So with the New Health Care Reform passed through the House. Who is for or against it?? Why or why not?

I am not in favor. My opinion (whether it's right or wrong) is why should we pay for the people who are too lazy to get a job just so they can have health insurance? Now it's different if they are disabled and unable to work. But these people who won't get off their butts to get a job shouldn't get subsidized health care that we, tax payers, are paying for!

Edited November 8, 200916 yr by TN_girl21

This fairytale of Obamacare lowering the deficit is a big fat joke on the dems part. Obama scammed them!

Lets say it is not going to lower the deficit and is going to cost the same as the war, which do you prefer?

And the buck being passed to the little guy starts.

From the AP

AT&T Will Take $1B Non-Cash Charge For Health Care

By Barbara Ortutay - March 26, 2010

AT&T Inc. will take a $1 billion non-cash charge in the first quarter because of the health care overhaul and may cut benefits it offers to current and retired workers.

The charge is the largest disclosed so far. Earlier this week, AK Steel Corp., Caterpillar Inc., Deere & Co. and Valero Energy announced similar accounting charges, saying the health care law that President Barack Obama signed Tuesday will raise their expenses.

All four are smaller than AT&T, and their combined charges are less than a quarter of the $1 billion that AT&T is planning. The $1 billion is a third of AT&T's most recent quarterly profit. In the fourth quarter of 2009, the company earned $3 billion on revenue of $30.9 billion.

AT&T said Friday that the charge reflects changes to how Medicare subsidies are taxed. Companies say the health care overhaul will require them to start paying taxes next year on a subsidy they receive for retiree drug coverage.

The telecommunications company also said it is looking into changing the health care benefits it offers because of the new law. Analysts say retirees could lose the prescription drug coverage provided by their former employers as a result of the overhaul.

AT&T rival Verizon Communications Inc. was among 10 companies that sent a letter to congressional leaders in December warning that their costs would increase with the health care changes. Verizon did not immediately return a phone call seeking comment.

Shares in AT&T, which is based in Dallas, climbed 7 cents to $26.22 in afternoon trading Friday.

Actually, the healthcare bill is not deficit neutral. The CBO has said that it will LOWER the deficit over 10-20 years.

Of course, I know there are those who reject the CBO when it doesn't support their delusions. These are the people who don't believe bush turned a surplus into a deficit with two unfunded tax cuts to the rich, two unfunded wars (one unnecessary) and a big unfunded giveaway to pharma. ALL OF THOSE BILLS DID ADD TO THE DEFICIT BUT SOMEHOW THEY WERE OKAY WHILE A DEFICIT REDUCING HEALTHCARE BILL IS THE PROBLEM?

Wow, talk about convuluted thinking!! It would be funny if it weren't so pathetic (and desperate).

And if we would have allowed a medicare buy in for all, then we could have eliminated that whole employer/healthcare connection. And that would have provided comfort to all those on here who worry so much about big corporate america.

Bottom line

Our taxes have to go up. That would have been the case even before healthcare. This budget shortfall has been happening in states way before healthcare or the stimulus but the governors and such don't want to do it since it would be a risk to their election. We need to raise taxes regardless and they need to start doing that since as people are fond of saying we don't have any money. We have been out of money since before the crash of the economy. They needed to do it more than 5 years ago to make a difference. Now its inevitable but people want to blame it on the big stimulus and health care. Bush should have did it 2 years after got into office if not sooner.

"Shares in AT&T, which is based in Dallas, climbed 7 cents to $26.22 in afternoon trading Friday."

Guess investors are really scared, eh?

"Shares in AT&T, which is based in Dallas, climbed 7 cents to $26.22 in afternoon trading Friday."

Guess investors are really scared, eh?

and its down 56 cents today? whats your point?

tdsfl1, we have to pay for the war in Iraq and the military presence we have in Afghanistan. Also that charming little Bush tax cut fiasco was another joke on Americans.

Republicans always seem to refuse to raise taxes (although the senior Bush had no choice) and they always bellow about "read my lips, no new taxes" but it has to be done when they run up the deficit like the Bush administration and Republican congress did.

Historically they know the Democrats will do the right thing. Then after the Dems right the sinking ship, Republicans run a loud hateful campaign about Democrats being all about raising taxes. So the Republicans get back in control and do whatever it takes to line their own pockets while they're in office and mainstream Americans pay the price. It's appears to be a chain of events that is inevitable.

"and its down 56 cents today? whats your point?"

Really? You don't get it? My point is that investors are not worried. They're still buying and selling AT&T stock. If they were scared, AT&T stock would be dropping like a rock. Well, for some 56 cents sounds like a huge drop, but it's all a game. People will simply invest in it when it's down. Hurrah for AT&T. They're geniuses.

Edited March 30, 201016 yr by BJean

tdsfl1, we have to pay for the war in Iraq and the military presence we have in Afghanistan. Also that charming little Bush tax cut fiasco was another joke on Americans.

Republicans always seem to refuse to raise taxes (although the senior Bush had no choice) and they always bellow about "read my lips, no new taxes" but it has to be done when they run up the deficit like the Bush administration and Republican congress did.

Historically they know the Democrats will do the right thing. Then after the Dems right the sinking ship, Republicans run a loud hateful campaign about Democrats being all about raising taxes. So the Republicans get back in control and do whatever it takes to line their own pockets while they're in office and mainstream Americans pay the price. It's appears to be a chain of events that is inevitable.

actually congress was controlled by republicans in Clinton era.

"and its down 56 cents today? whats your point?"

Really? You don't get it? My point is that investors are not worried. They're still buying and selling AT&T stock. If they were scared, AT&T stock would be dropping like a rock. Well, for some 56 cents sounds like a huge drop, but it's all a game. People will simply invest in it when it's down. Hurrah for AT&T. They're geniuses.

AT&T was down today because Verizon got the iphone, not because of a NON-CASH charge due to healthcare reform.

Well yes, congress was controlled by republicans in Clinton era. So they are totally responsible for everything good that happened when Clinton was in office... Well, I don't think so. The president is not super powerful when it comes to legislation, but he does have some power and Clinton did manage to get some things done even with the people who tried their level best to get him thrown out of office. When I think of all the money they spent and the ungodly way they handled the Lewinsky affair, it makes me nuts. :-)

Dang, a few months ago I got my Droid. Shoulda waited for the iphone. Hated to go back on my contact with Verizon. This business and technology stuff... it'll drive ya nuts.

Fast-forward a few thousand years. We have been placed in a land that had its founding rooted in the will and laws of God. We were by no means a perfect people, but our laws reflected Judeo-Christian laws and traditions. We thrived like no other country in history.

I tend to think our success had less to do with the mercy and goodwill of God and more to do with the virgin lands we stole from the natives and the fact that we cultivated those lands with the blood and sweat of slaves.

I tend to think our success had less to do with the mercy and goodwill of God and more to do with the virgin lands we stole from the natives and the fact that we cultivated those lands with the blood and sweat of slaves.

Where did you get the idea that this land belonged to the indians? Merely living on a land does not confirm ownership. The indians had lived here for hundreds of years but were still living in crude homes; eating and warming themselves over an open fire; and letting their old people die alone without help. They had access to all the gold, silver, iron, water, trees, etc. that the white man had, yet it was the white man who built the greatest, most advanced society in the world. Their record is not a clean one, but nevertheless, saying that the land belonged to the indian and was taken by the white man is not true. The only land the indians owned was was the land they cleared, lived on and cultivated. To suggest that the indians owned the whole country cause they rode around on it on horseback is bull. Most, if not all, Indian tribes did not believe in a personal ownership of land. They did not consider a plot of ground theirs to be passed on to a son, but ground that was owned by the tribe for the good of all. This same attitude was held toward food. If a brave took a bison or deer in a hunt, it did not belong to him, but the tribe. The shallow thinker says, "That's magnanimous and unselfish." but it is also socialism and could be one reason why the indians were living substantially the same way when Columbus arrived as they had lived five hundred years earlier.

After that monologue I am truly speechless.