Page 26 of 42 FirstFirst ... 1622232425262728293036 ... LastLast
Results 376 to 390 of 620

Thread: How much has Obamacare saved the American people?

  1. #376 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Delray Beach FL
    Posts
    114,996
    Thanks
    124,828
    Thanked 27,335 Times in 22,664 Posts
    Groans
    3,768
    Groaned 3,239 Times in 2,979 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Oneuli View Post
    What was the deficit when Bush left office? What was it when Obama left office? Was that an improvement or not? These are not hard questions.
    You love being a dishonest dumbfuck don't you?

    President Bush added $5.849 trillion in debt.

    Barrack Hussein Obama added $8.588 trillion. This 74 percent increase was the fifth-largest.

    Deficit when Bush left office was $458.6 billion.

    Deficit when Obama left office was $584.7 billion. Only a moron would call that an improvement.
    "When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny."


    A lie doesn't become the truth, wrong doesn't become right, and evil doesn't become good just because it is accepted by a majority.
    Author: Booker T. Washington



    Quote Originally Posted by Nomad View Post
    Unless you just can't stand the idea of "ni**ers" teaching white kids.


    Quote Originally Posted by AProudLefty View Post
    Address the topic, not other posters.

  2. #377 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    62,856
    Thanks
    3,734
    Thanked 20,360 Times in 14,088 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 649 Times in 616 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Oneuli View Post
    Yes, the 80s had huge economic volatility, with both very strong and very weak years. The net result was economic growth that was the second-worst of any 20th-century decade. Now one can, of course, play the usual conservative game of saying all the others don't count for whatever reason (the 40s don't count because of WWII, the 50s and 60s don't count because of the Baby Boom, the 70s don't count because of Vietnam, the 90s don't count because of the growth of the Internet, etc.). But what does it tell you that right-wing arguments nearly always need to take the form of "the evidence backs me up as long as you don't consider 90% of the evidence"?

    You're trying to spin things to fit your partisan leanings, and it take a huge amount of spin. By comparison, as you see, I merely need to lay out the facts and they argue for themselves. That's the luxury of building my opinions around the facts, rather than embracing immutable opinions and trying to then square the facts with them.
    The numbers are the numbers, you are correct. But building a story around the realities of the time is not wrong, any economist would do so. You can't look at GDP of years during the fighting of WWII and say it's comparing apples to apples with two non fighting years at some later point. And the geo-politics of the post war era had a very real effect on economic performance. There's nothing partisan about those statements, they're just facts. Technology, the rise of China, globalization all play, and played, a major role on the economy of the U.S. Our shift from an industrial economy to an information economy has played a major role and has had a major disruption.

  3. #378 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Delray Beach FL
    Posts
    114,996
    Thanks
    124,828
    Thanked 27,335 Times in 22,664 Posts
    Groans
    3,768
    Groaned 3,239 Times in 2,979 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Oneuli View Post
    Here's real GDP growth by decade, in the 20th century, best to worst:

    1940s 72.4%
    1960s 54.3%
    1950s 52.4%
    1990s 42.4%
    1970s 37.9%
    1980s 35.8%
    1930s 10.2%
    You fucking moron; that wasn't the GDP growth rate. If these were factual, it would have be phenomenal.

    Grow a fucking brain you clueless dumbfuck:

    1900's = 3.9%
    1910's = 2.9%
    1920's = 3.4%
    1930's = 1.0%
    1940's = 5.6%
    1950's = 4.2%
    1960's = 4.5%
    1970's = 3.2%
    1980's = 3.1%
    1990's = 3.2%
    2000's = 1.8%
    2010's = 2.1%
    OBAMA =1.48%

    https://www.crestmontresearch.com/do...-By-Decade.pdf

    https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-...r-3-gdp-growth
    "When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny."


    A lie doesn't become the truth, wrong doesn't become right, and evil doesn't become good just because it is accepted by a majority.
    Author: Booker T. Washington



    Quote Originally Posted by Nomad View Post
    Unless you just can't stand the idea of "ni**ers" teaching white kids.


    Quote Originally Posted by AProudLefty View Post
    Address the topic, not other posters.

