Reply With Quote
So, they came around. And, if I bothered to research, I'm betting the two ideas were only similar in name. But, it matters little, the current iteration is an abysmal job killer.
Yet another republican proposed idea.
So, they came around. And, if I bothered to research, I'm betting the two ideas were only similar in name. But, it matters little, the current iteration is an abysmal job killer.
like you ever care about details, yoni?
Really?
Not that I ever saw.
Link please. I want to see this!
if you are so certain of that, then it should be easy to prove me wrong.
lol, you mean the "iteration" you pulled straight out of your ass in order to justify its republican opposition?
Even if it's the identical sheme; it's a bad idea. I'm glad Republicans now oppose it. Yeah! Whoop Whoop!
What do you want me to say?
God knows Republicans can lay as many eggs as Democrats.
DMX7....
Who are the republican supporters of Tax and Cap?
Are the conservatives, or RINOs?
The only examples are find are not showing anyone as supporters of any draft that came out. Just the basic concept, before the facts were revealed.
Quick google search:
http://www.grist.org/article/2010-06...-cap-and-trade
Not speaking of details, and was against after seeing the numbers:I don't see this as an endorsement. I too, am impressed by how dumb people can be. Does that mean I endorse them:I do support the cap-and-trade concept because I believe it offers the opportunity to reduce carbon, at the least cost to society. The signal about future prices sent to electric power-plant operators will hopefully stimulate spending on low- and zero-carbon renewable energy plants now.This is no endorsement, it has a condition:I'm impressed with the fact the Chicago Climate Exchange, maybe as a prelude to some type of cap-and-trade or carbon-pricing system in our country, has at least established a price for carbon.What was the state version, and what is the missing text:I have no problem with trading as long as you don't devastate the economy. This is what solved acid rain. Some people on my side say, "Just create incentives." I say that's opening up the Treasury to every group in the country. I want to set emission standards and let the best technology win.What else do you expect from RINO losers:Reducing carbon dioxide emission in Massachusetts has long been a priority of mine. Passing this legislation is an important step ... towards improving our environment.I don't see this as evidence of republicans supporting any written legislation of the idea. Concept yes, practice no.A cap-and-trade policy will send a signal that will be heard and welcomed all across the American economy. And the highest rewards will go to those who make the smartest, safest, most responsible choices.
Back to the opening post, regarding the failure of CLASS.
The people defending the Obama administration for realizing what they were told many months ago, that the CLASS program was actuarially unsound, are missing the bigger picture as this failure relates to Obamacare, in general.
The public was sold this pile of on the promise it would bend the cost curve, and be a budget positive. $86 Billion of that positive affect on the budget was ascribed to the CLASS component. If they're were that far off on this one component, I'm sure we can remain confident in the rest of the forecast. Eh?
You didn't even ask for a forecast when Medicare Part D passed. That's what makes you a hypocrite.
Are you talking to yourself?
That was entirely a different thing, and I have no problem with providing better for our elderly and handicapped.
Apparently, you do.
It was a healthcare bill.
Apparently you only care about deficits when blue team is in power.
You are off your rocker if you think I would have supported the same Obamacare under republicans.
Arguably (and I'm basing this on what 101A said in another thread), Medicare Part D is actually more expensive than BarryCare.
So yeah, you do only care about deficits when blue team is in power.
We disagree. If that was fact, Part D would not have happened. It would have been stopped like future Obamacare previsions are being stopped.
Sure it would have happened. It was all rolled into the national credit card, that's the difference. You are just too much of a partisan hack to notice back when it passed.
And I'll take 101A word for it any day of the week, seeing he makes his living out of that.
No.
Part D is far cheaper than what Obama care would be fully implemented.
Here's when I say "back that up", and you say "I'm not going to take the time"
So why are you asking?
Why not just refer to the OP? Isn't the administration saying it's too expensive?
Maybe you missed it:
Government willingly shutting down an unsustainable program?
If only the GOP would do the same with theirs. Heck, not even shutting it down, but actually offsetting the cost with savings.
Correct.
Obamacare is not sustainable. Part D is.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions