Five Hidden Obamacare Taxes that Crush the Middle Class

[pointman]

http://moneymorning.com/ob/5-hidden-...-middle-class/

Like most things Obama, they are hidden so he can try to spin this monstrosity in his favor with deception. Obama claims that Ryan's plan hurts seniors and the middle class?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by pointman

http://moneymorning.com/ob/5-hidden-...-middle-class/

Like most things Obama, they are hidden so he can try to spin this monstrosity in his favor with deception. Obama claims that Ryan's plan hurts seniors and the middle class?

Yes. That tax on tanning at salons will devastate the middle class.

[Thepaindispenser]

Shocking Riot ignores the big ones and tries to be funny and clever with one, of course she is neither while missing the whole point of it. Laugh Riot but that tax really hurts the small business tanning salon owners. I am sure you don't care if they sunk their life earning into the business,, worked their asses off, and created employment for others. I am sure you would be laughing if Obama put an extra tax on something to do with the vetinary field.

It is outrageous that this jackass Obama will slowdown medical innovation with taxes on medical device manufacturers and drug companies. Don't worry, Paul Ryan who has already busted Obama on his Medicare lies, will explain it in a way that anyone but the true Obama sheep will understand..

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Thepaindispenser

Shocking Riot ignores the big ones and tries to be funny and clever with one, of course she is neither while missing the whole point of it. Laugh Riot but that tax really hurts the small business tanning salon owners. I am sure you don't care if they sunk their life earning into the business,, worked their asses off, and created employment for others. I am sure you would be laughing if Obama put an extra tax on something to do with the vetinary field.

It is outrageous that this jackass Obama will slowdown medical innovation with taxes on medical device manufacturers and drug companies. Don't worry, Paul Ryan who has already busted Obama on his Medicare lies, will explain it in a way that anyone but the true Obama sheep will understand..

Poor angry, hate-filled guy. What a way to not live.

And the proven threat of cancer has been hurting tanning salons for years, and driving them out of business.

[Thepaindispenser]

You can get that same cancer from the sun, what is next, Obama is going to regulate how much time we can spend in the sun? If Obama wanted that, someone like you would support him. Must be sad living a life where you let a bunch of elitist, hypocrite politicians make rules for you that they themselves are unwilling to follow.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Thepaindispenser

You can get that same cancer from the sun, what is next, Obama is going to regulate how much time we can spend in the sun? If Obama wanted that, someone like you would support him. Must be sad living a life where you let a bunch of elitist, hypocrite politicians make rules for you that they themselves are unwilling to follow.

You know, you can get mental health help for yourself. Good luck.

[pointman]

Originally Posted by Riot

Yes. That tax on tanning at salons will devastate the middle class.

I was more concerned about the $569 billion of hidden taxes such as the investment income surtax, medicate payroll taxes, and those taxes that are imposed on the health care industry which will inevitably be passed on to consumers as virtually all taxes placed on businesses end up being passed on to the consumer.

But since you wanted to attempt to declare these taxes as frivolous by using the one tax that most likely will not bother most American's, I will comment on that as well.

I am against sin taxes such as a tanning tax and find them insulting and a troublesome way that government has been imposing taxes in order to continute their spending problem. The government picks on people who most of the public won't complain about taxing, i.e. cigarette smokers, liquor, tanning, upon the lie that the government is taxing people for their own good to stop them from engaging in dangerous activities. They are easy victims which most people won't argue against taxing. Yet, if the government was so concerned about the danger of the activities or people's health, then why don't they ban them altogether?

They don't, because they know they can impose these taxes at times when people will not put up with new taxes and raise revenues without getting a complaint from the general public. Most of these taxes, cigarettes or liquor, etc., hit the poor the most. They are deceitful and they should be allowed to impose higher taxes than the product itself costs, which often occurs.

[pointman]

Originally Posted by Riot

Poor angry, hate-filled guy. What a way to not live.

And the proven threat of cancer has been hurting tanning salons for years, and driving them out of business.

The usual vitrolic response. Putting that aside, as I have tried to debate you, then why not make it illegal altogether if there is the proven threat of cancer? You think it is because the real purpose of the tax is to prey on those who engage in these sin activities to raise extra revenue knowing that the general public like yourself thinks it is justifiable to tax such sin activities and won't object?

[Clip-Clop]

As I have said here over and over. Large companies (read the "wealthy") do not PAY taxes, they collect them. Unless there are pricing regulations to follow any costs incurred by any company (or individual, corporations are IN FACT people) will simply be passed on to the consumer (read middle-class). The consumer is then forced to find cheaper goods and we have Wal-Mart, China and the inevitable death of the auto industry.
Mercifully the foreign auto companies are building plants in our right to work states that will certainly help stabilize those areas at least.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by pointman

I was more concerned about the $569 billion of hidden taxes such as the investment income surtax, medicate payroll taxes, and those taxes that are imposed on the health care industry which will inevitably be passed on to consumers as virtually all taxes placed on businesses end up being passed on to the consumer.

These are not "hidden", as they were all outlined in detail and discussed publicly when the Affordable Care Act was passed two years ago.

[Clip-Clop]

Originally Posted by Riot

These are not "hidden", as they were all outlined in detail and discussed publicly when the Affordable Care Act was passed two years ago.

Not one member of congress read that bill cover to cover.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Clip-Clop

Not one member of congress read that bill cover to cover.

That's a ridiculous statement to make Have you asked all 538 members personally? That their staff didn't read it? Silly.

The bill is shorter than a Harry Potter novel, and much of it is blank pages, and yes, indeed, the payment methods of how the Affordable Care Act was funded was fully covered in the press and in discussion on the House and Senate floor in detail.

The bill pays for itself, by the funding methods outlined within it. Which are not "hidden or secret", but were well-discussed. No secrets there. The bill has already been law for 2 years.

Do none of you realize the association between the Affordable Care Act and Romney's lies about the $716 billion?

[Thepaindispenser]

Originally Posted by Riot

These are not "hidden", as they were all outlined in detail and discussed publicly when the Affordable Care Act was passed two years ago.

They were all outlined in detail??? Even Nancy Pelosi said they needed to pass it to find out what was in it. Do you realize how much of it is left up to the discretion of Kathleen Sebelius and the rest of her dictatorship board? You really make no sense.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Thepaindispenser

They were all outlined in detail??? Even Nancy Pelosi said they needed to pass it to find out what was in it.

I'm so tired of hearing that last sentence misused and taken out of context as to imply ignorance of the bill contents.

Yes - before the ACA was finalized, there were four different versions floating around between the House and Senate, between Dems and GOP.

Pelosi was asked in a press conference what would be in the final version, and yes, Nancy Pelosi said they would need to pass a finalized bill before we knew for sure. Meaning, she didn't know on that date which version would be the one that would end up being passed.

But of course, the content of all the different bills, including the funding mechanisms, were indeed in those written bills, there to read.

And as the ACA was passed, yes, the funding was discussed publicly in great detail at the time.

There's nothing "hidden". And the bill has been law for 2 years. Seems most would have read it by now. Especially as most of it - including the funding - has already been in existence or will be shortly.

BTW, do you realize the ACA relation to Romney's current lie about the $716 billion in Medicare?

Do you realize how much of it is left up to the discretion of Kathleen Sebelius and the rest of her dictatorship board? You really make no sense.

Do tell us which of the financing portion of the ACA is left up to the random discretion of the Health and Human Services Director, be they appointed by a Republican or a Democrat?

[pointman]

Originally Posted by Riot

These are not "hidden", as they were all outlined in detail and discussed publicly when the Affordable Care Act was passed two years ago.

Go ask any senior if they are aware of these taxes and the costs that will be passed on to them by the health care companies. Hell, go ask any tanner if they are aware of it. Where is Obama admitting to these taxes? In reality, he is trying to dupe the public into believing that this bill will pay for itself when the CBO was provided information that double counted actual savings. Actual costs, estimated by Charles Blohaus, you know one of two public trustees appointed by Obama to Social Security and Medicare, are $1,160 billion over the next 10 years.

So are you really going to keep up the charade that there are no hidden costs, it saves us money, and that Obama is not lying to people about the actual costs of this monstrosity?

And while you are at it, why don't you make a fool of yourself trying to justify the tax you were so quick to belittle.

Both you and your diety are filthy disgusting liars.

[Thepaindispenser]

Exactly Riot, the more we find out about Obamacare the more we know how much Obama lied about it. Reducing the deficit and covering more people, what a filthy liar. My premiums have already shot up and it hasn't even kicked in yet. Not only that, the quality of my care, or at least what I can afford, has already diminished. Why do you think Obama made sure it wouldnt kick in until after the 2012 election? Why has he granted waivers to his biggest donors? If the law was so great, wouldn't he want it up and running before the election? If it is so great why all the waivers for his big donor pals. I reiterate, you make no sense.

Please point out where I said Sebelius has discretion over financing because I can't seem to find it in my post.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Thepaindispenser

Exactly Riot, the more we find out about Obamacare the more we know how much Obama lied about it. Reducing the deficit and covering more people, what a filthy liar. My premiums have already shot up and it hasn't even kicked in yet. Not only that, the quality of my care, or at least what I can afford, has already diminished. Why do you think Obama made sure it wouldnt kick in until after the 2012 election? Why has he granted waivers to his biggest donors? If the law was so great, wouldn't he want it up and running before the election? If it is so great why all the waivers for his big donor pals. I reiterate, you make no sense.

Reading you is like a stream-of-conciousness mainline from Freepers Fearville of Lies.

It's so sad you believe that.

Please point out where I said Sebelius has discretion over financing because I can't seem to find it in my post.

It was where you said,

"Do you realize how much of it is left up to the discretion of Kathleen Sebelius and the rest of her dictatorship board? You really make no sense."

[Thepaindispenser]

Again, where does it say discretion over financing?

Nice try with Nancy Pelosi, she is an elitist piece of garbage, who thinks that we should trust her liberal politician pals and her to make laws where there is no transpency during the process and that don't apply to them. If Obamacare is so great, why doesn't apply to members of Congress and Obama? Why did Obama lie so much about being transparent during the process?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Thepaindispenser

Again, where does it say discretion over financing?

You put that sentence directly into a reply about the financing of the ACA. Duh.

Nice try with Nancy Pelosi, she is an elitist piece of garbage, who thinks that we should trust her liberal politician pals and her to make laws where there is no transpency during the process and that don't apply to them.

You are simply incapable of talking politics. You can only spew your hate venom. Done with you. Blech.

[Thepaindispenser]

You just can't take it that you can no longer get away with your bullying and lies on this board.

Again, I still don't see where I said Sebelius has control over financing.