B-Man Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 My bad. Things are going so swimmingly right now. Moron. Gee Doc, one would think you'd be happy with the medical cost increases over the years! You must be making $ hand over fist! I believe I just read where a new study claims anesthesiologist involvement increased the cost of screening colonoscopy by 20 percent, according to findings published in Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keukasmallies Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 Please, I'm beggin' ya, DON'T mention the word Hil'ry in the same sentence with the word President. That fat-thighed, scraggly-haired harridan has done enough damage as it is. When she announced, a number of months ago, that she would hang it up in terms of political aspirations, I was over-the-moon enchanted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 Gee Doc, one would think you'd be happy with the medical cost increases over the years! You must be making $ hand over fist! I believe I just read where a new study claims anesthesiologist involvement increased the cost of screening colonoscopy by 20 percent, according to findings published in Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology. Just because you prefer to get a "colonoscopy" without anesthesia doesn't mean that's the way the rest of us roll. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duck_dodgers007 Posted September 19, 2012 Author Share Posted September 19, 2012 Blaming Obama for not cleaning up Bush's mess fast enough is pretty stupid. Four more years!!! Aboilsh the 22nd amendment???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 Blaming Obama for not cleaning up Bush's mess fast enough is pretty stupid. Yeah, let's look at that more closely... The stimulus proposed by Obama's economic team, before he even took office was going to: Increase the 2010 GDP by 3.7%, from 13088T to 13789T. Increase employment in 2010 from 133,876,000 to 137,550,000 jobs, by creating "or saving" 3.7 million private sector jobs. Keep in mind, those are "without/with stimulus" comparisons. And keep in mind, those are the numbers proposed in the administration-to-be's original stimulus plan priced at $775B So what happened? The stimulus plan that was passed was ten percent more than proposed. Total payroll employment fell to 131 million. The 2010 real GDP was...13088 trillion. In short, the actual stimulus accomplished a real net loss of jobs (it didn't save any, much less create any) and no change in predicted GDP, according to the metrics laid out in the administration's original plan that was smaller than actual stimulus the administration now argues was "too small" because of the obstructionist Republicans. Not only did the White House fail, it failed by its own published standards, and then proceeded to ignore those and cast the blame on others when it was clear they failed. And one more thing...those 137 million jobs the country was supposed to have by the end of 2010? Yeah...still not there yet. I believe, in cases such as that, the accepted vernacular is "epic fail". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koko78 Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 Obama's plans for world peace and global prosperity fell through because he had to compromise with his super-majority containing moderate Democrats. If the GOP had just bent over and took what he demanded up the butt, he would never have had to settle for less than he wanted just to please some 'blue dog' Democrats. Therefore, Romney causes cancer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cinga Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 Yeah, let's look at that more closely... The stimulus proposed by Obama's economic team, before he even took office was going to: Increase the 2010 GDP by 3.7%, from 13088T to 13789T. Increase employment in 2010 from 133,876,000 to 137,550,000 jobs, by creating "or saving" 3.7 million private sector jobs. Keep in mind, those are "without/with stimulus" comparisons. And keep in mind, those are the numbers proposed in the administration-to-be's original stimulus plan priced at $775B So what happened? The stimulus plan that was passed was ten percent more than proposed. Total payroll employment fell to 131 million. The 2010 real GDP was...13088 trillion. In short, the actual stimulus accomplished a real net loss of jobs (it didn't save any, much less create any) and no change in predicted GDP, according to the metrics laid out in the administration's original plan that was smaller than actual stimulus the administration now argues was "too small" because of the obstructionist Republicans. Not only did the White House fail, it failed by its own published standards, and then proceeded to ignore those and cast the blame on others when it was clear they failed. And one more thing...those 137 million jobs the country was supposed to have by the end of 2010? Yeah...still not there yet. I believe, in cases such as that, the accepted vernacular is "epic fail". Your argument is well founded, but you need to fix your GDP quotes.... It should be listed in billions, not trillions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duck_dodgers007 Posted September 20, 2012 Author Share Posted September 20, 2012 the administration's original plan that was smaller than actual stimulus the administration now argues was "too small" because of the obstructionist Republicans. Not only did the White House fail, it failed by its own published standards, and then proceeded to ignore those and cast the blame on others when it was clear they f And one more thing...those 137 million jobs the country was supposed to have by the end of 2010? Yeah...still not there yet. I believe, in cases such as that, the accepted vernacular is "epic fail". You are arguing that the economy would have been better without the stimulus? No, you can't be, you just want to hit Obama as making promises he didn't keep, oh woo pie doo, never had a politician like that, blah. You are an idiot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 You are arguing that the economy would have been better without the stimulus? No, you can't be, you just want to hit Obama as making promises he didn't keep, oh woo pie doo, never had a politician like that, blah. You are an idiot No, I'm arguing that strictly by the measures he himself set, and no one else's, Obama failed. And that you're an idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 Gee Doc, one would think you'd be happy with the medical cost increases over the years! You must be making $ hand over fist! I believe I just read where a new study claims anesthesiologist involvement increased the cost of screening colonoscopy by 20 percent, according to findings published in Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology. Happy with increased costs in the form of waste and fraud, to the point that it will bankrupt the country and worsen medical care? LOL! Yep, know the study. Sure it raises costs, just like a labor epidural raises costs for deliveries. But it also makes people less fearful of having a colonoscopy. Yeah, let's look at that more closely... The stimulus proposed by Obama's economic team, before he even took office was going to: Increase the 2010 GDP by 3.7%, from 13088T to 13789T. Increase employment in 2010 from 133,876,000 to 137,550,000 jobs, by creating "or saving" 3.7 million private sector jobs. Keep in mind, those are "without/with stimulus" comparisons. And keep in mind, those are the numbers proposed in the administration-to-be's original stimulus plan priced at $775B So what happened? The stimulus plan that was passed was ten percent more than proposed. Total payroll employment fell to 131 million. The 2010 real GDP was...13088 trillion. In short, the actual stimulus accomplished a real net loss of jobs (it didn't save any, much less create any) and no change in predicted GDP, according to the metrics laid out in the administration's original plan that was smaller than actual stimulus the administration now argues was "too small" because of the obstructionist Republicans. Not only did the White House fail, it failed by its own published standards, and then proceeded to ignore those and cast the blame on others when it was clear they failed. And one more thing...those 137 million jobs the country was supposed to have by the end of 2010? Yeah...still not there yet. I believe, in cases such as that, the accepted vernacular is "epic fail". Yeah...but Barry prevented us from going into a depression, and was the only guy who could do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 Happy with increased costs in the form of waste and fraud, to the point that it will bankrupt the country and worsen medical care? LOL! Yep, know the study. Sure it raises costs, just like a labor epidural raises costs for deliveries. But it also makes people less fearful of having a colonoscopy. When I have my coronary bypass, I'm refusing anesthesia. Just to save money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 When I have my coronary bypass, I'm refusing anesthesia. Just to save money. Naw. Let the libs do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 When I have my coronary bypass, I'm refusing anesthesia. Just to save money. When they open you up, will they find a heart? ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 No more obama in....... 46 more days. 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days. LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 No more obama in....... 46 more days. 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days 46 more days. LOL Obama's going to win. May as well start getting used to that idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 Obama's going to win. May as well start getting used to that idea. And I'm going to be down $20. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 And I'm going to be down $20. In that scenario, you're going to be down a lot more than $20. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 In that scenario, you're going to be down a lot more than $20. Yes, I'll be wrong which is much much worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duck_dodgers007 Posted September 22, 2012 Author Share Posted September 22, 2012 http://news.yahoo.com/tide-shifting-toward-obama-battleground-states-111916798.html?_esi=1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts