now that its passed

abe23 said:

Yea, those annoying government bureaucrats need to stop infringing on businesses' right to sell us shoddy and dangerous products. They also need to stop inspecting my meat....those motherfuckers.

Click to expand...

Ha Ha Ha you think their inspecting your meat thats funny ! how many meat inspectors do you think their are? what percentage of U.S. meat do you think is inspected? that post is sarcastic right? yeah i heard their shutting down the alcohol tobbaco and pharmicutical industries because their bad for you....ha ha. do you think radiation is good for your brain? must not be because your allowed to have a cell phone so if you can buy it it must be safe

The dem's are certainly cooked now....the question is....will they be incinerated? Just how bad will it get in the elections?

No deflection will work when the opposition didn't cast a SINGLE vote for it, and the country is against it, and are now quite angry.

Realize that the Constitution is about to make a comeback....if it doesn't...it's all over.

[youtube]q3_tJEGyq_Y[/youtube]

This isn't health care reform folks, it's health welfare. It's the crack in the door to wealth redistribution. It's a crack in the door to subservience of the federal govt. on a PERMANENT basis.

The CBO reported that, if enacted, the latest health care reform legislation would, over the next 10 years, cost about $950 billion, but because it would raise some revenues and lower some costs, it would also lower federal deficits by $138 billion. In other words, a bill that would set up two new entitlement spending programs — health insurance subsidies and long-term health care benefits — would actually improve the nation’s bottom line.Could this really be true? How can the budget office give a green light to a bill that commits the federal government to spending nearly $1 trillion more over the next 10 years?
The answer, unfortunately, is that the budget office is required to take written legislation at face value and not second-guess the plausibility of what it is handed. So fantasy in, fantasy out.
In reality, if you strip out all the gimmicks and budgetary games and rework the calculus, a wholly different picture emerges: The health care reform legislation would raise, not lower, federal deficits, by $562 billion.
Gimmick No. 1 is the way the bill front-loads revenues and backloads spending. That is, the taxes and fees it calls for are set to begin immediately, but its new subsidies would be deferred so that the first 10 years of revenue would be used to pay for only 6 years of spending.


Gimmick No. 2, some costs are left out entirely. To operate the new programs over the first 10 years, future Congresses would need to vote for $114 billion in additional annual spending. But this so-called discretionary spending is excluded from the Congressional Budget Office’s tabulation.



Consider, too, the fate of the $70 billion in premiums expected to be raised in the first 10 years for the legislation’s new long-term health care insurance program. This money is counted as deficit reduction, but the benefits it is intended to finance are assumed not to materialize in the first 10 years, so they appear nowhere in the cost of the legislation.
Another vivid example of how the legislation manipulates revenues is the provision to have corporations deposit $8 billion in higher estimated tax payments in 2014, thereby meeting fiscal targets for the first five years. But since the corporations’ actual taxes would be unchanged, the money would need to be refunded the next year. The net effect is simply to shift dollars from 2015 to 2014.
In addition to this accounting sleight of hand, the legislation would blithely rob Peter to pay Paul. For example, it would use $53 billion in anticipated higher Social Security taxes to offset health care spending. Social Security revenues are expected to rise as employers shift from paying for health insurance to paying higher wages. But if workers have higher wages, they will also qualify for increased Social Security benefits when they retire. So the extra money raised from payroll taxes is already spoken for. (Indeed, it is unlikely to be enough to keep Social Security solvent.) It cannot be used for lowering the deficit.
A government takeover of all federally financed student loans — which obviously has nothing to do with health care — is rolled into the bill because it is expected to generate $19 billion in deficit reduction.
Finally, in perhaps the most amazing bit of unrealistic accounting, the legislation proposes to trim $463 billion from Medicare spending and use it to finance insurance subsidies. But Medicare is already bleeding red ink, and the health care bill has no reforms that would enable the program to operate more cheaply in the future. Instead, Congress is likely to continue to regularly override scheduled cuts in payments to Medicare doctors and other providers.
Removing the unrealistic annual Medicare savings ($463 billion) and the stolen annual revenues from Social Security and long-term care insurance ($123 billion), and adding in the annual spending that so far is not accounted for ($114 billion) quickly generates additional deficits of $562 billion in the first 10 years. And the nation would be on the hook for two more entitlement programs rapidly expanding as far as the eye can see.
The bottom line is that Congress would spend a lot more; steal funds from education, Social Security and long-term care to cover the gap; and promise that future Congresses will make up for it by taxing more and spending less.
The stakes could not be higher. As documented in another recent budget office analysis, the federal deficit is already expected to exceed at least $700 billion every year over the next decade, doubling the national debt to more than $20 trillion. By 2020, the federal deficit — the amount the government must borrow to meet its expenses — is projected to be $1.2 trillion, $900 billion of which represents interest on previous debt.
The health care legislation would only increase this crushing debt. It is a clear indication that Congress does not realize the urgency of putting America’s fiscal house in order.


If you are following the CBO'S numbers..... you are being completely snookered...........


I remain VERY CONFIDENT....that as the details trickle out.... my position will be reinforced over and over again. I put that confidence at 100%....100%


Which is very bad news for the country........

this is funny shit. the US government pumps 12 trillion plus dollars into the economy..(that includes the federal reserve buying bad assets from banks to big to fail)
and when investors even get a whiff of something going on positive in the market OIL shoots through the roof stalling any recovery efforts /. why? because these idiots just keep printing and borrowing money we dont have to pay back.right now warren buffet can get better interest rates than the US government. NO ONE is buying our bonds right now. rightrfully so they know we will default.




More Reuters Results for:


""





#searchInterceptResults {display:none;} #searchInterceptResults.wResults {display: block;}

• Most Popular
• Most Shared

1. Gunmen attack U.S. consulate in Pakistan | Video 7:23am EDT
2. Analysts expect Apple to sell 5 million iPads in first year 7:42am EDT
3. China economist sees "room for talk" on currency row 7:39am EDT
4. Strong quake shakes cities around U.S.-Mexico border | Video 7:48am EDT
5. Futures higher after jump in payrolls data 7:24am EDT

1. Gunmen attack U.S. consulate in Pakistan | Video 7:23am EDT
2. Analysts expect Apple to sell 5 million iPads in first year 7:42am EDT
3. China economist sees "room for talk" on currency row 7:39am EDT
4. Strong quake shakes cities around U.S.-Mexico border | Video 7:48am EDT
5. Futures higher after jump in payrolls data 7:24am EDT

Oil hits 18-month high on economic outlook

Christopher Johnson
LONDON
Mon Apr 5, 2010 7:55am EDT




Related News

• Nikkei futures up 0.3 pct after U.S. jobs dataSun, Apr 4 2010
• US S&P futures extend post-jobs data gains in AsiaSun, Apr 4 2010
• UPDATE 1-Tesoro says Anacortes refinery production cutSun, Apr 4 2010
• Tesoro says Anacortes crude intake at about 70 pctSun, Apr 4 2010
• RPT-UPDATE 8-Four dead in Tesoro Anacortes refinery fireFri, Apr 2 2010

Related Video



Business Update: Oil at 2010 peak

Wed, Mar 31 2010







Drivers load gasoline at a local gas-station during a blackout in Santiago, March 14, 2010.
Credit: Reuters/Ivan Alvarado




LONDON (Reuters) - U.S. crude futures hit an 18-month high on Monday, climbing toward $86 per barrel on expectations of faster-than-expected economic recovery and increasing demand for fuel.
Data on Friday showed U.S. employers created jobs in March at the fastest rate in three years. Non-farm payrolls rose 162,000, only the third increase since the U.S. economy fell into recession in late 2007 and the largest since March 2007.
U.S. manufacturing is also expanding at its fastest pace for more than five years, while Chinese manufacturing is picking up and Japanese business sentiment is also improving.
U.S. crude oil for May delivery rose $1.02 per barrel to a high of $85.89 in early Asian trade before slipping back to around $85.37, up 50 cents, by 1130 GMT (7:30 a.m. ET). The market was closed for a three-day weekend including the Good Friday holiday.
U.S. crude has risen almost 2 percent in the first five days of the quarter, versus a rise of 5.5 percent through the whole of the first three months of the year.
Brent crude rose 40 cents to $84.41 per barrel.
The strong payrolls, positive manufacturing data and signs of rising fuel demand are all likely to support oil prices and cement crude in a new, higher range, analysts say.
"LITTLE RESISTANCE"
Technical analysts, who follow the movement of prices on historical charts, have become more bullish and suggest the oil market could move higher in the next few weeks.
"Our take on crude oil prices in the short-term is that we likely will push higher from here," said senior commodities analyst Edward Meir at brokers MF Global.
"Technically, there is very little resistance showing on the charts given the upside breakout evident."
Last Thursday, crude oil settled at $84.87 after upbeat U.S. economic data signaled better oil demand ahead, prompting fund buying as the new quarter began.
In industry news, U.S. Tesoro Corp said on Sunday crude oil intake at its Anacortes, Washington, refinery was down to about 70 percent of its 120,000 barrel per day (bpd) capacity after a deadly explosion and fire on Friday.
Sustained demand for gas oil has triggered a surge in buying of crudes with high yields of gas oil and diesel in the Asia-Pacific market as demand led by Chinese buyers absorbed May-loading supplies.
(Additional reporting by Nick Trevethan in Singapore; editing by Keiron Henderson)

Yes, Obama is trying to suppress the oil prices with promises no one believes.... he announced oil exploration and crude went.... HIGHER.

That's called ....having NO CREDIBILITY folks....

===========================================================

Let's just take another look at the CBO and going by their figures in the past...with something VERY SIMILAR to Obama care.....

Take Medicare, enacted in 1965. The initial projection was it would cost $9 billion a year by 1990. The actual figure for 1990 turned out to be $67 billion. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the baseline for Medicare in 2010 is $521.3 billion, which includes $55.3 billion for the prescription drug benefit approved in 2003.

CrackerJax said:

Yes, Obama is trying to suppress the oil prices with promises no one believes.... he announced oil exploration and crude went.... HIGHER.

That's called ....having NO CREDIBILITY folks....

===========================================================

Let's just take another look at the CBO and going by their figures in the past...with something VERY SIMILAR to Obama care.....

Take Medicare, enacted in 1965. The initial projection was it would cost $9 billion a year by 1990. The actual figure for 1990 turned out to be $67 billion. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the baseline for Medicare in 2010 is $521.3 billion, which includes $55.3 billion for the prescription drug benefit approved in 2003.

Click to expand...

Right....because the only thing that ever affects crude prices is what obama says, does and eats for breakfast. Unemployment numbers have been stable for the last few months and things are looking good, which is why the market expects oil prices to raise. Announcing new exploration that might lead to a 1% increase in production 30 years down the road isn't going to have quite as much impact.

Medicare costs haven't risen any faster than healthcare costs in general, so your second point about estimates from '65 and costs today is also moot. Private insurance premiums have done the same thing. At the current rate of inflation for healthcare costs compared to the rest of the economy, by 2050 we would be paying 100% of our gdp in healthcare costs, which obviously won't work. That's exactly why a bill that will bring down costs and cover more people was needed.

Later, dummy....

obama is a 2 pump chump

a black n white race bater / capitolism hater

never ran a thing till he took the helm of your land

and you let him do it you and him hand in hand

and now his hand turns into a vice

while your looking back, he seemed like he was nice


but so did that dick that ripped you off

or any other thats picked you off

just another bitch on the list for obama to tick you off.


hes not running for another term,


this alone should scare the living shit out of everyone.



think about it. Why wouldnt he run for another term????


theres only one reason.


he will not have support.


how does he know for sure he will not have support?


BECAUSE HE PLANS TO DO THINGS THAT ARE BAD FOR AMERICA IN THE VIEW OF THE VOTERS


why?


Because whats bad for america as a whole, may be good for minorities in the short term



lets pray god strikes him down in his stride. this is all we can do short of impeaching if we can get control of both houses.

abe23 said:

Right....because the only thing that ever affects crude prices is what obama says, does and eats for breakfast. Unemployment numbers have been stable for the last few months and things are looking good, which is why the market expects oil prices to raise. Announcing new exploration that might lead to a 1% increase in production 30 years down the road isn't going to have quite as much impact.

Medicare costs haven't risen any faster than healthcare costs in general, so your second point about estimates from '65 and costs today is also moot. Private insurance premiums have done the same thing. At the current rate of inflation for healthcare costs compared to the rest of the economy, by 2050 we would be paying 100% of our gdp in healthcare costs, which obviously won't work. That's exactly why a bill that will bring down costs and cover more people was needed.

Later, dummy....

Click to expand...

Wow.... just wow.

where to begin.... if only you were a blank slate.

You can go back and look it up..... but when a nation announces it is going to increase the supply of oil globally.... the market REACTS to it. I'm guessing you don't pay much attention to the markets and are simply ignorant.... I understand if that's the case.

Second point was quite obvious and yet you don't grasp it..... the predicted costs of Medicare were off by a factor of TEN.

So apply that to OPbama care and then tell me how ANY money is going to be saved... just the OPPOSITE.

Get ready for en economic slow motion bloodbath.

You need to follow the train of though on the actual subject matter.

The CBO numbers are hogwash....because Congress FED the CBO hogwash..... if this is allowed to continue...in thirty years.... the ppl alive will VILIFY this generation.

At least you guys across the pond arent paying $2 per litre for fuel like we are here...its really starting to hurt, likely to hit $2.50 per litre by end of summer!!!! There are tankers sitting off our south coast refusing to off load as they know they can sit there for a few more months and push the prices higher, so pushing up their profits...pfff

Woomeister said:

At least you guys across the pond arent paying $2 per litre for fuel like we are here...its really starting to hurt, likely to hit $2.50 per litre by end of summer!!!! There are tankers sitting off our south coast refusing to off load as they know they can sit there for a few more months and push the prices higher, so pushing up their profits...pfff

Click to expand...

you must anxiously be awaiting cap and trade

i got an idea, lets not allow drilling anywhere...that should ease the pain. or maybe a tax on plastics, that oughta help...good recall for a stoner huh woo

its gotta end with the increases in energy prices. somehow, something has gotta change. people cannot afford this for very much longer. i figured my energy bills for tax purposes recently. dude, about 40 percent of my income goes for energy. and thats after paying the fucking govt about the same.



nice seeing again.

Oil in tankers is bought and sold many times before it reaches port.

By the way... more tankers mean more pollution. So let's not drill domestically for pete sake!!

CrackerJax said:

Oil in tankers is bought and sold many times before it reaches port.

By the way... more tankers mean more pollution. So let's not drill domestically for pete sake!!

Click to expand...

heavens no, dont drill domestically. we might spill some on a spotted owl, or a snail darter. i mean face it, people are expendable, we gotta save the critters.

Much better to let the Russians PROTECT the Arctic.... right?

Much better to let the Chinese PROTECT the Gulf of Mexico ... right?


The USA suks.......right?

Isn't that how the logic goes.... without the libs even remotely aware of the consequences of their pussiness?

yes... I said it... liberals are PUSSIES!!!