right wingers, who would say they trust Fox news, that 2+2 = 5, then Obama claiming 2+2=4.

Roberto.. do you too get that "Tingle" when you see Obama...

APOCALYPSEFUCK is Comptroller says

PatNet Asks: How Could Hillary Clinton Get Your Vote for President?

two women enter.. one woman leaves....
.
i say its Thunderdome with Palin...Clinton hasnt got a chance...
.

Homeboy says

If it's revenue neutral, it is NOT a "fiscal shit storm". There is no "rest of the story". If you think I was claiming that there is no cost, you didn't read what I wrote. OF COURSE subsidies cost money. Duh. But they are PAID for, according to the CBO analysis. Engage your brain a bit before you throw out false charges of "dishonesty".

Oh bullshit. You posted the half the cbo information saying repealing the aca would increase the federal budget deficit. The implication is clear, that aca is somehow saving money therefore reducing the budget deficit. That's dishonest in any book.

What's with your obsession with twisting facts to make the aca look better than it is? Why won't you face up to the reality that the aca doesn't lower the cost of health care one cent. It only changes who pays. I will completely agree with you that aca will be a success if shuffling payers is your only criteria.

God it's hard to see the forest with all the fucking trees in the way.

Dan8267 says

lostand confused says

The only thing he did is make Romneycare go nationwide. ... That he is lying hypocrite is not in question. But the opposition is a bunch of loons who try and shut down the govt and make us default on our debt-something we will never be able to recover from. Sigh-is it too much to ask for a politician who cares a little bit about the country?

Well said. In the long run, Obama isn't going to be remembered as the first black president, but rather as a terrible president. Unfortunately, we're stuck with hoping for an alternative in the Democratic Party, because the Republican Party isn't going to produce a nominee that isn't god-awful.

He will be remembered as the shittiest door to door used insurance snake oil salesman, the world has ever known