It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
Free stuff is never free. Socialism never worked and never will. It's always been a huge trick. Bye bye Liberty. Hello totalitarianism
Those who will see their strangle hold on us fall away are squeezing tighter in an effort to make us stop "bucking". If you've ever broken a animal, you know they buck really hard before they break. All I see are people who are so scared for the animal (the rich corporations) that you want to let em off the hook.
Originally posted by DZAG Wright
Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
Free stuff is never free. Socialism never worked and never will. It's always been a huge trick. Bye bye Liberty. Hello totalitarianism
That's the deflection...
No one never said it was free except certain people who hate to share.
What was said was that with everyones input, everyone will benefit. With more people paying into it, it should make the cost more affordable for everyone.
It was never seriously said or believed (by anyone with a brain) to be free.
Originally posted by DarthMuerte
Your medical plan is facing an unexpected expense, so you probably are, too. It's a new, $63-per-head fee to cushion the cost of covering people with pre-existing conditions under President Barack Obama's health care overhaul. The charge, buried in a recent regulation, works out to tens of millions of dollars for the largest companies, employers say. Most of that is likely to be passed on to workers. Employee benefits lawyer Chantel Sheaks calls it a "sleeper issue" with significant financial consequences, particularly for large employers.
There you go. Everybody thought that this no pre-existing condition thing would be a freebie. There are no freebies liberals. Just another reason for employers to cut fulltime positions and reduce staffing overall. When will liberals learn? Everything has a cost. How many jobs will this cost? If they do not cut jobs over this, the employers will pass the cost along. I will not participate in this non-sense. I am "Going Galt".
Obamacare-fee-to-offset-costs-o f-pre-existing-conditionsedit on 11-12-2012 by DarthMuerte because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by DZAG Wright
Those who will see their strangle hold on us fall away are squeezing tighter in an effort to make us stop "bucking". If you've ever broken a animal, you know they buck really hard before they break. All I see are people who are so scared for the animal (the rich corporations) that you want to let em off the hook.
You seem to have swallowed the lie whole, like a snake swallows a rat. You swallowed the Kool Aid that Obama is the savior of the People and that he is finally bringing to end the evil corporate Capitalists. Obama may be Marxist redistributionist but he sure likes Crony Capitalism while he sucks the middle class dry.
The anecdotal phrase is "It is always darkest before the dawn". Obama is not bringing the dawn however.
Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
Originally posted by DZAG Wright
Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
Free stuff is never free. Socialism never worked and never will. It's always been a huge trick. Bye bye Liberty. Hello totalitarianism
That's the deflection...
No one never said it was free except certain people who hate to share.
What was said was that with everyones input, everyone will benefit. With more people paying into it, it should make the cost more affordable for everyone.
It was never seriously said or believed (by anyone with a brain) to be free.
It is not a deflection, it is the truth. The Progressives have been trying to convince the people to accept "free stuff" from the govt in return for votes. They just call it a "hand up", which it is not really in the end of it all.
People who "hate to share"? Are you kidding me? The American people are the most generous of all on this planet. Americans have shared their wealth and prosperity all across the planet in every scenario. Are you going to tell me it's only the evil Republicans who don't share, that it's only the Progressives who care? What a bunch of malarchy. I can see right through this nonsense.
Progressives like sharing other people's wealth and/or paychecks. It's so simple.
The whole "if everyone just shares everyone will be taken care of" is a bs lie. Jesus told us "The poor ye shall have with ye always".
What does that mean? It means that no matter how the pie is redistributed there will always be poor people among us. It is just not possible for everything to be completely equitable. The whole thing is a lie. We have seen that people work the system as well. Why is it fair for me to have to "share" my hard earned paycheck so some chick with 6 kids can work the system? It isn't fair one bit. It is not my responsibility to feed and clothe those people when they are taking advantage.
You think you can sell the idea by making it seem fair that the wealthy pay more. It is not fair. The wealthy already pay most anyway, and I don't mean necessarily the SuperElite like Rothschilds.
edit on 12-12-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)edit on 12-12-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by CALGARIAN
GOOD!
Now let the government increase everyones taxes in the US, just a hair, and have free healthcare for all.
USA is the only Westernized nation in the world who makes their citizens pay for care, manually.
Originally posted by Propulsion
..But think about all those poor children who will now have Obama care to pay their way because mommy is too lazy to go out and get a job. Obama care is only one component of many that enables the poor NOT to go out and better their lives. I mean really, why work if you can have those who DO work to pay your way?
Originally posted by DarthMuerte
Your medical plan is facing an unexpected expense, so you probably are, too. It's a new, $63-per-head fee to cushion the cost of covering people with pre-existing conditions under President Barack Obama's health care overhaul. The charge, buried in a recent regulation, works out to tens of millions of dollars for the largest companies, employers say. Most of that is likely to be passed on to workers. Employee benefits lawyer Chantel Sheaks calls it a "sleeper issue" with significant financial consequences, particularly for large employers.
There you go. Everybody thought that this no pre-existing condition thing would be a freebie. There are no freebies liberals. Just another reason for employers to cut fulltime positions and reduce staffing overall. When will liberals learn? Everything has a cost. How many jobs will this cost? If they do not cut jobs over this, the employers will pass the cost along. I will not participate in this non-sense. I am "Going Galt".
Obamacare-fee-to-offset-costs-o f-pre-existing-conditionsedit on 11-12-2012 by DarthMuerte because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by AwakeinNM
My comment is tangential to the OP, but I am in the process of starting a new company. Because of Obamacare most of the people I hire will either be part-time, independent contractors, or both. Chances are I will be hiring Obama voters for these positions. Oh, the irony.
Originally posted by CALGARIAN
Now let the government increase everyones taxes in the US, just a hair, and have free healthcare for all.
Originally posted by DZAG Wright
Originally posted by AwakeinNM
My comment is tangential to the OP, but I am in the process of starting a new company. Because of Obamacare most of the people I hire will either be part-time, independent contractors, or both. Chances are I will be hiring Obama voters for these positions. Oh, the irony.
So they have the option of being part-time and receive healthcare due to Obamacare, or before Obamacare the option was full-time work, but no health benefits?
So you would have given them more hours but no healthcare? The extra couple dollars they earned would not have covered healthcare expenses. I believe most people would rather earn a little less AND have healthcare.
Health expenditures in the United States neared $2.6 trillion in 2010, over ten times the $256 billion spent in 1980. [1] The rate of growth in recent years has slowed relative to the late 1990s and early 2000s, but is still expected to grow faster than national income over the foreseeable future.[2] Addressing this growing burden continues to be a major policy priority. Furthermore, the United States has been in a recession for much of the past decade, resulting in higher unemployment and lower incomes for many Americans. These conditions have put even more attention on health spending and affordability. [1]
www.kaiseredu.org...