with the republican congress what do you expect from the prez..he cannot do anything he wants to improve life in the usa...I guess he would be a great president if he does everything the house wants him to do ....lol
Providing health care for millions, slowing down the rate of health insurance premium increases, putting health insurance providers into direct competition with one another, encouraging preventative medical care, closing the Medicare drug benefit donut hole doesn't improve anyone's life?The problem is...most of the things he wants to do to "improve life in the usa"...won't.
Providing health care for millions, slowing down the rate of health insurance premium increases, putting health insurance providers into direct competition with one another, encouraging preventative medical care, closing the Medicare drug benefit donut hole doesn't improve anyone's life?
Keeping the US / North America auto industry from total failure didn't improve anyone's life?
Pushing a stimulus program that temporarily offered big tax breaks, and employed a few million Americans, improved no one's life?
Cutting the deficit by 2/3 since its peak (a peak caused by Bush 43's tax cuts, 2 wars and a massive drop in tax revenues from the worst economic downturn in 80 years) helps no one? Fascinating.
Providing undocumented immigrants a path to citizenship? The horror!!!
Not everything he's done is fantabulous, neither is everything he wanted to do. But it sure looks like some of what he was able to get done has improved the lives of many Americans.
Providing health care for millions, slowing down the rate of health insurance premium increases, putting health insurance providers into direct competition with one another, encouraging preventative medical care, closing the Medicare drug benefit donut hole doesn't improve anyone's life?
Keeping the US / North America auto industry from total failure didn't improve anyone's life?
Pushing a stimulus program that temporarily offered big tax breaks, and employed a few million Americans, improved no one's life?
Cutting the deficit by 2/3 since its peak (a peak caused by Bush 43's tax cuts, 2 wars and a massive drop in tax revenues from the worst economic downturn in 80 years) helps no one? Fascinating.
Providing undocumented immigrants a path to citizenship? The horror!!!
Not everything he's done is fantabulous, neither is everything he wanted to do. But it sure looks like some of what he was able to get done has improved the lives of many Americans.
Government interference hasn't bankrupted any insurers or hospitals or doctors or pharmaceuticals. It isn't preventing millions from getting care; in fact, it's helping people who were redlined out of the system get care. The quality of care in the US has not deteriorated.At the cost of greater government control and loss of choice. Not a good trade-off, if you ask me.
Fun fact! Deregulation is what produces systems that are "too big to fail." Government intervention didn't make GM and Chrysler big (in fact, it helped them shrink), and didn't force Ford to use the same suppliers as Chrysler and GM. Deregulation directly resulted in banks so big and interconnected, that the failure of one major investment bank threw the global financial system into turmoil.The government has no business picking winners and losers...etc
lol... No, I don't think so.If you were being honest, this should be credited to the Republicans. Without their opposition to the numerous spending schemes Obama and the Democrats have wanted and dragging Obama, kicking and screaming, to cutting spending, our deficit would have skyrocketed.
Then you're seeming wrong. We are basically out of Iraq and almost out of Afghanistan. We are certainly not spending anywhere near the kind of money and manpower as we were at the height of those conflicts.Also, it seems to me those two wars are still going on...as well as a bunch of others Obama has started.
And yet, the rate of illegal immigration flatlined during his term, and has not increased. Spending on ICE has in fact increased, and he ordered a more strict form of deportations.... Go figure.While letting those illegal aliens (let's call a spade a spade, shall we?) keep on coming and not making much of an effort to stem the tide.
Sorry dude, but they are not going anywhere.Illegal aliens don't need a path to citizenship...beyond the path provided by our existing laws...they need a path out of our country.
3.5% is not "anemic," it's actually pretty good. Even JeB! is only promising 4%. [Note: Any president has very limited ability to impact GDP.]Anemic economic growth
Wages have been largely stagnant since the 1970s. In fact, they are now ticking up a bit; plus, Obama has pushed visibly for increases in minimum wages. [Of course, wages are another factor over which any President doesn't have much control.]stagnant wages
That's actually a good thing.less hours worked
Where, in Fantasyland?prices that keep inflating...
Uh huhpeople's lives aren't "improving", they are "hanging on".
Government interference hasn't bankrupted any insurers or hospitals or doctors or pharmaceuticals. It isn't preventing millions from getting care; in fact, it's helping people who were redlined out of the system get care. The quality of care in the US has not deteriorated.
Seems like a decent trade-off to me. It'd be better if we went single-payer, but c'est la guerre.
Fun fact! Deregulation is what produces systems that are "too big to fail." Government intervention didn't make GM and Chrysler big (in fact, it helped them shrink), and didn't force Ford to use the same suppliers as Chrysler and GM. Deregulation directly resulted in banks so big and interconnected, that the failure of one major investment bank threw the global financial system into turmoil.
Meanwhile, government actions occasionally break up companies that are too big (AT&T) or prevent companies from getting too big (Comcast-TW).
So, which do you want? Regulation, that often prevents industries from being too big to fail? Or deregulation, which encourages it?
And yes, sometimes governments should intervene, when a critical industry is at stake, or a monopoly gets abusive, or companies fail to provide safe products.
lol... No, I don't think so.
The Republicans did not draft the budget single-handedly, and did not want (for example) the sequestration cuts. They screamed that those cuts were "Obama's fault," remember? Meanwhile, Obama had talked about cutting the deficit from day 1 in office.
Then you're seeming wrong. We are basically out of Iraq and almost out of Afghanistan. We are certainly not spending anywhere near the kind of money and manpower as we were at the height of those conflicts.
And what wars did Obama "start?" Did he start the civil strife in Libya? Nope, the Libyans did that. Did he encourage Syrians to revolt against the Assad regime? Nope.
And yet, the rate of illegal immigration flatlined during his term, and has not increased. Spending on ICE has in fact increased, and he ordered a more strict form of deportations.... Go figure.
Sorry dude, but they are not going anywhere.
At this point, kicking out all the undocumented immigrants is the equivalent of kicking out the entire population of Kansas. It's not going to happen.
3.5% is not "anemic," it's actually pretty good. Even JeB! is only promising 4%. [Note: Any president has very limited ability to impact GDP.]
Wages have been largely stagnant since the 1970s. In fact, they are now ticking up a bit; plus, Obama has pushed visibly for increases in minimum wages. [Of course, wages are another factor over which any President doesn't have much control.]
That's actually a good thing.
Where, in Fantasyland?
Inflation has been very low during Obama's term in office, including a touch of deflation.
Uh huh
- Consumer confidence is hitting 11-year highs
- Crime is down
- We're basically back at full employment
- Labor force participation rate, which started declining in 2001, has been flat for about 18 months
- Wages are finally coming up a little bit
- Stock markets are doing very well
- Real estate is recovering and even getting frothy in some markets, despite significantly stricter lending requirements
- The number of uninsured is near or at its lowest point since we started keeping track
- All this is happening while the EU and China are having economic issues
Is everything peachy keen? Definitely not. Would it be peachy if Obama got his way with every policy. No. But things are getting better for millions of Americans, and some of that is due to Obama's policies, which were passed in spite of a highly polarized Congress.
Your cheerleading for more and more big government doesn't impress me...and it certainly doesn't impress the majority of Americans. If it did, Obama wouldn't have approval rating that have been in the tank since the Democrats got shellacked in 2010.
In any case, most of these improvements you've laid at Obama's feet are improvements we've seen in spite of Obama. Take that "Consumer confidence is hitting 11-year highs", for example. That is primarily because of falling gas prices. Sorry, but Obama had nothing to do with that. In fact, if he'd had his way gas prices would be a LOT higher than they are now.
Just think how good things would be if Obama had just done his job and enforced the law and not try to "fix" things.
I shutter to think. Certainly wouldn't wanna go back in time, before Obama. Obama's done a pretty good job as far as I'm concerned. But you can keep hatin'. That's cool.
I shutter to think. Certainly wouldn't wanna go back in time, before Obama. Obama's done a pretty good job as far as I'm concerned. But you can keep hatin'. That's cool.
he is a violator of the constitution as many other presidents have done.....
our last true constitutional president was Grover Cleveland.
How's he doing with ISIS, Libya, Syria, Turkey, Egypt? How's our zero growth economy, Wall Street supported by Fed pumping? Hows that low unemployment rate backed up by 92 million out of the labor market? Finally, hows the longest recovery from recession in our history, even longer than the depression?
I shutter to think. Certainly wouldn't wanna go back in time, before Obama. Obama's done a pretty good job as far as I'm concerned. But you can keep hatin'. That's cool.
You betray yourself...your inability to see things objectively...when you take the easy way out and assume disagreement with a politician's actions and agenda means hatred for the politician himself.
That pretty much makes anything you think about the man worthless.
My stocks have gone up like 400% under his presidency. So much as I didn't vote for him and I think obamacare sucks....I give him a positive grade.
This trade deal he's working on is a plus as well
Yeah, don't let a little thing like facts get in your way.Your cheerleading for more and more big government doesn't impress me...and it certainly doesn't impress the majority of Americans. If it did, Obama wouldn't have approval rating that have been in the tank since the Democrats got shellacked in 2010.
Right, like those sequestration cuts, which cannot be attributed to Obama, unless it's politically expedient for Republicans to do so, which they can also turn around and attribute to Republicans in Congress when the deficit falls. Straight as a pretzel.In any case, most of these improvements you've laid at Obama's feet are improvements we've seen in spite of Obama.
Or not. Confidence cratered in 2007, and aside from a big dip in winter 2011, has grown gradually since that low point. Gas prices are a part of it, but so is the bump in wages, several years of positive GDP growth, the drop in unemployment, the slow healing of real estate markets, a gradually recovering economy and so forth. In fact, those falling gas prices have put a slight damper on confidence in some areas, as energy sector workers are concerned about their livelihoods.Take that "Consumer confidence is hitting 11-year highs", for example. That is primarily because of falling gas prices.