  4. #379 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    62,856
    Thanks
    3,734
    Thanked 20,360 Times in 14,088 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 649 Times in 616 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Oneuli View Post
    Yes, the 80s had huge economic volatility, with both very strong and very weak years. The net result was economic growth that was the second-worst of any 20th-century decade. Now one can, of course, play the usual conservative game of saying all the others don't count for whatever reason (the 40s don't count because of WWII, the 50s and 60s don't count because of the Baby Boom, the 70s don't count because of Vietnam, the 90s don't count because of the growth of the Internet, etc.). But what does it tell you that right-wing arguments nearly always need to take the form of "the evidence backs me up as long as you don't consider 90% of the evidence"?

    You're trying to spin things to fit your partisan leanings, and it take a huge amount of spin. By comparison, as you see, I merely need to lay out the facts and they argue for themselves. That's the luxury of building my opinions around the facts, rather than embracing immutable opinions and trying to then square the facts with them.
    And let's be clear no one is arguing these decades don't count, that's a strawman. What's being said is you can't look at the decades in a vacuum. In 2018 you can't say "the '50's were good let's implement the policies of those days" without taking into account the geo-political events of the day.

  5. The Following User Says Thank You to cawacko For This Post:

    Truth Detector (12-18-2018)

  6. #380 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    107,358
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 19 Times in 18 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 2 Times in 2 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Althea View Post
    I had one of those policies when I was in my 20's. A guy came into my shop, and showed me a list of my neighbors who purchased the same policy. What did I know? I had knee surgery, and found that my policy covered nothing but X-rays. That was when I began paying attention to the coverage I was paying for.
    Cool story.

  7. #381 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    107,358
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 19 Times in 18 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 2 Times in 2 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Oneuli View Post
    No clue what you're trying to say.
    Perhaps you should try to read more carefully. With practice you may improve.

  8. #382 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Delray Beach FL
    Posts
    114,996
    Thanks
    124,828
    Thanked 27,335 Times in 22,664 Posts
    Groans
    3,768
    Groaned 3,239 Times in 2,979 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Oneuli View Post
    Anyway, federal debt in Reagan's first month was $934 billion. In his last month it was 2,698 billion. That's much more than a doubling. Reagan's not the only example, either. Under FDR, national debt rose almost ten-fold. So, now that you know that you're wrong about the doubling of the national debt only happening under two presidents, Bush and Obama, does it change any of your political opinions? Again, I'm betting not, because I'm betting your opinion has nothing at all to do with the facts, and thus that finding out you were mistaken about the facts cannot alter your opinions. Am I right?
    PP said Bush and Obama. Let's add Reagan. How does that make Obama look better in any slight way? At least Reagan saw a GDP rate of 3.5% What did Obama have? An anemic 1.48%.

    As for FDR; he was fighting a massive global war you moron. What massive global conflict was Obama fighting? Bush was fighting two wars in the ME.

    Grow a brain snowflake.

    Debt when Bush came into office = $5.716 trillion
    Debt when Bush left office = 10.632 trillion
    Debt when Obama came into office = $10.632 Trillion
    Debt when Obama left office = $19.937 Trillion

    Reagan = 289% increase in debt.
    Bush = 186% increase in debt.
    Obama = 188% increase in debt.

    https://www.hudson.org/research/1271...h-by-president
    "When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny."


    A lie doesn't become the truth, wrong doesn't become right, and evil doesn't become good just because it is accepted by a majority.
    Author: Booker T. Washington



    Quote Originally Posted by Nomad View Post
    Unless you just can't stand the idea of "ni**ers" teaching white kids.


    Quote Originally Posted by AProudLefty View Post
    Address the topic, not other posters.

  9. #383 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    107,358
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 19 Times in 18 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 2 Times in 2 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    PP said Bush and Obama. Let's add Reagan. How does that make Obama look better in any slight way? At least Reagan saw a GDP rate of 3.5% What did Obama have? An anemic 1.48%.

    As for FDR; he was fighting a massive global war you moron. What massive global conflict was Obama fighting? Bush was fighting two wars in the ME.

    Grow a brain snowflake.

