President Obama won a second term! President Obama's VICTORY means a continuance and protection of women's reproductive rights. It means greater health reforms and more jobs in the long run. Americans want this country to be a better one for all, not just for the few!
What is YOUR reaction regarding the Presidential win? In YOUR estimation, do you think that the country will be much better with all the programs and reforms that President Obama has in mind? How will America in 2016 be a MUCH, MUCH better country than in 2008? I would like to add, it is NOT THAT MAN in the White House, it is PRESIDENT OBAMA, please show RESPECT!
Imagine Ryan's take on women's reproductive rights! Disgraceful, ignorant.
Four years later where are the jobs? Four years later unemployment is higher! Four years later the deficit is 6 trillion dollars higher! Four years later GITMO is still open!
Yes of course, but as the election exit polls showed, these idiots are still blaming Bush. So they obviously don't care about those issues, they just want to keep going in the wrong direction of free stuff for the lazy at the expense of the rest of us, whether we are wealthy or not.
GM, What is that they say in "The Big Easy' circles WHAT DAT!
I am happy Obama won. Romney would have been another rebublican disaster.
Congratulations to President Obama from Canada I think it's great that he's been given the chance to continue his work and he has A LOT!! hopefully, he won't get a tonne of objections along the way, as he did from last term co-operation and negotiation between R and D would be awesome to see.
YES, INDEED IF THE REBUBLICANS DECIDE TO COOPERATE AND WORK WITH THE DEMOCRATS! I'LL HOLD MY BREATH ON THAT!
"YES, INDEED IF THE REBUBLICANS DECIDE TO COOPERATE AND WORK WITH THE DEMOCRATS! I'LL HOLD MY BREATH ON THAT!"
You see Dame Scribe, there is the issue in a nutshell. The GOP is to give, give, give and the Dems take, take, take. That is their definition of "compromise". And he even yelled it.
I know it was awful to see so much 'objecting' to idea's - after all, change is what makes/brings/moves a nation forward. Nobody wants to stay in old schools I've made suggestions that maybe before implementing full 'national' change, maybe experiment with 'volunteer' states, to get a idea if it will work or not. I know, life isn't a science experiment but observing small may help provide clues where and what changes may be required. Hope I made sense
I honestly weren't for either one. But I am just so appalled at all the hateful comments that I've had on my facebook news feed from some of the people. It's crazy!
Many will agree that Obama will promote a woman's right to legally murder small people simply because they won't accept responsibility for their actions. I can't say I agree with that viewpoint, but many do.
There is little doubt that Obama will continue his fight to socialize the country, taking more and more from the "have's" to give more and more to the "have not's". It always sounds great, particularly when discussing health care, and the "have not's" are always happy to get something they haven't earned.
There is also little doubt that he will continue to grossly overspend what the tax base produces - it again looks very good to have things and services we can't afford and the future is hidden and doesn't belong to most of us anyway. Putting the bill onto future generations is what the "now" generation wants and the President is happy to continue that policy.
I expect more people to be better off in four years (increased govt. handouts will do that) and I expect more people to have jobs as well. Probably not good ones, but welfare will make up the difference, so that will work. If the policies and attitudes our President pushes continues down the road, I expect a major financial and social meltdown in the country - we simply cannot borrow our way to prosperity without the bill coming due one day. The "haves" that find themselves supporting the country alone will simply leave for greener pastures, making the debt picture even worse and accelerating the economic collapse.
Agreed. I love to hear liberals talk about making us more like those prosperous European countries, which are all failing and collapsing right now. It makes perfect sense doesn't it? Freedom vs. free stuff. I'm on the freedom side, don't want anything I didn't earn.
What do you mean, failing European countries? Just because they have to borrow from their neighbors to maintain a lifestyle they can't produce themselves doesn't mean they are failing - it means they are nice to their (current) citizens. Passing the bill to the future, just like we are.
Neither liberals in general nor our President seem to understand that, but one day we will follow the Europeans into descent if we don't learn. Of course, we can all blame Bush when we do...
Don't be such a wet blanket, wilderness. You people loss fair and square. I say if we did not make it clear as to the direction we need to go in a feudalistic arrangement between the working man and the Thurston Howell types that you seem to support would emerge and be to the disadvantage of those who have to work for a living. I hail the Obama victory and bask in the thrill of victory over the agony of defeat. Unfortunately for you, you are outnumbered and in this democracy that is the way the cookie crumbles.......
