Did you vote today?

Created by Rick on Jun 8, 2010

6,215 votes

Click on an option to vote

Yes

No

Other (explain below)

Barney Is My Hero

Jonesboro, AR

#29425 Feb 20, 2014
Barney, yesterday you agreed with the CBO
There’s no difference between the disincentives to work found in the Affordable Care Act and welfare payments, says the former director of the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).
“It’s exactly the same thing,” Douglas Holtz-Eakin, now president of the American Action Forum (AAF), told CNSNews.com .

“Many low income workers will figure out that if they work more, they’ll have to give up their tax credits and some Obamacare subsidies. They’ll add up the benefits and conclude it’s not worth it to work another day or another shift,” the economist said.

Earlier this month, the current CBO director, Douglas Elmendorf, told members of Congress that Obamcare subsidies will make working less attractive for people on the lower end of the income scale "relative to what would have been the case in the absence of that Act."

“As a result, some people will choose not to work or will work less – thus substituting other activities for work,” a CBO report noted.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) defended the health care law, which provides federal subsidies up to $7,000 to purchase taxpayer-funded health insurance, noting that one of its goals was to “give people life, a healthy life, liberty to pursue their happiness. And that liberty is to not be job-locked, but to follow their passion.”

“That’s crazy,” Holtz-Eakin said in response.“Honestly, it’s one thing if you choose to pursue your interests at your own expense, but that has nothing to do with this.” The loss of some 2.5 million people from the U.S. labor force will have "a straightforward effect,” he said.“It will mean less productivity, a smaller national economy, and a smaller tax base.”

“The biggest impact will be on young people who cannot find work. This takes one more thing off the list of reasons why they should be out there looking for jobs,” Holtz-Eakin added.

In a 2013 study, researchers at the Cato Institute found that despite the 1996 welfare reform legislation,“welfare benefits continue to outpace the income that most recipients can expect to earn from an entry-level job…The current welfare system provides such a high level of benefits that it acts as a disincentive for work. Welfare currently pays more than a minimum-wage job in 35 states.”

However, even though welfare recipients may be better off financially in the short term, they become dependent on government and tend to fall far behind their working peers in the long run. Will Obamacare continue this trend? CNSNews.com asked the former CBO chief.

“It’s a concern,” Holtz-Eakin replied.“There’s a lot of evidence, through several recessions, that some of those who are out of work don’t recover. Obamacare subsidies make it easier for them to never get back into the labor force.”

And that certainly “doesn’t help” the problem of income inequality, he added, because “the dividing line between the poor and not poor is a job. The poverty level of people with jobs is about 7 percent; it’s three times that for the unemployed. A job is the best anti-poor policy, but this goes the other way.”

CNSNews.com asked the former CBO chief if he was surprised that President Obama is attempting to reduce “income inequality” at the same time his signature domestic health care policy and his efforts to raise the minimum wage are increasing the disincentives to work.

“Not a bit,” he replied.“It’s clear they did not think about the economic implications when they passed [Obamacare]. The health sector is one sixth of the U.S. economy, and health insurance is a big part
Barney Is My Hero

Little Rock, AR

#29426 Feb 21, 2014
The First Amendment says "Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press…" But under the Obama administration, the Federal Communications Commission is planning to send government contractors into the nation's newsrooms to determine whether journalists are producing articles, television reports, Internet content, and commentary that meets the public's "critical information needs." Those "needs" will be defined by the administration, and news outlets that do not comply with the government's standards could face an uncertain future. It's hard to imagine a project more at odds with the First Amendment.

The initiative, known around the agency as "the CIN Study" (pronounced "sin"), is a bit of a mystery even to insiders. "This has never been put to an FCC vote, it was just announced," says Ajit Pai, one of the FCC's five commissioners (and one of its two Republicans). "I've never had any input into the process," adds Pai, who brought the story to the public's attention in a Wall Street Journal column last week.
Reality Check

Lonoke, AR

#29427 Feb 21, 2014
Barney Is My Hero wrote:
The First Amendment says "Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press…" But under the Obama administration, the Federal Communications Commission is planning to send government contractors into the nation's newsrooms to determine whether journalists are producing articles, television reports, Internet content, and commentary that meets the public's "critical information needs." Those "needs" will be defined by the administration, and news outlets that do not comply with the government's standards could face an uncertain future. It's hard to imagine a project more at odds with the First Amendment.
The initiative, known around the agency as "the CIN Study" (pronounced "sin"), is a bit of a mystery even to insiders. "This has never been put to an FCC vote, it was just announced," says Ajit Pai, one of the FCC's five commissioners (and one of its two Republicans). "I've never had any input into the process," adds Pai, who brought the story to the public's attention in a Wall Street Journal column last week.
If you asked Obama about that he would probably say something to the effect of "Congress didn't make that law, I did"
guest

Memphis, TN

#29428 Feb 21, 2014
I cant afford insurance and I cant afford to pay for the ones who get it free. Im in trouble.