    Debt when Bush came into office = $5.716 trillion
    Debt when Bush left office = 10.632 trillion
    Debt when Obama came into office = $10.632 Trillion
    Debt when Obama left office = $19.937 Trillion

    Reagan = 289% increase in debt.
    Bush = 186% increase in debt.
    Obama = 188% increase in debt.

    https://www.hudson.org/research/1271...h-by-president
    Quote Originally Posted by Oneuli View Post
    No clue what you're trying to say.

  10. #384 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,543
    Thanks
    441
    Thanked 1,874 Times in 1,170 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 202 Times in 195 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post

    Deficit when Bush left office was $458.6 billion.
    Incorrect. Presumably you're citing the FY 2008 figure. As you probably should know, it was FY 2009 when Bush left office. As I pointed out, we were at about a $1.2 trillion deficit in January 2009.

  11. #385 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    71,680
    Thanks
    6,595
    Thanked 12,128 Times in 9,658 Posts
    Groans
    14
    Groaned 504 Times in 477 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Oneuli View Post
    I find that right-wingers tend to react with unthinking incredulity, when the tropes they've been brainwashed into accepting crash up against verifiable real-world facts.
    you wouldnt know a real world fact even if it jumped and bit you in the aura.

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to Hermes Thoth For This Post:

    Truth Detector (12-18-2018)

  13. #386 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    12,526
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 8,341 Times in 5,714 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 374 Times in 355 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Althea View Post
    Most who make his argument, never mention that the coverage in the new policy was much greater than the bare bones policy he had previously.

    Now, he can debate whether he thinks he needed 'free' preventive procedures included in the new policy or not.

    For me, my premiums halved, while my coverage doubled.

    Until House Republicans de funded risk corridors, and my ins. company went out of business. Along with 12 others across the country.
    you lying huzzy, no ones premiums went down, PERIOD
    This just In::: Trump indicted for living in liberals heads and not paying RENT

    C̶N̶N̶ SNN.... Shithole News Network

    Trump Is Coming back to a White House Near you

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to Getin the ring For This Post:

    Truth Detector (12-18-2018)

  15. #387 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,543
    Thanks
    441
    Thanked 1,874 Times in 1,170 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 202 Times in 195 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cawacko View Post
    The numbers are the numbers, you are correct. But building a story around the realities of the time is not wrong, any economist would do so. You can't look at GDP of years during the fighting of WWII and say it's comparing apples to apples with two non fighting years at some later point.
    Agreed. In a similar, sense, at the end of Obama's time in office we weren't neck-deep in Afghanistan and Iraq like we'd been through most of his predecessor's presidency. And during Clinton's presidency, we didn't have Desert Shield and Desert Storm (and the Panama War) as we did on his predecessor's watch. But you'll notice it's never those on the left who have to pull out these "you have to ignore the results cuz things were different" arguments. Even with the demobilization of the Clinton and Obama years, the economy out-performed their predecessors. In fact, back in the day, conservatives tried to discount the Clinton success by saying it was the "peace dividend" from the end of the Cold War.

    Basically, the rule is simple: poor Republican economic performance in peacetime doesn't count, because they didn't have the stimulus of a war, and poor Republican economic performance in wartime doesn't count, because they had the burden of financing a war effort. Similarly, good Democratic economic performance in peacetime doesn't count, because they were just enjoying the peace dividend won by earlier Republican efforts, and good Democratic economic performance in wartime doesn't count because they had the artificial stimulus of a war.

    It's ALWAYS got to be dismissed as apples and oranges by the Republicans, because the very act of checking the evidence is contrary to what they'd like to be true. Things are simpler for people like me, since I form my opinions based on the evidence, rather than forming my opinions then working to blot out the evidence that is convenient.

    Technology, the rise of China, globalization all play, and played, a major role on the economy of the U.S. Our shift from an industrial economy to an information economy has played a major role and has had a major disruption.
    Yes, that's another good example. In the Clinton years, the great economic performance doesn't count, because the rise of China, the passage of NAFTA, the start of the WTO, and the explosion of the Internet were all artificial stimulus, which Clinton just had the dumb luck of surfing. Likewise, in the Bush years, the terrible economic performance doesn't count, because the further rise of China, the further expansion of free trade, and the further expansion of the Internet were all a "major disruption" and he just had the bad luck of being president at a time when those things were weighing us down.