Funny thing is, he DID have something to do with it. Not much, but: His main target for pollution controls has been the coal industry, not the oil industry. He has not gotten in the way of oil or natural gas production. The focus on renewables and natural gas has put a small dent in oil consumption, which in turn frees up supplies for other uses like gasoline. He has also, so far, resisted calls to increase federal gas taxes.Sorry, but Obama had nothing to do with that. In fact, if he'd had his way gas prices would be a LOT higher than they are now.
Uh huh. If he did what you wanted, we'd have....Just think how good things would be if Obama had just done his job and enforced the law and not try to "fix" things.
Uh huh. If he did what you wanted, we'd have.... (I've snipped the issues I've already addressed...I really don't want to repeat myself)
- health care costs would be higher than they are now
How many Americans will pay higher insurance premiums as a result of Obamacare?
That's the question posed by Congress to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, or CMS. More specifically, Congress required the Chief Actuary of CMS to give an estimated count of the number of Americans who will pay more, and how many will pay less as a result of three sections of the Public Health Service Act that were amended by the Affordable Care Act, commonly known as Obamacare. And now the numbers are in.
11 million examples of paying more
Actuaries with the government agency estimate that around 11 million individuals will pay higher rates because of the health reform law's impact. Six million Americans will pay less as a result of Obamacare.
11 Million Examples of Obamacare's Higher Costs (ESRX, WBMD)
ObamaCare 2015: Harvard faculty outraged over health care hikes
(watch the video...quite illuminating)
ObamaCare 2015: Harvard faculty outraged over health care hikes | Fox News
The Health Care Cost and Utilization Report found that health care spending averaged $4,864 per enrollee in 2013, up $183 from the year before.
Falling utilization helped mask continued growth in health care prices, authors of the report state.
The analysis uses claims data from three of the nation's largest health insurance providers, looking at claims for nearly 40 million Americans who are covered by employer-sponsored health insurance. This group in 2013 accounted for more than 27 percent of the U.S. insured population.
Use of brand prescription drugs, inpatient admissions and outpatient services declined in 2013. Still, average prices increased for all three categories, and at higher rates than in 2012.
Americans Using Less Health Care But Spending More Despite Obamacare Promises - US News
- no oversight of consumer credit agencies
- we might not have a president who supports gay marriage
- probably would not get anywhere near a deal with Iran to curb their nuclear weapons program
Again, pesky facts get in your way. None of the ACA supporters said "the cost of medical care will stop growing completely," and spending has in fact slowed down. This was even cited as a factor in the low GDP for Q1 2014.That's a supposition I don't really think you can adequately make, but the fact is health care costs are higher that Obama and his buddies told us they would be...
Did you actually read the article?Regarding health insurance premiums...
Thank you for demonstrating that you have no idea what I'm referring to.It was oversight...or, more accurately, politically induced pressure from Democratic lawmakers that got us in trouble. We don't need more oversight. We need big government to let the market work.
Uh, no, I'm not dreaming. I'm reading the news, and it is not lost on anyone who is actually paying attention that Republicans in Congress are doing everything they can to torpedo the deal. Meanwhile, just talking to the government of Iran is a huge change.Are you dreaming??? Obama...the foreign policy lightweight...isn't getting any deal...near or not...with Iran.
lolYou might as well face it. Obama has pretty much been a lousy President.
Again, pesky facts get in your way. None of the ACA supporters said "the cost of medical care will stop growing completely," and spending has in fact slowed down. This was even cited as a factor in the low GDP for Q1 2014.
Did you actually read the article?
It discusses small businesses... and is dated March 1, 2014. It was an estimate of a policy that still hasn't kicked in yet.
Meanwhile, the CBO has found that premiums have in fact risen more slowly than in the past, and this is (yet again) revising the cost of the law downward because... wait for it... the cost of care, including premiums, has slowed down compared to past years. It will save the government money in the long term, despite providing health care to more people.
Obamacare’s projected cost falls due to lower premiums under health care law, CBO says - The Washington Post
Projected Health Spending Has Fallen Since 2010, Even With Health Reform
And no, I do not weep for a very small number of Hahvad profs who are upset over changes in their health care... nor does that actually prove anything about the larger trends.
Thank you for demonstrating that you have no idea what I'm referring to.
I'm referring to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. In case you missed it, credit card agencies and retail banks have spent the past decade or so increasingly tightening the screws on consumers. Interest rates go up when you miss a car payment; banks routinely add small fees and costs; cell phone companies illegally bill customers, and so on. Left to their own devices, those financial actors have made life much worse for consumers. That's exactly the type of function government should handle -- it should set up and enforce rules that ensure consumers are treated fairly by financial institutions.
Uh, no, I'm not dreaming. I'm reading the news, and it is not lost on anyone who is actually paying attention that Republicans in Congress are doing everything they can to torpedo the deal. Meanwhile, just talking to the government of Iran is a huge change.
lol
I can face the fact that people right of center decided, before Obama was sworn in, that he'd be a lousy president. No problem with that one.
What president hasn't failedFor those who obviously haven't been paying attention to anything but the Left Wing media apologists for his adminsistration from Day One, here is a synopsis of his presidency up to the time of the writing of this article.
https://www.commentarymagazine.com/2014/04/24/obamas-staggering-record-of-failure/
He's done fine, considering the mess he started with
What president hasn't failed
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?