Then: " It will save 4 trillion dollars" -- now: " we didn't think we would cover 30 million people for free."

September 9, 2009
Add it all up, and the plan I'm proposing will cost around $900 billion over ten years – less than we have spent on the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, and less than the tax cuts for the wealthiest few Americans that Congress passed at the beginning of the previous administration. Most of these costs will be paid for with money already being spent – but spent badly – in the existing health care system. The plan will not add to our deficit. The middle-class will realize greater security, not higher taxes. And if we are able to slow the growth of health care costs by just one-tenth of one percent each year, it will actually reduce the deficit by $4 trillion over the long term.

versus press conference of September 10, 2010:

No, as I said, Jake, the -- I haven't read the entire study. Maybe you have. But, you know, if -- if you -- if what -- the reports are true, what they're saying is, is that as a consequence of us getting 30 million additional people health care, at the margins that's going to increase our costs, we knew that. We didn't think that we were going to cover 30 million people for free, but that the long-term trend in terms of how much the average family is going to be paying for health insurance is going to be improved as a consequence of health care. And -- and so our goal on health care is, if we can get. instead of health-care costs going up 6 percent a year, it's going up at the level of inflation, maybe just slightly above inflation, we've made huge progress.

Editor's notes: let's get one thing settled - Obama no longer talks of trillion dollar savings resulting from health care reform. We are wondering that if 4 trillion in savings was an honest appraisal, why the talk of a tax on the top taxpayers in our nation. Understand that this Master of Class Warfare is about to tax the top 3% of the population, the same 3% that pays 35% of our income tax bill and spends 37 % of all the money spent in this country. The same 3% that supplies 70% of all private sector jobs. THAT 3% .

Obama made 5.5 million dollars last year but he is not in the same club with the rich folks he hates: he manufactured nothing, hired no one, and for darned certain, he paid no bills. Large energy firms and unions and the Marxist Left own his thin skin -- he is lobbied by more people than Bush shook hands with during his eight years as President.

He is a genius at double talk. It is how he advances himself. It is how he survives.

And we have it all on tape !!!!!!

We document the complications of the Obama war on business.

Editor's notes: this was the result of legislation passed earlier this year. With Obama and his angst against the evil rich plantation owner (read: CEO) . One thing for certain; if he had run on the a platform that flat out said, "Vote for me and I will do my best to limit the pay of your boss," he would not have won the election. . . . but that is exactly what he is doing.

US pay law branded ‘logistical nightmare’

By Jean Eaglesham and Francesco Guerrera in New York

Published: August 30 2010 22:01 | Last updated: August 30 2010 22:01

US companies face a “logistical nightmare” from a new rule forcing them to disclose the ratio between their chief executive’s pay package and that of the typical employee, lawyers have warned.

The mandatory disclosure will provide ammunition for activists seeking to target perceived examples of excessive pay and perks. The law taps into public anger at the increasing disparity between the faltering incomes of middle America and the largely recession-proof multimillion-dollar remuneration of the typical corporate chief. . . . . READ THE FULL ARTICLE in the Financial Times >>>>

Point of post: something else that needs to be repealed. Why? Because what private business makes is none of the Government's business.