    The fact this requires the Republicans to argue the exact opposite points from one minute to the next doesn't seem to bother them. They start with an absolute and unshakable faith in the correctness of their economic faith, so everything else, including logic, must bow to those "truths."
    Last edited by Oneuli; 12-18-2018 at 10:45 AM.

  16. #388 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    12,526
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 8,341 Times in 5,714 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 374 Times in 355 Posts

    Default

    Obama doubled the nations debt. PERIOD
    Obama lied about Obamacare. PERIOD
    Obamacare caused my premiums to rise, again and again and again. PERIOD
    And Obamacare is unable to survive financially. PERIOD

    please do not dispute facts

    Quote Originally Posted by Oneuli View Post
    Agreed. In a similar, sense, at the end of Obama's time in office we weren't neck-deep in Afghanistan and Iraq .
    is there a point there?

    please tell me you are not crediting Obama for getting out of Iraq.
    And Afghanistan was basically exactly how he found it when he left.

    are you a serious poster? I'm seeing a lot of trolling, and to in anyway shape or form claim Obama was a success story is beyond belief.
    you need to read more
    This just In::: Trump indicted for living in liberals heads and not paying RENT

    C̶N̶N̶ SNN.... Shithole News Network

    Trump Is Coming back to a White House Near you

  17. The Following User Says Thank You to Getin the ring For This Post:

    Truth Detector (12-18-2018)

  18. #389 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    134,846
    Thanks
    13,245
    Thanked 40,785 Times in 32,151 Posts
    Groans
    3,661
    Groaned 2,865 Times in 2,752 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Oneuli View Post
    You lost track of the question (or you're playing the coward again and dodging the question). The question was about which two-term president can it not be said that national debt went UP eight times in the eight years of his presidency. Can you locate your manhood long enough to answer?

    Anyway, federal debt in Reagan's first month was $934 billion. In his last month it was 2,698 billion. That's much more than a doubling. Reagan's not the only example, either. Under FDR, national debt rose almost ten-fold. So, now that you know that you're wrong about the doubling of the national debt only happening under two presidents, Bush and Obama, does it change any of your political opinions? Again, I'm betting not, because I'm betting your opinion has nothing at all to do with the facts, and thus that finding out you were mistaken about the facts cannot alter your opinions. Am I right?
    you trying to explain away $10T in deficits will not alter my opinions.......

  19. The Following User Says Thank You to PostmodernProphet For This Post:

    Truth Detector (12-18-2018)

  20. #390 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,543
    Thanks
    441
    Thanked 1,874 Times in 1,170 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 202 Times in 195 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    You fucking moron; that wasn't the GDP growth rate. If these were factual, it would have be phenomenal.

    Grow a fucking brain you clueless dumbfuck:

    1900's = 3.9%
    1910's = 2.9%
    1920's = 3.4%
    1930's = 1.0%
    1940's = 5.6%
    1950's = 4.2%
    1960's = 4.5%
    1970's = 3.2%
    1980's = 3.1%
    1990's = 3.2%
    2000's = 1.8%
    2010's = 2.1%
    OBAMA =1.48%

    https://www.crestmontresearch.com/do...-By-Decade.pdf

    https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-...r-3-gdp-growth
    You lost track of the argument, dumb dumb. You've posted annualized rates. I posted the total growth for each decade. You can equate the two with elementary-school-level math. For example, if the growth is 3.1% annualized, over ten years, total growth is 1.031^10, or 35.7%. As you can see, your 3.1% annualized rate for the 80s and the 35.8% total growth I quoted are the same thing (allowing for a fraction of a point from rounding). Now, try not to be such an imbecile in the future. You embarrass yourself.

Similar Threads

  1. Trump says that John McCain is the Republican who saved Obamacare
    By TheDonald in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 09-23-2017, 09:39 AM
  2. Saxon invaders saved Welsh people in 9th century
    By Micawber in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 08-31-2017, 10:30 PM
  3. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 01-09-2017, 06:50 PM
  4. Fox News Has 'Saved' The GOP And American Politics
    By Yoda in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-11-2014, 05:29 AM
  5. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 09-23-2013, 02:24 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •