News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:AT&T giving $1000 bonus to all its employees because of t... by mc32 on Wednesday December 20, 2017 @03:40PM (#15973593)
Didn't Obama propose bringing Corp taxes down to 28% (vs 35 now and 22% after passage?). So it isn't only Reps who recognized our corp taxes were out if sync with other nations corp tax rates.
Re:AT&T giving $1000 bonus to all its employees because of t... by fzeroracer on Wednesday December 20, 2017 @04:03PM (#15973790)
Yes, BUT that was meant to be combined with the closing of multiple loopholes that would prevent companies from paying far less than what they're supposed to. In comparison the Republican bill leaves them open and even has a few of its own.

That's why Obama had such a tough time actually getting something done. Well, that and another obvious factor.

[dead]
Re:AT&T giving $1000 bonus to all its employees because of t... by specialist on Thursday December 21, 2017 @08:21AM (#15978537)
Obama is the benchmark for how to get elected.

ACA was kinda a big deal.

Of all the criticisms one could make, you parroted least reality-based.

Re:AT&T giving $1000 bonus to all its employees because of t... by fzeroracer on Wednesday December 20, 2017 @05:37PM (#15974533)
I'm not here to argue about the whether or not Obama was a good president, but your second point is incorrect. The ACA was formulated in an almost entirely bipartisan way, taking influence from many Republican plans. It was a bandage on the bleeding wound of Healthcare and one that was desperately needed.

I would say it was particularly effective, considering my family personally benefited from the removal of pre-existing condition denial. That said, it was obvious more needed to be done and gutting the ACA just means ripping open the wound once more and hoping we don't bleed out.

Re:AT&T giving $1000 bonus to all its employees because of t... by prepend on Wednesday December 20, 2017 @07:45PM (#15975359)
“The ACA was formulated in an almost entirely bipartisan way,“

While the idea for health exchanges initiated with repub policy people, the implementation is really different. So I don’t think it’s accurate to say the ACA was bipartisan. That’s why not a single republican voted for it, https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/111-2010/h165.

I suppose you could say that this bill is bipartisan because a democrat came up with the idea of lowering corporate tax rates. While true at face, the implementation is super different. Thus the zero democrat votes.

Interestingly, the ACA kind of set precedent for shoving stuff through with only a single party. If the ACA hadn’t been so super partisan, it would have been a lot harder to pass this bill.

Re:AT&T giving $1000 bonus to all its employees because of t... by fzeroracer on Wednesday December 20, 2017 @09:02PM (#15975744)
There's an important distinction to be made between what happened with the ACA and what happened with the current tax bill. It was bipartisan because republicans at all stages were given the opportunity to engage, plus a lot of the basic foundations of the ACA were praised by conservative economists and it was directly based off of Romney's healthcare plan. At no point were republicans shut out or their opportunity to amend the bill taken away. Many republicans even supported the individual mandate before the ACA came along!

With the republican tax bill, democrats were outright denied any opportunities to work with republicans. They were shut out of the entire process, all of their amendments were denied and there was no opportunity for bipartisan legislation because the GOP viewed it as 'my way or the highway'. Similarly, republicans simply backed away from any and all debate or attempt to amend the ACA because they refused to work with democrats.

This is the important distinction between what happened with the ACA and with the recent tax bill. Many republicans immediately turned face against what they had previously supported. Which is also a reflection of the modern-day GOP and reflected in how disastrous their attempt at governing has been.