mikem12
-
Posts
975 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Downloads
Store
Posts posted by mikem12
-
-
I found this just now. Seems we are still paying GM to produce cars.
-
"obamao": seems to be gopperspew for Obama? Mikem12, you're not an elitist if you spell properly, honest.
Ok I can cease to refer to him as that. "If" it goes both ways. So the Goppers, republicants etc have to go too. I am not a Republican, I am by definition a conservative Libertarian. Just so you know up front.
-
you will not be allowed to keep your health insurance
- 1
-
We aren't, we are going to repeal it.
we can't, what it will do is force any small business to either close down or reduce the number of employees to below the threshhold of 50. They then won't be fined $2000. Funny thing is I believe the Big three would rather pay the $2k and put everyone on the gov dole for insurance.
My neighbor has already gotten change notices concerning his UAW retirement insurance. Not good.
What I am seeing is the systematic degration of the middle class. there will be two classes in this country before long the elite (obama) and us the working class(poor). Anyone who believes this President is for the middle class is past being ignorant.
-
fmccap, on 02 July 2012 - 06:58 PM, said:
They are not outdated ideas, just abandoned for no good reason.
What is the real reason everything is so expensive? Don't tell me the greedy CEO either.
***
after spending a few days in the hospital and having conversations with some of the staff I became enlightened as to why insurance companies refuse to pay some treatments and perscribed drugs. It's because Medicare sets the standard, if the government won't pay for it neither wil the insurance companies.
it will be the gov. who tell the providers what they can or cannot do
- 1
-
*for all you arm chair lawyers*
Subject: True Nature of Justice Roberts Decision
Before you look to do harm to Chief Justice Roberts or his family, it’s important
that you think carefully about the meaning – the true nature — of his ruling on
Obama-care. The Left will shout that they won, that Obama-care was upheld and all
the rest. Let them.
It will be a short-lived celebration.
Here’s what really occurred — payback. Yes, payback for Obama’s numerous,
ill-advised and childish insults directed toward SCOTUS.
Chief Justice Roberts actually ruled the mandate, relative to the commerce clause,
was unconstitutional. That’s how the Democrats got Obama-care going in the first
place. This is critical. His ruling means Congress can’t compel American citizens to
purchase anything. Ever. The notion is now officially and forever, unconstitutional.
As it should be.
Next, he stated that, because Congress doesn’t have the ability to mandate, it must,
to fund Obama-care, rely on its power to tax. Therefore, the mechanism that funds
Obama-care is a tax. This is also critical. Recall back during the initial
Obama-care battles, the Democrats called it a penalty, Republicans called it a tax.
Democrats consistently soft sold it as a penalty. It went to vote as a penalty.
Obama declared endlessly, that it was not a tax, it was a penalty. But when the
Democrats argued in front of the Supreme Court, they said ‘hey, a penalty or a tax,
either way’. So, Roberts gave them a tax. It is now the official law of the land —
beyond word-play and silly shenanigans. Obama-care is funded by tax dollars.
Democrats now must defend a tax increase to justify the Obama-care law.
Finally, he struck down as unconstitutional, the Obama-care idea that the federal
government can bully states into complying by yanking their existing medicaid
funding. Liberals, through Obama-care, basically said to the states — ‘comply with
Obama-care or we will stop existing funding.’ Roberts ruled that is a no-no. If a
state takes the money, fine, the Feds can tell the state how to run a program, but
if the state refuses money, the federal government can’t penalize the state by
yanking other funding. Therefore, a state can decline to participate in Obama-care
without penalty. This is obviously a serious problem. Are we going to have 10, 12,
25 states not participating in “national” health-care? Suddenly, it’s not national,
is it?
Ultimately, Roberts supported states rights by limiting the federal government’s
coercive abilities. He ruled that the government can not force the people to
purchase products or services under the commerce clause and he forced liberals to
have to come clean and admit that Obama-care is funded by tax increases.
Although he didn’t guarantee Romney a win, he certainly did more than his part and
should be applauded.
And he did this without creating a civil war or having bricks thrown threw his
windshield. Oh, and he’ll be home in time for dinner.
Brilliant.
w!
This article, written by I.M. Citizen, gives a much different perspective of Justice
Robert’s decision.
- 1
-
hers the list of new taxes under Obama and or Obama care. one that stands out is now they can tax your insurance ans income.
Taxes that took effect in 2010:
1. Excise Tax on Charitable Hospitals (Min$/immediate): $50,000 per hospital if they fail to meet new "community health assessment needs," "financial assistance," and "billing and collection" rules set by HHS. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,961-1,971
2. Codification of the “economic substance doctrine” (Tax hike of $4.5 billion). This provision allows the IRS to disallow completely-legal tax deductions and other legal tax-minimizing plans just because the IRS deems that the action lacks “substance” and is merely intended to reduce taxes owed. Bill: Reconciliation Act; Page: 108-113
3. “Black liquor” tax hike (Tax hike of $23.6 billion). This is a tax increase on a type of bio-fuel. Bill: Reconciliation Act; Page: 105
4. Tax on Innovator Drug Companies ($22.2 bil/Jan 2010): $2.3 billion annual tax on the industry imposed relative to share of sales made that year. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,971-1,980
5. Blue Cross/Blue Shield Tax Hike ($0.4 bil/Jan 2010): The special tax deduction in current law for Blue Cross/Blue Shield companies would only be allowed if 85 percent or more of premium revenues are spent on clinical services. Bill: PPACA; Page: 2,004
6. Tax on Indoor Tanning Services ($2.7 billion/July 1, 2010): New 10 percent excise tax on Americans using indoor tanning salons. Bill: PPACA; Page: 2,397-2,399
Taxes that took effect in 2011:
7. Medicine Cabinet Tax ($5 bil/Jan 2011): Americans no longer able to use health savings account (HSA), flexible spending account (FSA), or health reimbursement (HRA) pre-tax dollars to purchase non-prescription, over-the-counter medicines (except insulin). Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,957-1,959
8. HSA Withdrawal Tax Hike ($1.4 bil/Jan 2011): Increases additional tax on non-medical early withdrawals from an HSA from 10 to 20 percent, disadvantaging them relative to IRAs and other tax-advantaged accounts, which remain at 10 percent. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,959
Tax that took effect in 2012:
9. Employer Reporting of Insurance on W-2 (Min$/Jan 2012): Preamble to taxing health benefits on individual tax returns. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,957
Taxes that take effect in 2013:
10. Surtax on Investment Income ($123 billion/Jan. 2013): Creation of a new, 3.8 percent surtax on investment income earned in households making at least $250,000 ($200,000 single). This would result in the following top tax rates on investment income: Bill: Reconciliation Act; Page: 87-93
Capital Gains
Dividends
Other*
2012
15%
15%
35%
2013+
23.8%
43.4%
43.4%
*Other unearned income includes (for surtax purposes) gross income from interest, annuities, royalties, net rents, and passive income in partnerships and Subchapter-S corporations. It does not include municipal bond interest or life insurance proceeds, since those do not add to gross income. It does not include active trade or business income, fair market value sales of ownership in pass-through entities, or distributions from retirement plans. The 3.8% surtax does not apply to non-resident aliens.
11. Hike in Medicare Payroll Tax ($86.8 bil/Jan 2013): Current law and changes:
First $200,000
($250,000 Married)
Employer/Employee
All Remaining Wages
Employer/Employee
Current Law
1.45%/1.45%
2.9% self-employed
1.45%/1.45%
2.9% self-employed
Obamacare Tax Hike
1.45%/1.45%
2.9% self-employed
1.45%/2.35%
3.8% self-employed
Bill: PPACA, Reconciliation Act; Page: 2000-2003; 87-93
12. Tax on Medical Device Manufacturers ($20 bil/Jan 2013): Medical device manufacturers employ 360,000 people in 6000 plants across the country. This law imposes a new 2.3% excise tax. Exempts items retailing for <$100. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,980-1,986
13. Raise "Haircut" for Medical Itemized Deduction from 7.5% to 10% of AGI ($15.2 bil/Jan 2013): Currently, those facing high medical expenses are allowed a deduction for medical expenses to the extent that those expenses exceed 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income (AGI). The new provision imposes a threshold of 10 percent of AGI. Waived for 65+ taxpayers in 2013-2016 only. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,994-1,995
14. Flexible Spending Account Cap – aka “Special Needs Kids Tax” ($13 bil/Jan 2013): Imposes cap on FSAs of $2500 (now unlimited). Indexed to inflation after 2013. There is one group of FSA owners for whom this new cap will be particularly cruel and onerous: parents of special needs children. There are thousands of families with special needs children in the United States, and many of them use FSAs to pay for special needs education. Tuition rates at one leading school that teaches special needs children in Washington, D.C. (
National Child Research Center) can easily exceed $14,000 per year. Under tax rules, FSA dollars can be used to pay for this type of special needs education. Bill: PPACA; Page: 2,388-2,38915. Elimination of tax deduction for employer-provided retirement Rx drug coverage in coordination with Medicare Part D ($4.5 bil/Jan 2013) Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,994
16. $500,000 Annual Executive Compensation Limit for Health Insurance Executives ($0.6 bil/Jan 2013). Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,995-2,000
Taxes that take effect in 2014:
17. Individual Mandate Excise Tax (Jan 2014): Starting in 2014, anyone not buying “qualifying” health insurance must pay an income surtax according to the higher of the following
1 Adult
2 Adults
3+ Adults
2014
1% AGI/$95
1% AGI/$190
1% AGI/$285
2015
2% AGI/$325
2% AGI/$650
2% AGI/$975
2016 +
2.5% AGI/$695
2.5% AGI/$1390
2.5% AGI/$2085
Exemptions for religious objectors, undocumented immigrants, prisoners, those earning less than the poverty line, members of Indian tribes, and hardship cases (determined by HHS). Bill: PPACA; Page: 317-337
18. Employer Mandate Tax (Jan 2014): If an employer does not offer health coverage, and at least one employee qualifies for a health tax credit, the employer must pay an additional non-deductible tax of $2000 for all full-time employees. Applies to all employers with 50 or more employees. If any employee actually receives coverage through the exchange, the penalty on the employer for that employee rises to $3000. If the employer requires a waiting period to enroll in coverage of 30-60 days, there is a $400 tax per employee ($600 if the period is 60 days or longer). Bill: PPACA; Page: 345-346
Combined score of individual and employer mandate tax penalty: $65 billion/10 years
19. Tax on Health Insurers ($60.1 bil/Jan 2014): Annual tax on the industry imposed relative to health insurance premiums collected that year. Phases in gradually until 2018. Fully-imposed on firms with $50 million in profits. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,986-1,993
Taxes that take effect in 2018:
20. Excise Tax on Comprehensive Health Insurance Plans ($32 bil/Jan 2018): Starting in 2018, new 40 percent excise tax on “Cadillac” health insurance plans ($10,200 single/$27,500 family). Higher threshold ($11,500 single/$29,450 family) for early retirees and high-risk professions. CPI +1 percentage point indexed. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,941-1,956
-
I guess we will have to see just how high the projected cost of this monster will go. last I read there are 21 new taxes in this law and will be the largest tax increase in US history. that tax increase will affect the lower income and the middle class! From what I just heard the tax increase will be somewhere around 500 billion dollars plus there will be a raid on medicare of 500 million, say good bye to the elder care in this country. But we don't want to worry about them do we.
-
I don't know that the White House presented it that way as much as Chief Justice Roberts saw it that way. My understanding of the court proceedings is that the Admin didn't limit the thought that it could be considered a tax but that they argued for the mandate based mostly on the commerce clause.
they presented it to the people as a mandate via the commerce clause. However, when in front of the SCOTUS they argued it was a tax. Lies and damn lies. I think this decision just helped the Reps. as it did in 2010.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2009/09/obama-mandate-is-not-a-tax/
- 1
-
form your own opinions
-
this person, candy cane, from what I have seen, is little more than a sh*t stirrer. ignore him.
- 1
-
1973 sen. At Saline,flipped a quarter a million times,still can't decide. Very proud to be at FOMOCO
Go when you feel comfortable. And tell all obnoxious ones to piss off. Last time I heard it your decision.
31 years and counting
-
Thoughts?
I will take it if the retirement board ever gives me a retirement benefit amount. Been waiting since November.
-
-
Yeah, well he learned well from Republicans if that's the case. Before Soros there was Mellon Scaife and others like the Koch's for the GOP.
my point exactly. According to diewhat, obama and the dems walk on water and play by whatever rules supposedly in place. my contention is there isn't an ounce of difference between any of them.
- 6
-
No because the majority of his are from small donors. The president of the U.S, shouldnt be beholden to two individuals but to everyone. They think they can buy the office but they have another thing coming.
what was that guys name George something oh yeah Soros. Oh and what about the CEO from GE who now sits in his cabinet. Yeah all of obozo's donors are small ones. PLZ
- 4
-
-
Spot on.
Just replacing a president with another one does not "fix" the problem. Until some seats change in the house & senate its more of the same.
The real problem is career politicians. If they are corrupted before they get there it doesn't take long to become corrupted.
-
If your going to neg my comments at least have the balls to comment on them, thank you.
Talk about getting off the subject.
try this read:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/merrillmatthews/2011/10/28/obama-campaigning-like-its-1936/
- 1
-
-
Could you imagine picketing outside of KCAP if we went on strike?Residents of Claycomo would attack with pitch forks.OVER ONE BILLION DOLLARS of new investment?You guys are set for life,sic em.Detroit Lions 48 Kansas City Chiefs 3
I don't know about set for life. LOL But I am glad we passed it.
-
You drive a made-in-mexico fusion. Stop posting anti-uaw garbage on here please.
regardless of whether he drives a fusion or not is the statement he made true>
Is the IUAW. spending more than it takes in???
from the huffington post, which I almost never read
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/22/uaw-facing-financial-reckoning_n_976630.html
- 1
-
This process involved a multi-level review of the application by several departments. This is the way this type of loan approval is handled - each level serves as a "check" on the prior level, to make sure that nothing has been rushed, and that any potential red flags are thoroughly investigated before final approval is granted.
That is why, despite the initial "apparent haste" that you noted in the first level of the review, the next level reviewer produced a memo that highlighted several concerns. These concerns needed to be further explained and investigated.
That's not a "wild ass guess." It's how the process works. It's how government works.
Attempting to pin any of this on the Bush Administration is a waste of time. It's not going to exonerate the Obama Administration and, at any rate, his re-election isn't going to hinge on whether his administration approved this loan. There will be much bigger fish to fry in the coming months.
Do you remember the adage about wrestling a greased pig. I think it applies here.
- 3
-
their will be no strike,this is just a uaw threat to get this passed.They will just go back to the bargaining table!
Actually I think we would be forced to strike until an agreement is brought forth. first let me say I am not a Company drone, I have near 31 years with Ford as an hourly employee. Yes I did two tours in management but that time is long past.
So here it is, from what I have read and that has been just the highlights this is an agreement we can live with. Is it not entirely what I had hoped for, no, we didn't get COLA, the retirees were pretty much ignored and we now find out we will be paying through the nose for VEBA. We gave up a lot from 07 to date. Ford did make sacrifices as well, they mortgaged the company to the hilt, to include the Ford logo and name. The Ford family had a great deal to lose if this failed as we have a great deal to lose if we demand all that we gave up now. If you remember the Ford family gave up the leadership because the CO was dieing.
Ford made a profit around $10b, but this company ain't out of the woods yet, there is still the mortgage to pay and the Stock holders think they want a return on their investment as well. We as the rank and file are still working! The national unemployment rate is at 9 percent, believe me there are folks out there who would give heir eye teeth to be just working making a decent living as we are. The economy is not stable, we have entire countries ready to default on money they owe just like the US.
I would have liked to see at least COLA restarted, but maybe that is for the next contract. I can live and survive on what I will get after retiring. And, hope that in the future I have a Union that will work to keep us going as we have worked to help them that came before us.
Vote yes on this contract, if we force Ford into bankruptcy all that we have worked so hard for will be gone and Ford might be gone as well.
- 2
General Motors Is Headed For Bankruptcy -- Again
in Lounge: Off Topic Discussion
Posted
heres where those bail out tax dollars went.