Well, at least they don't have to waste their time trying to keep the president from being re-elected. Watch out though, Michelle might decide to run next. That would be a landslide!
As for Michelle, that is a big 10-4 DBQ!
The question is where is Karl Rove, there is probably a contract out on him let by his rightwing buddies furious about all the money he wasted.
Is somebody gonna take him for a ride?
Ridiculous. You obviously don't know how a lot of people feel about her.
She won't run, anyway. She is the best first lady this country has ever had. I don't care how people feel about her.
I will never forget when the President answered criticism of her dresses, "She has the right to bare arms."
That is an incredible, supportive and hilarious comment. I don't like to get too caught up in people's appearances, (or judging their appearances, I find it catty and demeaning to their personalities,) but Michelle Obama is a really beautiful woman, inside and out.
I love people who ingnore the facts. It was your republican Bush and his conservative policies that dug us a hole so deep it took four years to begin to see the light. All this dispite the party of no obstruction. We are in a new century, it is time to turn around and look foward.
So love how everyone ignores the fact that the mess we are in can NOT be placed on ONE president. It's not all bush or obama. This mess took longer than 12 years to make and it will take much longer to fix. This mess was in the works long before any of us could see it. So this hole wasn't dug by Bush, it was dug by every president over the last 30 years AT LEAST including bush and obama!
I'm happy he won. He has given a whole generation inspiration that their dreams are accessible. Michelle Obama is the best first lady ever. She is not stingy with hugs. They keep it real.
As far as the country is concerned, we are still deadlocked as indicated by the election results. We need to heal the divisions. I like what Bill Nelson said in Florida when he defeated Connie Mack, "He's not my enemy, he has been my opponent, and we can work together for the good of the state."
Number one . . . tax reform . . . 10% across the board, no deductions. Now, Washington DC you know what the budget is, no borrowing. Spend it wisely. This is the only way it will work. As far as social issues – live and let live.
I'm thrilled Obama won, I felt that the race between Obama and Romney was brutal & I'm happy to not only be able to put the race behind me, but hopefully the horrific personal attacks that came along with it.
First, I'd like to mention that with this being Obama's last term in office, the GOP has little to lose in cooperating with him. In the last few years we've seen a great deal of obstructionist behavior, hopefully now, it will stop and Obama can get down to the business of healing and rebuilding our great nation.
I'd like to paraphrase one of the last lines in Obama's acceptance speech: "We are all Americans."
Truly, think about what that means to you, personally, our rights, our freedom, our ingenuity... these are traits, qualities and characteristics of American life, which are admired world wide.
Many of you have blasted the so-called "Obama-care" term. This is the same health care system that was pushed by Romney in his state. Many of you would have voted for him, despite the fact that this was his policy, his baby, so to speak. (Minus of course, the right to Women's Care. Let's make sure that birth control isn't as readily available to those who need to use it most, and let's certainly not allow those same women the opportunity to improve their own lives and the lives of their unborn or already born children by barring access to safe, legally allowed abortions.)
Let me ask you this: With the costs piled on by insurance companies & pharmaceutical companies, (which have truly grown out of proportion and epically failed the nation through their greed,) what would you have Obama do?
Every human being in this great nation of ours deserves access to medical care. The pharmaceutical companies and the insurance companies have had their chance to REFORM themselves and have failed.
That said, the first four years of his presidency this was Obama's great shining moment, (other than bailing out the auto industry, signing American Recovery and Investment Act, finally finding and destroying Bin Laden, an extension of revisions in the Alternative Minimum Tax, repealing "Don't Ask, Don't Tell, creating the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform... the list goes on and on,) I have great hope for the next four years, hope that would have been dashed and died had Romney / Ryan been elected. Because, yes, being a woman, my rights are first and foremost on my mind. I'm selfish that way. (And in the way that my daughter's rights are first and foremost on my mind, as well.)
Lastly, I'd like to make a personal plea, a shout-out to those of you, (you know who you are,) who have defiled and defamed one of the most incredible First Ladies this nation has had the honor of serving us, as we have had the honor of her guidance. Stop. Just, stop. No one wants to hear anymore about how much her clothes cost, how she is a man in disguise or how she's tacky or lacks class. Michelle Obama is a phenomenal mother, a guiding light to our Commander-in-Chief, and one of the most dignified women I have ever seen on television. Her story, of how she worked her way up through this world, is a true inspiration to women, children and Americans everywhere.
gmwilliams, to be honest, I am surprised you are an Obama supporter. But whatever!
