Obama's numbers. What say you?

[KUJACK]

My wife signed up

Obama care is costing my wife $550 per monthe for Md and Hospital care. 5oo deductable. Reasonable because we can afford it, Make too much for a subsidy. $175 for rx coverage, $31.for dental. I have Medicare

 

[Setanta84]

Obama care is costing my wife $550 per monthe for Md and Hospital care. 5oo deductable. Reasonable because we can afford it, Make too much for a subsidy. $175 for rx coverage, $31.for dental. I have Medicare

First, sorry to read about your wife. Having a loved one in the hospital sucks. I've been there--and I am glad the financial aspect of it isn't a strain on you.

The Medicare and Medicaid parts of the law aren't parts of the law I am going to argue over. I actually think they did a good job there--probably because rich doctors who make a business out of overbilling these programs are also national-level campaign donors--and the polling bears out that it's way less of a hassle than the exchanges, which is why they are the sole parts of the law that are legitimately popular.

Still, for lots of working people, roughly $700 out of pocket per month for health care costs alone isn't exactly affordable. Especially in this economy.

 

[Busybody]

Did panty granny answer the question

Or does he think throwing numbers out in a vacuum was supposed to have meant something?

 

[Paendragon]

Issues as complex as healthcare and the labor market are never going to be justly depicted in a single figure or graphic.

I agree. In fact, I would say that the long-term unemployed number is a drop in the bucket. I'll take the new job creation number, but the unemployment rate is very deceptive as a whole.

With the number of people insured rising, it's intellectually dishonest to hold that up as "proof" that opponents of the ACA were wrong.

Nobody to the left of the Tea Party suggested it wouldn't increase the rolls of insurance companies. That's pretty much the one and only thing it was designed to do.

Rather, being familiar with the US' for-profit health care industry and the results of private exchanges in that marketplace--mainly in MA--the concern was whether insurance would actually increase access to quality care.

In MA it didn't. Medical bankruptcies never declined in MA--which makes promises a federal version of it would do it when that data was in seem even more cynical--the basic problems of hospitals being overcrowded and understaffed weren't addressed by it, addressing the lack of GPs to keep people up to date in health exams and treatments and keep them out of the ER didn't happen, and the insurance companies used the configuration of networks to screw the consumer by making it unnecessarily hard to use the plans they had been forced to buy.

The ACA is flawed (I still think we're going to end up public eventually) but one area it differed from Romneycare was the removal of the coverage caps that seemed to cause many of those bankruptcies.

If you have other data that contradicts this, I'd be interested in reading it.

All of this is also true of the ACA. It's why, contrary to what the White House was telling people in 2009 and 2010, the bill has not become more popular since implementation. People get they are being screwed harder than ever by the insurance companies now.

The only part of the ACA that is worthwhile is the expansion of Medicaid and undoing some of the violence Bush did to Medicare. And those parts of it are actually popular.

However, if Barry and his friends John, Paul, and Pete get their way, those golden kernels of corn in the heap of corporatist/fascist shit that is the ACA will go away when the Grand Bargain happens.

No comment.

With the labor market, those factoids fail to point out that the working and middle classes--and even the lower to middle tiers of the upper middle class--never recovered from the recession, that 9 cents out of every dime generated by the "recovery" went to the richest Americans because of how heavy it was skewed towards subsidies for industry and fucking tax breaks, and that the job market is still shit.

Job security just does not exist anymore, most of the jobs "created or saved" are fucking part-time service industry jobs that pay minimum wage or less depending on the state, and employers are also using the desperation of the workforce to abuse the fuck out of independent contractor designations to both skirt basic employee protections and tax liability.

Working people and religious and ethnic minorities--i.e. everyone outside of the elite donor class--have actually lost ground under the Obama administration.

I basically agree with this as well. A 3% wage increase is minimal. I personally know quite a few people who were laid off, and then hired at another company for far less than they were making. Meanwhile these corporations starting making record profits and earnings for shareholders. The wealthy got wealthier, the poor got poorer, and the middle class handled the burden for the whole mess.

Look at the difference between weekly earnings and corporate profits, for fuck's sake. It's an embarrassment. More people are being hired, but at a discount.

The one thing I really like is the wind/solar power numbers (well, I like the mpg increases as well, for the same reason). The right screamed "Solyndra" over and over, but I can tell you from a silicon valley perspective, the energy loan was a huge success. Anything that can get us out from under our oil dependency is a good thing.

 

[phrodeau]

Did panty granny answer the question

Or does he think throwing numbers out in a vacuum was supposed to have meant something?

Read the thread title, dumbass.

 

[Paendragon]

The economy sucks. Labor force participation is at an all time low. The Fraud dumps on our allies and coddles our enemies. Russia is out of control. The Middle East is on fire. The federal deficit is at an all time high. The country is more divided than ever.

Should I continue?

Please do. No one is going to tell you what you can post.

None of that is really on topic, though, since it can't be measured with numbers, which was the point of this thread.

I already commented on labor force, so I'll leave that one. You should know I adhere more to the "we should stay the fuck out of it" line of the Libertarian party when it comes to sticking our noses into foreign affairs, but I'll comment on some of what you said.

I don't believe anyone is being coddled, and I think the entire Netanyahu thing, which is what I'm assuming you mean by dumping on our allies, was politics at its worst (and I'm including Obama, house and senate Republicans, and Netanyahu himself in that mess).

Israel is still receiving billions in aid, and will continue to do so as far as I can tell. If you've heard different, please cite me. I'd be generally interested.

As far as the middle east goes, I fully support them fixing their own damned mess for a change. I applaud King Abdullah II and his fight against ISIS, and if we're going to be involved it should be in a supporting role only.