Since: Dec 10

Kansas City Ks.

#29429 Feb 21, 2014
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
If you asked Obama about that he would probably say something to the effect of "Congress didn't make that law, I did"
Or he just might tell you that, "the CIN Study" is a pilot study, and by law the FCC is required to conduct feasibility test.

That any participation in this test is voluntary.

Damn, what a coincidence that they would kick this off in Columbia South Carolina, one of the most red of the red states, the program brought to the light of day in a OP-ED Piece in the WALL STREET JOURNAL by a Republican.

Then attempt to make political hay out of it!

They needed to give you haters something to cut paste beside the BLAZE.
Sand

Euless, TX

#29430 Feb 21, 2014
And you got your information from where, Barney?
Show us your source.
Reality Check

Lonoke, AR

#29431 Feb 21, 2014
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
Or he just might tell you that, "the CIN Study" is a pilot study, and by law the FCC is required to conduct feasibility test.
That any participation in this test is voluntary.
Damn, what a coincidence that they would kick this off in Columbia South Carolina, one of the most red of the red states, the program brought to the light of day in a OP-ED Piece in the WALL STREET JOURNAL by a Republican.
Then attempt to make political hay out of it!
They needed to give you haters something to cut paste beside the BLAZE.
That study has no place in a country where freedom of speech is one of it's foundational rights. This study has no place in America. The only reason for this study is to control information coming out of media outlets. It's dangerous.
OlPapaw

Euless, TX

#29432 Feb 21, 2014
Ar senate approves "Private Option"
House has voted no three times

Since: Dec 10

Kansas City Ks.

#29433 Feb 21, 2014
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
That study has no place in a country where freedom of speech is one of it's foundational rights. This study has no place in America. The only reason for this study is to control information coming out of media outlets. It's dangerous.

The study has nothing to do with freedom of speech what so ever.

And it is only a pilot study at that.

Since: Dec 10

Kansas City Ks.

#29434 Feb 21, 2014
Sand wrote:
And you got your information from where, Barney?
Show us your source.

99% of the information was in the WSJ article.

Tell me what information in my post, that was not contained in the article, do you want to know the source of?
Barney Is My Hero

Jonesboro, AR

#29435 Feb 21, 2014
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
The study has nothing to do with freedom of speech what so ever.
And it is only a pilot study at that.
You're right, it has to do with limiting free speech, of course if voters were smarter none of this would be an issue.

Since: Dec 10

Kansas City Ks.

#29436 Feb 21, 2014
Barney Is My Hero wrote:
<quoted text>
You're right, it has to do with limiting free speech, of course if voters were smarter none of this would be an issue
If the speech is limited it is not free.

It's only a issue to the uninformed, and partisan Republican voters..........

Everyone else knows its Bull Shit!

“Frankly my dear...”

Since: Apr 08

Location hidden

#29437 Feb 21, 2014
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
If the speech is limited it is not free.
It's only a issue to the uninformed, and partisan Republican voters..........
Everyone else knows its Bull Shit!
This coming from the fool that blames George w. Bush for anything and everything!!!
Barney is the KING of uninformed and partisan.......and reigns from his throne of BS!!!!
Reality Check

Little Rock, AR

#29438 Feb 21, 2014
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
Or he just might tell you that, "the CIN Study" is a pilot study, and by law the FCC is required to conduct feasibility test.
That any participation in this test is voluntary.
Damn, what a coincidence that they would kick this off in Columbia South Carolina, one of the most red of the red states, the program brought to the light of day in a OP-ED Piece in the WALL STREET JOURNAL by a Republican.
Then attempt to make political hay out of it!
They needed to give you haters something to cut paste beside the BLAZE.
Well, well, well, it looks like it just came out today that the FCC is suspending the "study" until further notice. If they are required to do it and it's just a "study" then why would they need to delay it? I mean, what harm could it do?
Reality Check

Little Rock, AR

#29439 Feb 21, 2014
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
The study has nothing to do with freedom of speech what so ever.
And it is only a pilot study at that.
Let me repeat. Well, well, well, it looks like it just came out today that the FCC is suspending the "study" until further notice. If they are required to do it and it's just a "study" then why would they need to delay it? I mean, what harm could it do?
Reality Check

Little Rock, AR

#29440 Feb 21, 2014
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
Damn, what a coincidence that they would kick this off in Columbia South Carolina, one of the most red of the red states, the program brought to the light of day in a OP-ED Piece in the WALL STREET JOURNAL by a Republican.
Then attempt to make political hay out of it!
They needed to give you haters something to cut paste beside the BLAZE.
South Carolina huh? Isn't that the state (the right to work state) where Boeing had so much trouble from the NLRB? I wonder how that would have turned out if the administration had their "news police" controlling what information was given to the public? Do you think it's just a coincidence?

Since: Dec 10

Kansas City Ks.

#29441 Feb 21, 2014
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
South Carolina huh? Isn't that the state (the right to work state) where Boeing had so much trouble from the NLRB? I wonder how that would have turned out if the administration had their "news police" controlling what information was given to the public? Do you think it's just a coincidence?
Give me and example of one question from the study guidelines that would give a lucid person any reason what so ever to believe that this study has a thing to do with controlling information given to the public.

To be so outraged as you are, you have surly read the guideline for the study, did you not?

Sure you have, now tell me which one of those questions is it that has you so up in arms.
While your at it, look at what information they are looking for and why they need it.

Then please tell me you can turn the reason for the study into some wild idea it is meant to a job description for a - "NEWS POLICE".

BTW- if you think S.C. is a union friendly state you best think again.

"Don't want to taint the water"

Gov. Nikki Haley

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2014...

“Frankly my dear...”

Since: Apr 08

Location hidden

#29442 Feb 21, 2014
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
Give me and example of one question from the study guidelines that would give a lucid person any reason what so ever to believe that this study has a thing to do with controlling information given to the public.
To be so outraged as you are, you have surly read the guideline for the study, did you not?
Sure you have, now tell me which one of those questions is it that has you so up in arms.
While your at it, look at what information they are looking for and why they need it.
Then please tell me you can turn the reason for the study into some wild idea it is meant to a job description for a - "NEWS POLICE".
BTW- if you think S.C. is a union friendly state you best think again.
"Don't want to taint the water"
Gov. Nikki Haley
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2014...
Yeah! That's right, Barney! Any lucid person should know what to think when a transparent President like Barak tells the American people anything.
Heck, your lucid mind believes and still defends the lie, "If you like your health insurance, you can keep you health insurance!"
Even though that lie has been shot full of holes and sunk faster than the titanic, you still believe the lies!
You will never be the poster child for "lucid minds", cause you're a nut! Pure, bona fide, CRAZY...that is anything but lucid!
I believe...I BELIEVE this administration has been controlling information given to the public from the beginning.
Now, it is your responsibility to wake up from your liberal induced coma and open your sleepy eyes to the real world...
Reality Check

Lonoke, AR

#29443 Feb 22, 2014
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
Give me and example of one question from the study guidelines that would give a lucid person any reason what so ever to believe that this study has a thing to do with controlling information given to the public.
To be so outraged as you are, you have surly read the guideline for the study, did you not?
Sure you have, now tell me which one of those questions is it that has you so up in arms.
While your at it, look at what information they are looking for and why they need it.
Then please tell me you can turn the reason for the study into some wild idea it is meant to a job description for a - "NEWS POLICE".
BTW- if you think S.C. is a union friendly state you best think again.
"Don't want to taint the water"
Gov. Nikki Haley
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2014...
It's not the study in and of itself. It's how it will be used if the FCC deems it feasible. If we have freedom of speech in this country, why would we need a media police force deciding what information is critical to the country and what is not?

Since: Dec 10

Kansas City Ks.

#29444 Feb 22, 2014
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
It's not the study in and of itself. It's how it will be used if the FCC deems it feasible. If we have freedom of speech in this country, why would we need a media police force deciding what information is critical to the country and what is not?

You have no idea of what the intended purpose of that study was to begin with, it would be best if you just moved on, you just might land on a subject that you can discusses without looking miserably foolish trying to discuss.

Not likely, but it is worth a try.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

El Dorado Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
What is the significance of the date 4/20 20 min All the same 3
Charlie H 1 hr Private eye 8
Felicia Evans (Jun '11) 1 hr The voice 268
Laura B. Mason arrested for solicitation to com... (Jun '13) 1 hr All the same 936
150 females ive slept with in eldorado 1 hr The voice 33
How Does One Report A Bad Doctor (Apr '11) 1 hr The voice 35
IS MELLOR PARK MALL coming back to life 2 hr snoop 29

Flood Warning for Union County was issued at April 20 at 9:21PM CDT

More from around the web

El Dorado People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]