I wasn't too terribly thrilled, however, the alternative wasn't that great, either. I was not surprised he won, though I am a little sad only 50% of people who voted, voted for him. And not even half the country bothered to vote. That isn't a lot of support; wish we had someone with a higher margin in regards to popular vote.
How about that, is right!!
My number one emotion is RELIEF.
The consequences across the board of a Romney/Ryan administration were just too Orwellian to contemplate.
America -- the rising America, the real America, the relevant America -- has spoken.
We will no doubt continue to be called "takers" by the so-called "makers."
I am not on welfare. I am not on Social Security or Medicare. I don't get food stamps.
But I am happy to embrace the label of "taker" if that means the 50+ percent of the country that re-elected President Obama.
You guys can keep spewing that term at us if it MAKES you feel batter.
Like Obamacare, we'll happily embrace the label.
We "Takers" sure did TAKE your party to the cleaners.
MM, you honestly believe that anyone who could afford health insurance would CHOOSE to go without it? You, who I believe is the one who said on another forum about being unable to obtain health insurance for your husband and now could? Who sat there without health insurance due to pre-existing conditions and worried about it? You believe that someone who was in a position to afford it, would choose not to have it? And you believe that now taxing those people is going to help them?
A lot of young people choose to go without it, simply to save money, but then again you're talking about being able to afford it...so who knows. Maybe if they purchased less CDs and beer they could afford it, but who knows? I know it is an unecessary expense for many, what with $3000 deductibles/year, I'd rather just pay to go to the dentist and the doctor once. Hah.
Also, I met a chiropractor that did not buy health insurance because he thought that MD's were full of crap, and as long as you keep your spine aligned, you won't get sick. Well, he seemed healthy to me. Wonder where he is now; knowing he needs to buy insurance for himself and his one employee now. Wonder if that person will get a paycut to subsidize the costs.
The thing is though those people were not really uninsured they were relying on free healthcare because if they got ill we would not just let them die, they were getting free very basic coverage for nothing even though they could afford it, time for them to take on the appropriate responsibility.
Josak, such hypocrisy.
Those on welfare on not takers! They need it! Stop picking on the poor! you cry.
But, when it is pointed out that those without health insurance truly cannot afford it, they are simply choosing to let the government pay the bill.
No that is precisely the point, the people who truly can't afford it will get free healthcare, the people who can with some minor sacrifices (as determined by expert analysis) will now buy it, I fully support giving it to people who can't afford it but not to people who won't buy it.
no hypocrisy at all.
The Medicaid expansion (the only free health insurance being offered) only covers just under $13,000 a year for an individual. By the Law, you are expected to afford 8% of your income for health insurance. BTW, that isn't even a straight 8% because before they figure that 8%, they include any end of year tax break being offered for your income bracket. This is not a voucher, or a paid up front break, you do not get it until the end of the year. Let's say you make $14,000. You get a tax break at the end of the year based on your income of say, $500 (just to keep it lower than actual). That means you are expected to cover your 8% (that is $1140) plus that $500, which makes the total $1640. Yes, you will get that $500 back at the end of the year, however, you are supposed to now be able to afford a monthly payout of $136 a month on an income of $1166, on your own. Meaning your are expected to live on $1000 a month. That is the numbers and probably worse than that because that $500 figure is expected to be higher. An end of year tax break does not help you meet that bill each month. Do you really think that person can afford health insurance?
That's going to hurt. Wonder how many people will have to cut back on groceries to afford insurance. I'd rather eat than go to the doctor for 'free'.
If what you're saying is true, I don't like it one bit.
I already pay at least 15% of my income towards taxes. I get some back at the end of the year (this is the last year I can claim ANY college and get additional money back). Are you saying I have to afford to pay for any money I get back on my taxes, plus my already 15%, plus an additional 8%? I'm sorry but I don't like the idea of paying 23% of my income. I don't make that much. I make more than 13k, but not enough more for me to not get hurt by the government sucking 1/4th my income.
No not in taxes. You are expected to be able to afford a payment equal to 8% of your income plus whatever the amount of any tax break being offered to pay for health insurance for your income bracket. They consider that being able to afford insurance, which means you will not be granted an exemption. So you either cough up 8% of your income, plus the tax break, or you will get hit with that penalty tax at the end of the year for not having insurance.
Before, or after taxes?
People making as little as 17k/year are taxed in the 15% bracket, and are subsidized with tax breaks at the end of the year. Are you saying these people will no longer get those, and expect to see them go towards the ~$1500/year they are supposed to now pay on top of their ~$2550 in taxes? Then they should expect a take-home pay of ~$1500/year less than usual? People in this income range typically opt-out of getting insurance all together, by the way. They won't have the choice now.
No the tax breaks you receive now are not affected. This is an additional tax break being offered to help pay for health insurance. At least, I'm pretty sure. Hmmm....I will look into that more closely. I did not consider the tax break people currently receive for what they've paid for health insurance.
Do get back to this thread when you do!
I may have automatically assumed the worst, but having lived frugally for a couple of years (and still do now, even making a little more), I am very mindful of my money...ESPECIALLY tax returns. My favorite time of the year, financially, is getting a check for tax returns .. Right after holidays, when I feel the most broke, too!
Here is some good info from the medical community. It breaks it down pretty well.
http://blogs.webmd.com/health-insurance … costs.html
Thank you for providing this information to me, although it does not ease my worry.
I don't remember off the top of my head how much is taken out of my paycheck for insurance, so I'll have to see. Sure don't think it's 9%, so I guess I won't be getting any tax breaks. Unless of course I opt-out and buy one of those "online" plans, and hope I can work the numbers to where I save the most.
Or hopefully by 2014 I will get a payraise...
Oh don't worry Kat. These are the rules for those whose employers do not provide their insurance. Those who have to go to the exchanges to find their insurance. There are supposed to be tax breaks offered there. I am not certain how those breaks work for those who share the cost of insurance with their employers.
Well it's pretty clear how it's going to work for people whose employers provide their insurance...
'If you get insurance through your job, your costs may continue to rise, just as they have every year, at least in the immediate future (although the past few years has seen health care costs grow more slowly than in the past 50 years). That’s because employers are shifting more costs onto employees through higher deductibles, co-pays and co-insurance.'
I suppose I would have the option of opting-out of my employer's insurance, then?
I wonder if they would keep the costs down, to compete with the non-employer programs.
It is my understanding Kat, that everyone will have the option of obtaining insurance through the exchanges if that is the more cost effective way for you to get health insurance.
I'm not on welfare. I have no insurance. I went to the emergency room about two years ago with a dislocated, fractured jaw. They saw me, did an x-ray and gave me a few samples of Tylenol with codeine. The hospital worked out small payments to get their $1,200. I never got the prescription for oxycodone filled, and no one would work anything out for orthoscopic surgery.
My jaw is still sore, and pops when I eat. I guess I am jacking it here, though.
I suppose we should congratulate you for paying a bill that you owed. But many do not pay them, and the cost is eventually passed onto the rest of us through higher premiums. This is exactly what Obamacare will do, thus higher 'taxes' on those of us who work and pay the bills that we owe.
By the way, my jaw still pops from a very expensive, fully paid for through insurance, jaw surgery back in 1987. So don't feel too bad about not seeing that surgeon.
Hey, you! Look into chiropractic care, too...
I don't care that it pops and am not a fan of chiropractors, no offense. I just concentrate on not clenching it and I'm fine.
Just sayin'. Fixed my popping problem, which wasn't really that annoying, though it occasionally hurt. And wayyyy cheaper than it would have cost to get surgery-ized, as is the common solution to all mis-alignment problems these days. That and drugs.
That is what the surgery was for when I was younger. Didn't work, as many don't. But I haven't had a problem since I started paying attention to clenching; although sometimes I get stressed and forget...usually when I'm on Hubpages!
I am clenching as we speak. Haha.
I have a big problem with clenching and grinding my teeth. That's what caused my clicking. But chiropractic therapy has helped with that, a lot.
Ha ha ha! I feel better, now. We will have to do lunch sometime and beat out a rythm.
No that is precisely what Obamacare avoids, it ensures that people who can pay for coverage and in full implementation has a price freeze (healthcare inflation allowed) and a percentage of coverage spent on care requirement so that the prices CAN'T go up.
You are fooling yourself Josak; you must know that the cost of those unpaid bills is passed on to everyone else. There is no law saying that insurance rates cannot increase. It only says that rates have to be the same for everyone. Which means that they will get their money from all of us to make up for the costs they never received from patients and for those unhealthy people who they must insure. Common sense.
Look, the fact of the matter is that coverage for everyone ensures that the insurance companies / pharmaceutical companies will have to bring their prices down.
The unpaid bills no longer exist due to Obamacare. The legislation dictates that the vast majority of insurance cost has to go to actual care so there is no room to raise the prices.
As I said, you are fooling yourself...
In Ohio, Obamacare to Increase Individual Insurance Premiums by 55-85%
30 October 2012
In Ohio, Obamacare to Increase Individual Insurance Premiums by 55-85% Avik Roy With the Presidential election one week away, it’s worth reviewing how Obamacare will impact the residents of key swing states. In Ohio, as elsewhere, Obamacare will drive up the cost of private health coverage, especially for those who buy insurance on their own. [...]
Read the full story
That's fine with me. I don't mind giving my neighbor a hand. The American church should be helping more, but they are too busy paying for TV time to preach the prosperity doctrine and sell trinkets.
Do you have TMJ?
My chiropractor has been treated me for that for $40 a visit. Look into that. Sometimes muscular therapy is a safer alternative to surgery, and I can personally attest that it DOES work.
Look into it. Way less than surgery!
And then they got a bill in the mail, and paid for it.
Hmm.. I think we're talking about two different groups of people, here. I'm talking about people who don't want to pay for healthcare PLUS an outrageous deductible. I am talking about young, generally healthy people, who maybe go to the dentist or the doctor once per year. With the deductible, they would be paying the $300 for the visit, anyway, so they may as well not make the monthly payments towards it. That's why they don't have it. I know many people who do this (and won't be able to anymore, come January, and I think that's wrong); they don't buy healthcare, but they DO pay their bills.
Nope massive numbers of those bills were never paid or even more commonly were sold to debt recovery and retrieved like 50% to 60%
And creating jobs for debt collectors
And how could you possibly know how many bills were paid? People who pay their bills don't get noticed. It's the people that don't pay them that bring attention. The hospitals don't care who pays them, as long as they get paid, and their books get balanced.
Financial records I looked it up more than a year ago recovery was about 60% of cost.
Debt collectors is a zero sum job, it creates no wealth for the country an the cost of lack of recovery makes whatever stimulus their income would provide entirely irrelevant.
I don't spend any time thinking about people who can afford health insurance and refuse to carry it.
They are irrelevant.
The people milking the system for welfare, food stamps and cash are just as irrelevant then. You do realize that many, and yes, it is not this piddling little number you like to believe, have never worked a day in their life, and never intend to either.
I see you completely ignored the question though. You really believe that an individual making only $13,000 a year can afford health insurance? Because the only insurance being offered for free is Medicaid and that is where it caps off. Must be nice in your little bubble.
Hmm, about the meds and pharmaceuticals. What if gov't regulations allowed 'new' ones to start up? who regulates that market? if there are more 'providers' - wouldn't that bring prices down due to the competition? when you shop for groceries, don't you find yourself looking for a alternative, when the prices seems ridiculously high? just a thought.
You'd think that with US population of 312.8 M (312,780,968) people, if they paid $5/month would be - dang calculator can't add that number but appears to be lots point being, you'd think that would be more than enough for everybody to have health coverage.
We are already paying for our own insurance. So we should pay more for people who don't want, in many cases, to pay for their own? Sounds pretty much like a liberal idea to me. And it will be reality soon enough...
Well, first off not all those people are adults. Secondly, only 50% (around) actually pay any taxes at all, let alone any additional $5 a month. Which is why it doesn't work.
You know, with that $800 billion however, we could have given every household (not individual) making less than $20,000, $1 million of their own. With the stipulation that they could not draw from the government cash drawer again in their life time.
by Grace Marguerite Williams3 years ago
in light of the current sociopolitical and socioeconomic situation regarding the United States of America? Do you believe that President Obama is doing the best job he can under the circumstances? Do you maintain that...
by Jack Lee2 days ago
This is a shocking relvelation, if true, undermines our whole democratic process...Why is this not headline news?
by Grace Marguerite Williams3 weeks ago
Was the racial climate in America better under President Obama or is it better under President Trump? Is President Trump responsible for the overt escalation of racism in America?
by LucidDreams4 years ago
I am not saying ALL Republicans are, I am just wondering why anyone would actually stay with a party that is clearly not on the same page as most of America? Most (not all) but most who are die hard right Republicans...
by Susan Reid5 years ago
Hot off email from Washington postWhen Mitt Romney arrives Thursday at the gates of Teton Pines, a majestic Wyoming country club where captains of industry flock each summer to golf on an Arnold Palmer-designed course,...
by Jimbo'daNimbo3 weeks ago
We have two major political parties that would seem to stop at nothing to get or keep power. This was highlighted to me when my son and I went to see The Campaign. Who do you feel is the least scrupulous? Please...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.