I will agree that Obama is to blame for the deficit. I will also agree that Bush is. Tax cuts plus an increase in spending, with a recession thrown in, will do that. Obama has not done enough to rein it in, and that's on him.

The country divided is also a bipartisan issue.

 

[Paendragon]

No information types love that shit.

Don't be a douche.

 

[Setanta84]

The ACA is flawed (I still think we're going to end up public eventually) but one area it differed from Romneycare was the removal of the coverage caps that seemed to cause many of those bankruptcies.

If you have other data that contradicts this, I'd be interested in reading it.

It's the out of pocket costs that drive medical bankruptcy, whether you owe $800 and can't afford it or owe $850k and can't afford it.

While the lack of caps is nice, that doesn't address whether you can handle the out of pocket costs in the near term.

When most of the capital earned by working people since the New Deal is now in the pockets of the 1% and the job market is shit, there aren't that many people who can afford to feed and clothe their families, pay their rent or mortgage, maintain personal transportation, secure their kids' education AND pay hundreds or thousands of dollars in out of pocket medical costs every month.

 

[miles]

Don't be a douche.

HA!

You posted a graph loaded with bullshit from a deceptively biased source, then say the one thing you really like are the solar power and wind numbers, and I'm a douche?

I'm guessing you lap up the global warming lie to boot.

 

[Busybody]

Don't be a douche.

so PANTY GRANNY posts a cute info graphic with nice numbers n stuff

n gets AXED.....what is it compared to?


and then PANTY GRANNY gets pissed?

HE MUST BE A LIB

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

No information types love that shit.

Someone didn't bother to read the bottom of the graphs or is just outright ignoring it.
-OR- In DizzyBooby's case, needs someone to sound out anything over two syllables.

Numbers in the graphs are compared to 1/20/2009, That would be when the President took office.

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

HA!

You posted a graph loaded with bullshit from a deceptively biased source, then say the one thing you really like are the solar power and wind numbers, and I'm a douche?

I'm guessing you lap up the global warming lie to boot.

So show where the numbers are "loaded with bullshit", moron.

 

[Busybody]

Someone didn't bother to read the bottom of the graphs or is just outright ignoring it.
-OR- In DizzyBooby's case, needs someone to sound out anything over two syllables.

Numbers in the graphs are compared to 1/20/2009, That would be when the President took office.

another DOPE

we all know that

what we want is

COMPARED TO OTHER 8 YR PERIODS of OTHER PRESIDENTS

DUMMY

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

another DOPE

we all know that

what we want is

COMPARED TO OTHER 8 YR PERIODS of OTHER PRESIDENTS

DUMMY

-read post- against my better judgement.

OK, then pull up the same numbers from George W. Bush's Presidency (from 1/20/2001 to the end of the first quarter of 2008) to compare and contrast.

Then post the same stats for the last quarter of 2008. You know, just to give a sense of the sort of economic collapse that President Obama was left with.

Go ahead, I'll wait.

 

[Busybody]

-read post- against my better judgement.

OK, then pull up the same numbers from George W. Bush's Presidency (from 1/20/2001 to the end of the first quarter of 2008) to compare and contrast.

Then post the same stats for the last quarter of 2008. You know, just to give a sense of the sort of economic collapse that President Obama was left with.

Go ahead, I'll wait.

lets do all Presidents

and

Obama DIDNT have 9/11 and Katrina....major issues to deal with...he came in at the BOTTOM....

lets compare the numbers from all that came in at bottom of recessions...shall we?

and STFU with the BEE ESS of me being n IGGY....move on LITTLE MAN

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

Yeah, I didn't think you would want to go there.

 

[Busybody]

Yeah, i didn't think you would wanna talk reality

Show me the Bush numbers

I'll wait

 

[miles]

Well, the graph comes from Factcheck.org., which is linked to The Fraud himself and Bill Ayers.

 

[miles]

Two can play the game:

http://balladeer.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/obama-five-years.jpg

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Shame on bUsy Body. The national debt was half what it is when Obama took over. That's an achievement we cant gift Bush with.

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

Well, the graph comes from Factcheck.org., which is linked to The Fraud himself and Bill Ayers.

Wrong, as usual miles.

factcheck.org is a project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania and get funding from the Annenberg Foundation, created by Walter Annenberg in 1989.

Ayers was one of three Chicago educators who applied for a grant from the Annenberg Foundation in 1995, which was one of 5,200 grants the foundation made during its first 15 years. That $49 million grant, plus additional funds raised locally, funded the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, which sought to improve Chicago public schools.

Obama was selected by Chicago officials (not Ayers) to chair the board set up to administer Annenberg Challenge funds, and he headed it until 1999. FactCheck.org came into being in late 2003.

 

[Busybody]

lets remember abut the ACA and the surge in so called insured

the law says YOU MUST have insurance, or face a penalty

so is it a surprise more are insured?

 

[Busybody]

Wrong, as usual miles.

factcheck.org is a project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania and get funding from the Annenberg Foundation, created by Walter Annenberg in 1989.

Ayers was one of three Chicago educators who applied for a grant from the Annenberg Foundation in 1995, which was one of 5,200 grants the foundation made during its first 15 years. That $49 million grant, plus additional funds raised locally, funded the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, which sought to improve Chicago public schools.

Obama was selected by Chicago officials (not Ayers) to chair the board set up to administer Annenberg Challenge funds, and he headed it until 1999. FactCheck.org came into being in late 2003.

tee

hee

 

[Busybody]

Two can play the game:

http://balladeer.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/obama-five-years.jpg

facts!

 

[NeverEndingMe]

are you smoking the juice or a retard?

jobs are up, yes more people are employed at fast food places...AWESOME!

http://www.factcheck.org/2015/04/obamas-numbers-april-2015-update/

http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/2015/04/ObamasNumbersApril2.png

This should be nice and peaceful . . .