NOBama Nation: 1.7 Trillon required for Universal Healthcare AND Global Poverty Act

Yes, that is the cost so far (874 Billion) assessed for Obama's plans for Universal Healthcare and the Global Poverty Act.

Over 1.7 Trillion to pay for it, means your taxes GO UP! You pay for other people's healthcare, even those much less responsible than you are with their Health! Obama is a New World Order puppet, and this means his Presidency would finish the final step in creating the North American Union.

This means too, that you will support an overwhelming poor Mexican population with your tax dollars for their Health Care, while many of these poor people will not be supporting you! Sound fair? Yeah, it is if you like becoming more poor and giving away your hard-earned dollars. If you like supporting uneducated people with poor hygene and no means to make a better life for themselves otherwise, then yeah, it is fair. It levels the playing field so much, that you are taken down a notch or two, while Obama and his partners in crime will continue to rake in over 4 million per year (Obama's income last year cited via his 2007 Tax Return).

Obama's Health Care Plan Will Cost Up To $65 Billion A Year; Equal To $260 Billion Over Four Years."[Obama] campaign officials estimated that the net cost of the plan to the federal government would be $50 billion to $65 billion a year,

That's just Healthcare, now move on to solving the World's Hunger problem with American Taxpayers' money (another 800 Billion+$).

Coming from a guy who also wants compensation from the United Nations for Slavery that happened over a hundred years ago.

The debt to slavery was more than paid with the blood of over 400,000 dead White American soldiers in the Civil War to free the Slaves. The Audacity of Obama.

Read about Obama's massive spending plan using your hard-earned money (and not Obama's 4 million+) using the link below (middle section).

Counter to Obamatron Rebuttal

As expected, the following Obamatrons are using the money for the Iraq war as an excuse for Obama's planned Miracles.

Here is the counter, key point, you are not paying for the Iraq war directly - but will definitely be, over and above what is being taxed now, by a considerable margin, to fund Obama's Utopia.

**Obama will not bring the troops home in a timely fashion. It's more complicated than that. Even so, it would take two years as he claims.

**Also, you are not paying for the war in Iraq, other countries are!! The US has alot of hollow debt for the war, none of it, is being taken from you! Your taxes DID NOT go up to fund the Iraq war effort.

Obama, will take from you! Cutting middle class tax, and then reinstantiatiing it for higher taxes? Yeah, sure.

Bottom line, war or not, you are going to be affected much more directly than before with regard to your income.

www.dontvoteobama.net...



[edit on 9-6-2008 by jetxnet]

Obama has already said he will have middle class tax cuts, so it wouldn't make sense to cut them, and then raise them.
He has also said that he is going to end the war in Iraq, which will bring millions and millions of dollars that were being spent on the war back into the economy.

Quit being a party pooper.

[edit on 8/6/08 by wisefoolishness]

Let's look at this equation

Trillions spent on war --------- Much less spent on giving everyone health care.

I'm not the brightest bulb in the chandelier but I know which one makes more sense.

reply to post by jetxnet


I would much rather spend 3/4 of a trillion dollars on proving food and healthcare for people as opposed to a trillion dollars on an illegal war in iraq.

I don't quite understand how you can complain about spending when we've already wasted several trillion (depending on which estimates you read) in the middle east with nothing good coming out of it. At least with universal healthcare and anti-poverty programs people will be fed and taken care of.

I'm not a huge fan of universal healthcare in the first place, but you need to look at the opposite side of the coin.

War could surpass $1 trillion - article from 2006

Cost of Iraq war is $500 billion and counting

Iraq war cost at $1.3 trillion

A report released last week by the Democratic staff of Congress's Joint Economic Committee put the war's 2002-08 tab at $1.3 trillion.

Nobel laureate estimates wars' cost at more than $3 trillion

When U.S. troops invaded Iraq in March 2003, the Bush administration predicted that the war would be self-financing and that rebuilding the nation would cost less than $2 billion.

Coming up on the fifth anniversary of the invasion, a Nobel laureate now estimates that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are costing America more than $3 trillion.

Any questions?

I can see where this brainwashing is going 'Obama said ..'

Obama will not bring the troops home in a timely fashion.

Also, you are not paying for the war in Iraq, other countries are!! The US has alot of hollow debt for the war, none of it, is being taken from you!

Obama, will take from you! Cutting middle class tax, and then reinstantiatiing it for higher taxes? Yeah, sure.

Bottom line, war or not, you are going to be affected much more directly than before with regard to your income.

Stop drinking the Kool-aid.





[edit on 8-6-2008 by jetxnet]

Originally posted by jetxnet
Also, you are not paying for the war in Iraq, other countries are!! The US has alot of hollow debt for the war, none of it, is being taken from you!

Could you provide some statistics to back that up?

And how much goes to Corporate Welfare? Hmm...

Extending the lives of American citizens is bad now? You act like you are so pro-American. You are nothing but a jingoistic nutjob.

Oh and learn how to spell "Healthcare"

[edit on 8-6-2008 by QuetzalcoatlAlien]

Originally posted by jetxnet
I can see where this brainwashing is going 'Obama said ..'

I'll believe what Obama says before I believe what you say. I believe you are the one who has been 'brainwashed'.

Stop drinking the Kool-aid.

I happen to enjoy kool-aid, thank you very much.

No need to back it up, your taxes didn't go up since the war began. If that doesn't explain it, what does? Other countries have paid for it mostly (the Iraq War). China, Japan and the list goes on. Do the research.

The point is, your taxes will GO UP bigtime to cover Obama's plans for the US to solve Global Hunger (as IF it is OUR responsibility in the first place).

Universal Healthcare, 'nuff said.

[edit on 8-6-2008 by jetxnet]

Originally posted by jetxnet
No need to back it up, your taxes didn't go up since the war began. If that doesn't explain it, what does? Other countries have paid for it mostly (the Iraq War). China, Japan and the list goes on. Do the research.

The point is, your taxes will GO UP bigtime to cover Obama's plans for the US to solve Global Hunger (as IF it is OUR responsibility in the first place).

Univerals Healthcare, 'nuff said.

Contradicting yourself there, Paulie.

Why is it OUR responsibility to be supposedly ending "Terrorism" and "Muslim Extremists"? Why was it OUR responsibility to go to Vietnam?

Global Hunger is far more serious and should be a humanitarian effort looked up to.

Socialism never works. This universal health care plan is stupid. Sure you'll get healthcare for cheaper, but you also have to pay more taxes anyway, so you're really saving no money. The government just can't get this money for 'universal healthcare' from thin air.

The only people that will be getting healthcare for free/cheap are lazy people who leech off of society and are too lazy to get a job. If we stopped sugar coating things for them and giving free handouts, it would cure the sloths of their lazyness and they would be forced to get a job and become a productive member of society to stay alive like everyone else does.

Originally posted by AgentScmidt
Socialism never works. This universal health care plan is stupid. Sure you'll get healthcare for cheaper, but you also have to pay more taxes anyway, so you're really saving no money. The government just can't get this money for 'universal healthcare' from thin air.

The only people that will be getting healthcare for free/cheap are lazy people who leech off of society and are too lazy to get a job. If we stopped sugar coating things for them and giving free handouts, it would cure the sloths of their lazyness and they would be forced to get a job and become a productive member of society to stay alive like everyone else does.

Socialism never works? Explain that to the people who were happy during the Thomas Sankara's leadership in Burkina Faso.

Uh huh, lazy people. Let me see here...people dying because they can't afford healthcare are lazy cheap people...hmm...because they can't get a good paying job? So that makes them lazy people?

Oh and universal healthcare isn't a socialist program.

Originally posted by jetxnet
I can see where this brainwashing is going 'Obama said ..'

Obama will not bring the troops home in a timely fashion.

I am not even that staunch of a supporter of Obama. I do see him as a better 'choice', if you would call the lesser of 3 evils a choice, than McBush and Billary.

Where is your proof he will not bring the troops home in a 'timely fashion'? McCain has said he wants a 100 more years of war, so I don't really see how Obama could be worse than him.

Also, you are not paying for the war in Iraq, other countries are!! The US has alot of hollow debt for the war, none of it, is being taken from you!

Are you talking about the $7 trillion national debt? What's worse, China paying for the war or the fact that we lost our surplus after George Bush was elected and now we owe foreign countries that much cash instead?

Obama, will take from you! Cutting middle class tax, and then reinstantiatiing it for higher taxes? Yeah, sure.

If he taxes the rich more than the middle class and poor I'm all for it. They benefit much more than anyone else from government protection.

Bottom line, war or not, you are going to be affected much more directly than before with regard to your income.

I doubt it as I'll be leaving this country soon enough.

Stop drinking the Kool-aid.

How is McCainade? I hear its a little more bitter and war-like.

I also find it funny people vote for liberals to bring down the size of government that Bush created and to end the war, when in fact liberals are for those things.

Just look at the very meaning of the words liberal and conservative. If you're sitting at a table with your family and you say to your mom "please give me a liberal amount of those mashed potatoes" you're saying you want a LOT. If you say "give me a conservative amount" you are saying you want a LITTLE.

Liberals = MORE war, BIGGER government, MORE spending, etc. I don't think anyone on these forums are for that... so why do we have people that declare themselves as liberals and vote for democrats like Obama or Hillary? Just look at all past wars, Democrats have always gotten us into wars and Republicans have gotten us out.

For the record, Bush and McCain are also liberals, they are RINOs (Republicans in Name Only). The only issues they are conservative on is taxes, and abortion, which is not a whole lot.

Originally posted by jetxnet
No need to back it up, your taxes didn't go up since the war began. If that doesn't explain it, what does?

Um, could it be because the US had a 2 trillion surplus before this debacle and is now running a deficit over 2 trillion? Do you think that money came from the "cash fairy"?

'nuff said.

I guess not.

Originally posted by jetxnet
No need to back it up, your taxes didn't go up since the war began. If that doesn't explain it, what does? Other countries have paid for it mostly (the Iraq War). China, Japan and the list goes on. Do the research.

My taxes didn't go up? Is that all this is about, taxes? I think you're looking at this from a skewed point of view. Bush didn't raise taxes, but that doesn't mean anything. He just moved spending from education and other areas that are much more important to life here in the US over to the war effort.

The point is, your taxes will GO UP bigtime to cover Obama's plans for the US to solve Global Hunger (as IF it is OUR responsibility in the first place).

Ya we'll see. It doesn't matter what we think anyway, we have no real control over what happens so you can complain all day about how your taxes will be raised and nothing will happen.

I think its up to those who have a surplus of food, in this case corn, to feed others. We seem to have no problem burning corn as fuel, but when feeding the hungry is discussed there is some huge deal.

Why don't we stop subsidizing everything and we'll have billions of extra cash to use.

Oh wait, but you wouldn't want to stop helping the oil companies now would you? You do realize the US government subsidizes Exxon-Mobil and Chevron-Texaco to insure you have cheap gas? So ensuring corporate profits is OK with you, but taking care of the less fortunate is 'elitist'?

Universal Healthcare, 'nuff said.

I don't think you've said much at all. All I've read is you complaining about higher taxes, but no proof of anything. Usually when you stop spending trillions of dollars on one thing you have a surplus of a few trillion.

Simple economics.

Originally posted by AgentScmidt
Just look at all past wars, Democrats have always gotten us into wars and Republicans have gotten us out.

Huh?

The recent wars:

The Gulf War- President George H.W. Bush, a republican.

The current Iraq War- President George W. Bush, a republican.

Republican is as republican does.

Originally posted by AgentScmidt
Socialism never works.

Newsflash: You already live in a socialist state. What do you think a subsidy is?

This universal health care plan is stupid. Sure you'll get healthcare for cheaper, but you also have to pay more taxes anyway, so you're really saving no money. The government just can't get this money for 'universal healthcare' from thin air.

Universal healthcare implies providing healthcare for all, for free. That sounds so terrible doesn't it? Something for nothing.

Obtaining money out of thin air is impossible, you are correct. As I said before, taking money out of one pocket and placing another is how this thing works.

No more corporate subsidies, instead we'll be taking care of those who actually need help.

The only people that will be getting healthcare for free/cheap are lazy people who leech off of society and are too lazy to get a job.

Ah yes here it is the 'lazy' people. I guess everyone who is poor and disenfranchised by society is somehow lazy and stupid. Right.

If we stopped sugar coating things for them and giving free handouts, it would cure the sloths of their lazyness and they would be forced to get a job and become a productive member of society to stay alive like everyone else does.

I'm sure those sloths are too lazy to get a job anyway, so why cut their government-supplied heroin? What do you care anyway?

Originally posted by AgentScmidt
I also find it funny people vote for liberals to bring down the size of government that Bush created and to end the war, when in fact liberals are for those things.

There is no 'liberal' and 'conservative' politician. That is a misnomer. A politician is always about big government because they don't have a job if there is small government. That's how federalism works.

Just look at the very meaning of the words liberal and conservative. If you're sitting at a table with your family and you say to your mom "please give me a liberal amount of those mashed potatoes" you're saying you want a LOT. If you say "give me a conservative amount" you are saying you want a LITTLE.

Yes the old liberal versus conservative trite. I'm glad you're stuck in the box. "They" have won. You have been assimilated into the matrix as Agent Smith, just like your avatar and name.

Liberals = MORE war, BIGGER government, MORE spending, etc. I don't think anyone on these forums are for that... so why do we have people that declare themselves as liberals and vote for democrats like Obama or Hillary? J

Actually, liberals tend to be less war, same size government (which is still bull#), and shifting spending away from war towards helping people.

ust look at all past wars, Democrats have always gotten us into wars and Republicans have gotten us out.

How about Iraq? Afghanistan? That was some stupid liberals who started those wars and the conservatives are helping us get out...

For the record, Bush and McCain are also liberals, they are RINOs (Republicans in Name Only). The only issues they are conservative on is taxes, and abortion, which is not a whole lot.

I think the word you're looking for is NeoConservative, just like the 'liberals' these days are NeoLiberals.

DINOs.

Originally posted by QuetzalcoatlAlien
Oh and universal healthcare isn't a socialist program.

Care to explain this? There's a reason it's called "socialized medicine".

It's funny how this thread has been going so far. You have people justifying this ludicrously expensive program by saying that the war has cost more than the program will. Wouldn't it make even more sense if we ended the war AND spent that money improving our dire economic situation? Most of you that are arguing for this are the same people that argued that us spending this money on the war is what killed the economy. Do you really expect that we can do something like this AND raise taxes and it's not going to completely flatline the economy?

Take a few seconds and think about what your life is going to be like when taxes get raised back up to pre-Bush era levels. Most families are struggling to make ends meet as it is and this tax increase is going to make it impossible for many families to support themselves.