Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

30 is the new 50 (as in work hours) under Obama

5 posters

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Guest


Guest

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/11/is_thirty_the_new_fifty.html





With ObamaCare in the wings, the traditional forty- or fifty-hour work week will soon be replaced with a less than thirty-hour week for many American workers. To wit: many businesses, including ones that previously received ObamaCare waivers, are trying to avoid paying onerous fines for not providing employees with health coverage as mandated by the new law

President Obama recently said that he won't allow the budget to be "balanced on the backs of the middle class." He sure did give the appearance of truly caring about these "folks," but he failed to disclose the fact that, even if taxed at 100%, there simply aren't enough rich people to pay for all of his big-government plans. But as Thomas Sowell points out, even at a rate much lower than 100%, higher tax rates don't necessarily translate into higher tax revenues. So where will all this needed money come from? While Obama is targeting the group of Americans who already pay the most in taxes, the burden of his policies will ultimately break the backs of those he claims to be trying to protect.



_

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/11/is_thirty_the_new_fifty.html#ixzz2CopWeBt9

Floridatexan

Floridatexan

PACEDOG#1 wrote:http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/11/is_thirty_the_new_fifty.html





With ObamaCare in the wings, the traditional forty- or fifty-hour work week will soon be replaced with a less than thirty-hour week for many American workers. To wit: many businesses, including ones that previously received ObamaCare waivers, are trying to avoid paying onerous fines for not providing employees with health coverage as mandated by the new law

President Obama recently said that he won't allow the budget to be "balanced on the backs of the middle class." He sure did give the appearance of truly caring about these "folks," but he failed to disclose the fact that, even if taxed at 100%, there simply aren't enough rich people to pay for all of his big-government plans. But as Thomas Sowell points out, even at a rate much lower than 100%, higher tax rates don't necessarily translate into higher tax revenues. So where will all this needed money come from? While Obama is targeting the group of Americans who already pay the most in taxes, the burden of his policies will ultimately break the backs of those he claims to be trying to protect.



_

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/11/is_thirty_the_new_fifty.html#ixzz2CopWeBt9

Why do you read this garbage day after day?

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

Floridatexan wrote:
PACEDOG#1 wrote:http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/11/is_thirty_the_new_fifty.html





With ObamaCare in the wings, the traditional forty- or fifty-hour work week will soon be replaced with a less than thirty-hour week for many American workers. To wit: many businesses, including ones that previously received ObamaCare waivers, are trying to avoid paying onerous fines for not providing employees with health coverage as mandated by the new law

President Obama recently said that he won't allow the budget to be "balanced on the backs of the middle class." He sure did give the appearance of truly caring about these "folks," but he failed to disclose the fact that, even if taxed at 100%, there simply aren't enough rich people to pay for all of his big-government plans. But as Thomas Sowell points out, even at a rate much lower than 100%, higher tax rates don't necessarily translate into higher tax revenues. So where will all this needed money come from? While Obama is targeting the group of Americans who already pay the most in taxes, the burden of his policies will ultimately break the backs of those he claims to be trying to protect.



_

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/11/is_thirty_the_new_fifty.html#ixzz2CopWeBt9

Why do you read this garbage day after day?


American Thinker and The Blaze are in the same league-both are wingnut Koolaid.

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

Markle

Markle

ZVUGKTUBM wrote:
Floridatexan wrote:
PACEDOG#1 wrote:http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/11/is_thirty_the_new_fifty.html





With ObamaCare in the wings, the traditional forty- or fifty-hour work week will soon be replaced with a less than thirty-hour week for many American workers. To wit: many businesses, including ones that previously received ObamaCare waivers, are trying to avoid paying onerous fines for not providing employees with health coverage as mandated by the new law

President Obama recently said that he won't allow the budget to be "balanced on the backs of the middle class." He sure did give the appearance of truly caring about these "folks," but he failed to disclose the fact that, even if taxed at 100%, there simply aren't enough rich people to pay for all of his big-government plans. But as Thomas Sowell points out, even at a rate much lower than 100%, higher tax rates don't necessarily translate into higher tax revenues. So where will all this needed money come from? While Obama is targeting the group of Americans who already pay the most in taxes, the burden of his policies will ultimately break the backs of those he claims to be trying to protect.



_

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/11/is_thirty_the_new_fifty.html#ixzz2CopWeBt9

Why do you read this garbage day after day?


American Thinker and The Blaze are in the same league-both are wingnut Koolaid.

So can either of you tell us what is not true in the post starting this thread?

Or are you busy reading about it in the DailyKOS and "The Nation"? OH...RIGHT, it wasn't in those publications.

Guest


Guest

Floridatexan wrote:
Why do you read this garbage day after day?


What is not FACT about the material I presented? Do FACTS disturb you when it shows another policy failure from your Messiah?

boards of FL

boards of FL

PACEDOG#1 wrote:
Floridatexan wrote:
Why do you read this garbage day after day?


What is not FACT about the material I presented? Do FACTS disturb you when it shows another policy failure from your Messiah?

So for the sake of curiosity, can you, PACEDOG#1, quote something from your article that you deem a fact?


_________________
I approve this message.

Guest


Guest

boards of FL wrote:
PACEDOG#1 wrote:
Floridatexan wrote:
Why do you read this garbage day after day?


What is not FACT about the material I presented? Do FACTS disturb you when it shows another policy failure from your Messiah?

So for the sake of curiosity, can you, PACEDOG#1, quote something from your article that you deem a fact?



Fail to read the article?

Markle

Markle

boards of FL wrote:
PACEDOG#1 wrote:
Floridatexan wrote:
Why do you read this garbage day after day?


What is not FACT about the material I presented? Do FACTS disturb you when it shows another policy failure from your Messiah?

So for the sake of curiosity, can you, PACEDOG#1, quote something from your article that you deem a fact?

It appears that you are incapable of reading the article. Why not just say so?

Or, prove the article wrong by posting the errors.

Guest


Guest

Markle wrote:
boards of FL wrote:
PACEDOG#1 wrote:
Floridatexan wrote:
Why do you read this garbage day after day?


What is not FACT about the material I presented? Do FACTS disturb you when it shows another policy failure from your Messiah?

So for the sake of curiosity, can you, PACEDOG#1, quote something from your article that you deem a fact?

It appears that you are incapable of reading the article. Why not just say so?

Or, prove the article wrong by posting the errors.

Who is going to pay down the debt you all have bitched about for years, Markle? The job creating rich who have run out of excuses as to why they haven't created jobs? It seems no matter what is offered you have criticisms as to why it won't work. You can longer justify the feeble excuses of your party's failures. The pandering is over and your gonna have to pay.LOL!

Guest


Guest

See cost of job saved/created under obama... private growth/jobs are the only real/lasting chance we have.

Guest


Guest

PkrBum wrote:See cost of job saved/created under obama... private growth/jobs are the only real/lasting chance we have.

Show me how many jobs the rich have created over the last four years,Pkr.

Markle

Markle

Dreamsglore wrote:
Markle wrote:
boards of FL wrote:
PACEDOG#1 wrote:
Floridatexan wrote:
Why do you read this garbage day after day?


What is not FACT about the material I presented? Do FACTS disturb you when it shows another policy failure from your Messiah?

So for the sake of curiosity, can you, PACEDOG#1, quote something from your article that you deem a fact?

It appears that you are incapable of reading the article. Why not just say so?

Or, prove the article wrong by posting the errors.

Who is going to pay down the debt you all have bitched about for years, Markle? The job creating rich who have run out of excuses as to why they haven't created jobs? It seems no matter what is offered you have criticisms as to why it won't work. You can longer justify the feeble excuses of your party's failures. The pandering is over and your gonna have to pay.LOL!

The reasons jobs have not been created is well known and have proven to be right many times.

We continue to be in trouble, and will be so long as the total distrust, doubt and confusion caused by President Barack Hussein Obama's failed polices continues.

The public and companies are afraid to buy, hire, expand, or start a business. The both distrust the government and who it will target next as either a winner or loser.

We have been told so many lies that everyone is sitting pat with whatever they have and hoping they can weather the storm.

Yes, Obama inherited a recession from the Democrat caused housing/mortgage/financial meltdown. Nothing he has done has helped, all his programs have failed and simply made things worse and, as FDR did with the Great Depression, extended the recession far beyond what would have happened.

Obama was so fixated on "FUNDAMENTALLY TRANSFORMING" the country that the economy, jobs, unemployment were simply an irritation.

$1 TRILLION wasted on the "Stimulus" plan started the downhill slide.

Now we have all that debt, no results.

We have $6 TRILLION in additional debt, in 48 months, with $1.15 TRILLION deficit PROPOSED by President Obama for 2013. SOMETIME, it has to be repaid. When, how? Where does the money come from?

Buyers and businesses know that all that means staggeringly higher taxes. They don't know when, on what, or how much. All we know is the Obama wants to punish those who have worked hard, played by the rules and been successful in order to reward those who did not.

They saw the massive failure of billions of dollars doing down the tubes for the failed Cash for Clunkers program.

Housing is a massive boondoggle which they keep dragging out so no one knows what to expect. AGAIN, another program to "rescue" homeowners is costing billions...again to reward people who made bad decisions from taxes confiscated from people who played by the rules. That adds more uncertainty to the housing market and encouraging people who WERE making their payments, even if they were underwater, to belly up to the government money trough.

President Obama PROMISED to give Card Check to the Unions which would cost all businesses more. Card check which is now lurking in the background as a goal of his second term. You know, as he told Russia, when he’d have more freedom to do as he pleases.

President Obama PROMISED that his energy programs would cause coal powered power plants into bankruptcy. We derive 23% of our energy from coal. This would further economic damage in all coal producing states and is happening today.

President Obama PROMISED that his energy programs would also "NECESSARILY CAUSE ENERGY PRICES TO SKYROCKET".

ObamaCare, today was the first day a few of the possible "benefits" go into effect. The plan is so bad that even the White House has advised all Democrats, running for office, to NOT mention the program and certainly not mention any savings which might be from the plan. Even the estimated costs have already exploded. Easily costing $2 - 3 TRILLION. The state of Connecticut approved 20 - 24% INCREASES for health insurance companies for next year along. People, companies don't know how much their mandated insurance will cost or how much the fines will be.

Adding more fuel to the fire, over the past three years the minimum wage has increased, resulting in MORE people being out of work.

More confusion? Two of Obama's top three economic advisers have bailed out going back to their classrooms. Apparently, all these THEORIES worked just fine and their blackboards. None of his advisers have ever run a business or had to make a payroll so how could they know what a business needs to grow and hire people?

Need more? So long as all this chaos is in the market place, we'll remain in the downward spin.

There are many more reasons but those should get you started. Still can't figure out what Obama has done to cause more people to be living below the poverty level...REALLY?

2seaoat



President Obama PROMISED that his energy programs would cause coal powered power plants into bankruptcy. We derive 23% of our energy from coal. This would further economic damage in all coal producing states and is happening today.


Not entirely the whole story.....factor in the over supply of natural gas, and an abundance of peaker natural gas plants which can be ran almost at the same price as coal burning plants, and you have more of the market forces determining a lower demand for coal than political policies. To the extent that subsidy is still in place for wind power, and States like Illinois are now barely using coal as they have the majority of their power derived from nuclear, wind, and natural gas......you have a changing paradigm for coal which Obama has become the easy scapegoat, but the truth is that natural gas and improved fracking technologies are making coal far less attractive than the President's rhetoric or regulation.

Guest


Guest

2seaoat wrote:President Obama PROMISED that his energy programs would cause coal powered power plants into bankruptcy. We derive 23% of our energy from coal. This would further economic damage in all coal producing states and is happening today.


Not entirely the whole story.....factor in the over supply of natural gas, and an abundance of peaker natural gas plants which can be ran almost at the same price as coal burning plants, and you have more of the market forces determining a lower demand for coal than political policies. To the extent that subsidy is still in place for wind power, and States like Illinois are now barely using coal as they have the majority of their power derived from nuclear, wind, and natural gas......you have a changing paradigm for coal which Obama has become the easy scapegoat, but the truth is that natural gas and improved fracking technologies are making coal far less attractive than the President's rhetoric or regulation.



PLenty of places are using coal. How in the heck do you think you would be able to post without Gulf Power using coal? Clueless

Guest


Guest

DAMMIT, MAN! I misread the title of the thread and thought it said that "50 is the New 30"... I'm 40, so I was really hoping for that!

30 is the new 50 (as in work hours) under Obama Stabbingguy

Sorry, I know you all are so serious here. I just thought I would add some of my poor sense of humor over here.

Sad

Guest


Guest

riceme wrote:DAMMIT, MAN! I misread the title of the thread and thought it said that "50 is the New 30"... I'm 40, so I was really hoping for that!

30 is the new 50 (as in work hours) under Obama Stabbingguy

Sorry, I know you all are so serious here. I just thought I would add some of my poor sense of humor over here.

Sad



Works for me!Very Happy

Markle

Markle

Dreamsglore wrote:
PkrBum wrote:See cost of job saved/created under obama... private growth/jobs are the only real/lasting chance we have.

Show me how many jobs the rich have created over the last four years,Pkr.

Simple, ANY AND ALL private sector jobs created over the past four years have been created by the rich.

How many poor people have ever hired you?

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum