|

Obama’s [If you like your health plan, you can keep it] not guaranteed

Remember the promise made by President Obama on Tuesday August 11, 2009 that, “if you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan?”

Well, there are some unintended consequences that the President and apparently Nancy Pelosi didn’t “PLAN” for with the Obamacare implementation. Even unions are objecting to Obamacare’s unintended consequences. There are many ways you could lose the health care plan you like, despite Obama’s promise.

Some labor unions have grown frustrated and angry about Obamacare and problems that could jeopardize the health benefits offered to millions of their union members because employers may opt out of health care offered in the past for lower cost public healthcare plans or simply decide to pay fines, while union members seek out other plans.

Here, employers are allowed onto the exchanges and will pick the public option, which would clearly change some union member’s health plans.

Unions are also concerned that if the employer can do opt out of a contract plan, what about the need for union negotiations? Why the need for unions at all?

Excerpt:

But last month, the union representing roofers issued a statement calling for  “repeal or complete reform” of the healthcare law. Kinsey Robinson, president of  the United Union of Roofers, Waterproofers and Allied Workers, complained that  labor’s concerns over the healthcare law “have not been addressed, or in some  instances, totally ignored.”

“In the rush to achieve its passage, many of the act’s provisions were not  fully conceived, resulting in unintended consequences that are inconsistent with the promise that those who were satisfied with their employer-sponsored coverage  could keep it,” Robinson said.

Excerpt on second article:

If the public option is cheapest, Jake Tapper [ABC NEWS] said, “then lots of employers will want to have their employees covered by that cheaper plan, which will not have to be for-profit, unlike private plans, and may, possibly, benefit from some government subsidies, who knows.

And then their employees would be signed up for this public plan, which would violate what you’re [Obama] promising the American people, that they will not have to change health care plans if they like the plan they have.”

The Wall Journal reported earlier this year, that more cities and municipalities might be looking to shift their health care costs from big cities to the federal government. Guess who is contemplating such a move – Rahm Emanuel will place retired workers on Obamacare! You can’t make this stuff up.

Excerpt:

Last week Obama’s former chief of staff- and Chicago’s newest mayor-for-life- Emanuel, decided that the city was through with paying for healthcare benefits on behalf of about 30,000 retired government workers.

“Once the phaseout is complete,” reported the Chicago Tribune, “those retired workers would have to pay for their own health insurance or get subsidies under the Affordable Care Act. The city-subsidized coverage is particularly important to retired workers who aren’t yet eligible for Medicare, as opposed to those 65 or older who use the subsidies for Medicare supplemental insurance.”

The 30,000 retired workers will either pay for their health insurance individually, says the city, or they can move their healthcare over to Obamacare and receive a federal government subsidy along the way, in addition to paying an out of pocket premium. The proposal will save Chicago $109 million next year.

Obama must really love Rahm’s support of Obamacare! So much for keeping your health care if you like it, Mr. President.

Last, but not least, is the so-called Obamacare “Cadillac Tax” that will affect nearly 75% of all corporate and public employees’ insurance plans over the next 10 years.

The tax doesn’t even become effective until 2018, but some employers are already lowering their costs so they will be unaffected when it takes effect.

Excerpt:

Employers say they have to get started bringing down costs now, The  New York Times reports, so employees who are used to $20 co-pays at  the doctor’s office and $500 deductibles are learning a new reality. Many now  are looking at deductibles as high as $6,000 for families.

Still, the tax is one of the most controversial parts of the healthcare law. It  imposes a 40 percent tax on the portion of a health plan’s cost that exceeds  $10,200 for an individual and $27,500 for a family. That cost includes what both  the employer and employee pay.

Many corporate employees, teachers and university professors already have the equivalent of $21,000 to $32,000 for family coverage and at least $7500 to $12,000 for single coverage and many more employees will be at those levels within the next 10 years.

This tax on premiums is typical of the one size fits all; level the playing field mentality of Obamacare. Employers will not pay this 40% tax on health care premiums over the next 10 years, so kiss that health care plan you want to keep goodbye!

Share:

92 Comments

  1. Brian Opsahl

    Thanks Wilson for being human …Terry…if all you want to write is insults ..please don’t bother…your shtick is wherein thin…I get it, you hate Unions and me thats fine, but stop pretending to know anything of what I do, how I do it, or why…all you do is guess with insults day after day about me personally…right or wrong we all have opinions and mine have no more value than yours or anybody elses…but to continue to attack me personally is YOUR issue that needs to be stopped…it’s your choice if you want me to start digging at you personally as your doing to me then continue down this path knowing I want NO part of it, but I will get nasty as you have…your choice dude..!!

    Im asking nice…otherwise just ignor my post that’s what I would do…?

  2. wilson

    Brian an ignorant electorate and the complicit MSM helped Obama get re-elected.
    Please define how the right insults “Women,Blacks,Hispanics,Asians,Poor”. The conservative movement wants to raise everyone up, not hold them back.

  3. Brian Opsahl

    That’s simple Wilson,

    The free stuff coment being made by all the republicans is very insulting…
    All the rape laws republicans are fighting that are against our Ladys..and the coments again our Lady’s are not stupid…how about all those panels republicans hold on Womens issues that have NOT one single Lady on it..
    The poor are villified daily by your party as being on the take and lazy….they can read Wilson..
    The Hispanics want some kind of immigration reform….they have been asking for several years that date back to Mr.Bush and your republicans clearly refuse to make that happen..

    The Conservatives on this blog are constantly promoting less pay and benifits for our workers…(anti-Union) race for the bottom attitude that you all write on a daily basis…

    These are the things that cost you the last election and if no changes are made it will continue…!! is that what you were looking for…Wilson..?

  4. Brian Opsahl

    Your coment that the electorate is ignorant just proves my point…wilson. you can’t call someone ignorant then turnaround and ask them to vote YOUR way…Right..?

    The really smart folks in this country voted overwelmingly in Mr.Obamas favor…so again..?

  5. wilson

    Brian, the truth hurts, but they are “low information voters” they have no understanding and no wish to be bothered, mark it up as apathy.
    Please be specific what rape laws are you referring to?
    Lets see food stamps all time high, high unemployment record numbers now on disability and record poverty.
    Conservatives want to uplift these folks, get the economy moving. Your party by all indications likes to have a class of people dependent on government.
    Well all want immigration reform, but some of us don’t want to award those folks who disobeyed our laws and entered illegally.
    So they have one panel hearing on contraception and no lady’s were present? So what? it was about the separation of church and state and the freedom of religious practice in the US.
    “An AFL-CIO union, the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers, sent a letter [pdf] last week to all senators urging them to reject the bill.

    “IFPTE believes it is not appropriate or fair for politicians to trade the jobs of American workers … in exchange for a path to citizenship,” said the letter. That is “a cruel betrayal of American workers,” the latter added.

    The chairwoman of the Congressional Black Caucus also signaled opposition to the bill’s guest-worker provisions.

    “We want our people not only to have these [graduate-level] jobs, but to build capacity, K through 12, to prepare young people for these jobs,” Ohio Rep. Marcia Fudge told National Public Radio in May.

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/06/03/lefties-unions-decry-gang-of-8-immigration-bills-impact-on-jobs/#ixzz2Vv2jDbJX

  6. Brian Opsahl

    Wilson, I would dissagree with any path that garnts some kind of immunity….but Im not the one who seeks this..I was just answering your questions.

    How can you build someone up by trashing them with insults…?

    If you really want our economy to get going then stop blocking all those jobs bills before congress your guys vote NO on..all the time.

    The Women against violence act that has been extended by many a congress can’t pass now becuase your guys suddenly don’t like it any more….why is that..? and there are many state laws republicans are suddenly against that target our Ladys…you really haven’t followed this…?

    Your assuming that because I mentioned the immigration law that I am behind it…NOT true …iI am with most conservitives on that issue…I was only pointing out your answer.

  7. wilson

    Like this bill “The GOP alternative bill, an extension of funding for federal highways and transportation programs, also went down in defeat, blocked by Democrats on a 47-53 vote. Freshman Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) crossed the aisle to vote with Republicans, while Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) voted with Democrats.”
    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/67568.html

    “How can you build someone up by trashing them with insults…?
    You tell me, since I have no clue what you are specifically referring to.

    Maybe more “shovel ready” Jobs, or green jobs that cost 11 million a job?
    Keystone pipeline, Coal
    “MCKINLEY AND GRIFFITH: Obama coal regulations crippling communities
    War on fossil fuels strangling the economy, too”
    from the Washington Times

    Brian, how many times are you mistaken?
    Wikipedia
    “In February 2013, the Senate passed an extension of the Violence Against Women Act by a vote of 78-22,[8] and the House of Representatives passed it by a vote of 286-138, with unanimous Democratic support and 87 Republicans voting in the affirmative.[9] The extension was signed by President Barack Obama.[10]”

  8. Brian Opsahl

    Keystone XL pipeline with the republican Governor of Nebraska against it and the one still leaking tar sands in the Michgan river kalamazoo…that has been leaking since 2006 and they cannot get the oil off the bottom…you mean that pipeline…?

  9. wilson

    So no comment about you incorrect assertions? You know Brian, you should do more research before making your claims.

    Well if we spent the billion we lost on green solar and battery technology companies , I am sure they could resolve that issue and actually make money and not sell the assets in a liquidation sale to the Chinese.
    Since the solar and battery companies went bankrupt, who pays for the toxic clean up?
    We do, who pays for an oil spill? Private companies.

    From the AP
    “Fueled partly by billions in government incentives, the industry is creating millions of solar panels each year and, in the process, millions of pounds of polluted sludge and contaminated water.

    To dispose of the material, the companies must transport it by truck or rail far from their own plants to waste facilities hundreds and, in some cases, thousands of miles away.

    The fossil fuels used to transport that waste, experts say, is not typically considered in calculating solar’s carbon footprint, giving scientists and consumers who use the measurement to gauge a product’s impact on global warming the impression that solar is cleaner than it is.”

    Isn’t the entire idea behind solar power to go “green” and help save the environment? Apparently not in the case of Solyndra. Not only did the company go bankrupt after receiving $500 million in taxpayer funding, but now workers at the Solyndra plant have left behind tons of toxic waste.
    Like Solyndra?

    “CBS 5 found the building locked up, with no one around. At the back, a hazardous storage area was found. There were discarded buckets half filled with liquids and barrels labeled “hazardous waste.” The building’s owner, a company called iStar, claimed in court documents, “there may be serious environmental, health and safety issues” at the premises. According to the documents, they include, “numerous containers of solvents and chemicals…and processing equipment contaminated with lead.” “Essentially it looks like they left a pretty big mess behind,” San Jose State Assistant Professor Dustin Mulvaney told CBS 5. Mulvaney has written a white paper (.pdf) on solar industry waste for the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition.”
    http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2012/04/30/great_news_solyndra_plant_full_of_toxic_waste

  10. Brian Opsahl

    You know the Chinese munipulated the solor market …right..!
    The reason we have better batteries is why…Wilson, because somebody took a chance and spent some money on new technologys…and yes there are winners and loosers…this has been going on forever in our Country you ever heard of NASA…Wilson…?

    Who pays for an oil spill…really, you honestly believe they pay for it…or maybe they pass the cost on to us…hence higher gas prices…? how about that gulf oil spill that had our Predient make BP oil put 20 billion in the bank to cover all the little guys who were hurt by that spill…?

    People like you said the same thing about the transister that put Japan back on the map…

    A war on fossil fuels…really even though the President has opened new drilling more than any President in our times…and gas will be our number 1 export…really..! number 1 wilson..?

  11. wilson

    President has opened new drilling more than any President in our times… and what about coal?

    Not on public land!

    “Obama’s War On Drilling: Oil Surplus, Not Scarcity, Is The New Regulatory Excuse”
    “Larry, the policy hasn’t really changed at all. In fact, the U.S. Treasury Department makes it very clear that they now regard oil and gas production as a problem. In each of the annual budget proposals they have sent to Congress, the Treasury Department calls for higher taxes on domestic oil gas and coal. Their remarkable reasoning is that unless taxes are raised, it will encourage the overproduction of oil gas and coal! For suffering motorists and families and businesses struggling to pay their energy bills, this is a cruel policy.”
    forbesDOTcom/sites/larrybell/2013/03/03/obamas-war-on-drilling-oil-surplus-not-scarcity-is-the-new-regulatory-excuse/

    Do even know what you are talking about? Better batteries? I am talking about billions thrown down the drain on government investments in green energy.

    Chinese firm gets OK to buy failed U.S. battery maker
    http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57566519/chinese-firm-gets-ok-to-buy-failed-u.s-battery-maker/

  12. Brian Opsahl

    so billions spent on the internet that you play with today…came from R and D work that your Government INVESTED in ….years ago…do you understand that…? and what that means.

    When your Governments Military asks for some new fangled wigit that can see through walls or stuff like that they have many failers before that new invention works.
    Costing billions to find a cure for cancer is worth the investment is it not…? do you get my point now…?

    • Ted Biondo

      Brian, I thought Al Gore invented the internet – just ask him!

  13. Gilligan,

    Tell me one thing that I said that was false and insulting.

  14. wilson

    Well Brian, when our government gives money to support failing companies, companies they knew wouldn’t remain solvent even with the millions provided for political reason, then yes I don’t get your point.

    This wasn’t research, it wasn’t money to colleges, this was money provided in many cases to political bundlers and political cronies.

    NASA
    Jobs Lost since 2011
    Texas 4,000
    Florida 5,400
    Louisiana 900
    Alabama 650
    United Space Alliance 2,870
    Shuttle Program Contractors 26,800
    Cure for cancer, yes that would be nice, tell me how much do the pharmaceuticals spend in private money each year in R&D?

  15. Brian Opsahl

    Al Gore should have never said that, just like the potato coment made by Dan Quale…

    Terry…gilligan …really ..dude..!! just about everything you write to me is insulting go back and read your crap…I can’t believe you asked that…!!!

    My point with you Wilson about NASA is all the things that were invented by all those ideas that came from space travel,moon landings, and all that research they do is jobs,jobs,jobs..I know they have been cutting back on funding because they are trying to spend more wisely than before.

    Haliburton would be a company that should be first on your list but you don’t even have them listed is that because of Cheney…? we all know how that company got billions in NO bid contracts….then were so cheap with the soldiers water suppy they got them sick…and there are many stories more about that company…shall we go on…?

  16. wislon

    Haliburton ? You mean that company that Obama gives no bid contracts too?
    So research equals jobs, jobs jobs, so Obama cuts spending to spend more wisely on green energy which resulted in a net loss of jobs (less research) and upwards of a billion dollars thrown down the toilet. Brian, what planet do you come from? Do you even understand what you said?

  17. wilson

    Regarding pipeline leaks

    ” Pipelines have been used to transport natural gas and oil, including from Canada to the United States, for three-quarters of a century. Almost 500,000 miles of interstate pipelines crisscross America, carrying crude oil, petroleum products, and natural gas, and over 2 million miles of natural-gas distribution pipeline send natural gas to businesses and consumers. …

    U.S. oil and natural-gas production is outpacing the transportation capacity of our inadequate national pipeline infrastructure. The Keystone XL pipeline is only one of many pipelines that will need to be constructed in the years ahead. …

    If personal injuries and environmental damage caused by accidents in the transportation of oil and natural gas were proportionate to the volume of shipments, one would expect the vast majority of incidents to occur on pipelines. But the opposite is true — the majority of incidents occur on road and rail, as shown by Transportation Department data, even though more road and rail incidents go unreported.”

    http://www.nationalreview.com/energy-week/350509/pipeline-safety-diana-furchtgott-roth

  18. Gilligan,

    Go back and re-read – “was false AND insulting”

  19. Brian Opsahl

    Wilson….did you spell your own name wrong..?
    My point to you on oil spills like tar sands is…look at the Kalamazoo river spill in Michagan if it was you living close to that river there is know way you would think it’s a good idea transporting tar sands that way…people can’t breath there own air drink there own water and they say the smell is worse than rotten eggs ever could be….but hey as long as it’s not in YOUR backyard why not right…!!!

    To this day they have not found a way to get the tar sands off the bottom of the river…and it has been several years in the making..

    The idea that this goes over the top of the largest sourse of water in the mid-west…is insain…dont you think…?

  20. wilson

    Yes I fat fingered my name, by the way it is their not there it is Michigan not Michagan.
    Insane?, what is insane is throwing billions away on green energy to help your political cronies. All as have as a result is toxic waste and lost jobs and the Chinese gets the technology at fire sale prices.

    Accidents happen and I trust our government would make sure that something like that leak would never happen again, don’t you trust your government?

    That link I provided shows that there are considerably less incidents of spills with pipelines.

    Hmm the drinking water I had in Illinois smelled of rotten eggs, I wonder…

  21. Brian Opsahl

    Terry…really again.

    Re-red….same result …insulting…as I said…what part of that don’t you understand…?
    Condescending,demeaning…those are words that come to mind.

    My Union backing doesn’t keep my job as your insulting about, my ability to be very good at what I do keeps my job …probably like most folks do….you sure do hate us Union guys don’t you…and all those lies being told to you about us Union guys just are not true…

  22. Brian Opsahl

    So just scratch Kalamazoo…right…!!
    Believe me wilson I am the King of bad grammer and spelling….I wasn’t picking …honestly I should have never pointed that out…since im the one who is always saying the glass house thing…..Go Hawks..!!!

    If just one of those green jobs finds some crazy way to save us from the toxic fumes of gas and oil type products that kill us slowly…then it’s worth it…I think

  23. wilson

    One of those green jobs that don’t exist since all those companies the government picked failed?

    Great use of our money
    “80% of DOE Green Energy Loans Went to Obama Backers”
    “A new book by Hoover Institution fellow Peter Schweizer details the startling extent of the cronyism that has pervaded President Obama’s “green jobs” push. According to Schweizer, 4 out of every 5 renewable energy companies backed by the Energy Department was “run by or primarily owned by Obama financial backers.”

    Those companies’ “political largesse is probably the best investment they ever made in alternative energy,” Schweizer explains. “It brought them returns many times over.”

    Such is the inevitable consequence of large government interventions in private markets. Leaving aside the losses associated with transfers of funds from self-sustaining industries to ones that rely on government support, such interventions also encourage unproductive business activities by making “subsidy suckling” far more profitable than run-of-the-mill business expansions or product improvements.”

    http://blog.heritage.org/2011/11/14/report-80-of-doe-green-energy-loans-went-to-obama-backers/

  24. Brian Opsahl

    And when Bush was President all that money went to his favorite companys…probably like 80% wilson….mostly oil prospecting..companys….so you we all hate waste wilson…me to…so..?

  25. wilson

    Brian, you have proof? What money are you referring to?What companies?

    So I guess that makes it right now that it is Obama in office?

    Yea Bush did this, so I guess this is what you are referring to, only the money didn’t go to political cronies and Republican bundlers and you have raved about the bailout being a success.

    “The only problem with Biden’s history lesson is that the “man with steel in his spine” he referred to should have been George W. Bush, not Barack Obama. Lest we forget, it was Bush rather than Obama who initiated the government rescue of the auto companies.

    On December 19, 2008, a week after Republicans in the Senate had killed a bailout bill proposed by Democrats, saying it didn’t impose big enough wage cuts on the U.A.W., Bush unilaterally agreed to lend $17.4 billion of taxpayers’ money to General Motors and Chrysler, of which $13.4 billion was to be extended immediately. He had to twist the law to get the money. Deprived of congressional funding, he diverted cash from the loathed TARP program, which Congress had already passed, but which was supposed to be restricted to rescuing the banks. “I didn’t want there to twenty-one-per-cent unemployment,” he said to a meeting of the National Automobile Dealers Association in Las Vegas last month, explaining why he acted as he did. “I didn’t want history to look back and say, ‘Bush could have done something but chose not to do it.’ ””
    http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/johncassidy/2012/03/an-inconvenient-truth-it-was-george-w-bush-who-bailed-out-the-auto-makers.html

  26. Brian Opsahl

    Oh…so now you want to give Bush the credit for fixing those companys you all called Government Motors….wow..dude..!!

    You like to re-write what happened don’t you…Mr.Obama fixed that deal and you know it..Romney was attempting to do the same thing your doing…didn’t work then aint workin now…!!

  27. wilson

    “You like to re-write what happened don’t you…Mr.Obama fixed that deal and you know it”
    No not me the New Yorker, of course it is apparent you didn’t read the link .

    You just can’t make statements and accusations without any thing to back it up.
    I guess you are just a Democratic lackey.

    “Obama, who in December, 2008, was the President-elect, publicly supported Bush’s move, saying it was a “necessary step to avoid a collapse in our auto industry that would have devastating consequences for our economy and our workers.” After taking office six weeks later, Obama put together an auto task force that extended tens of billions more in emergency financing to Detroit over the ensuing months, and also did what appears to have been a pretty good job in restructuring G.M. and selling Chrysler to Fiat.

    Obama deserves a lot of credit for finishing the job that Bush and his Treasury Secretary, Hank Paulson, had started. He stood with the auto companies, which were victims of extraordinary circumstances beyond their control. As the price of the bailout, he also insisted on some changes at G.M., including the installation of new leadership and the elimination of several brands.

    But that hardly justifies writing Bush and Paulson out of history, which is what the Obama campaign appears to be doing”

  28. Re: ” a pretty good job in restructuring G.M.”

    Obama’s screwing of the GM stockholders to pay off the UAW, isn’t a “pretty good job”, IMHO.
    Had GM been allowed to go through a re-organizational bankruptcy, they could have renegotiated the UAW contracts, and emerged even fiscally stronger.

  29. Gilligan,

    It may insulting, but it wasn’t false.

    “My Union backing doesn’t keep my job” – So would your company pay you more, less or the same if you weren’t in a union.

    As for the car company bailout, they should have went thru bankruptcy as Wilson said. The bondholders got screwed because the Obama administration appointee said so. GM still owes this country millions. They also got over $10 billion in a deferred tax liability wiped off the books. This was nothing but a payback to the unions. They should have been allowed to go bankrupt. Demand for cars would have been picked up by other manufacturers.

  30. Brian Opsahl

    Where do you idiots get that the UAW folks were paid off….? is this more fox talking points because the real facts are… the Union took a huge hit in reducing of benifits and pay….and funny not one mention of that in your ignorant anti-Union rants…..GM is now in top in sales again…from the brink of dissaster….do not follow that BS bankruptsy crap that Romney was selling….that company is doing just fine now…and all those good paying jobs are still paying taxes and contributing to the eceonomy….istead of being un-employed as republicans like you seem to want….what an anti-Americans you all are…wow!!

  31. As usual, Brian’s “facts” don’t match reality………

    Obama’s Auto Bailout Was Really a Hefty Union Payoff

    The Obama administration strong-armed the auto companies’ creditors into accepting undeniably unfair terms – terms that saw pensions obliterated for non-union workers but saved for those carrying a UAW card. Terms that saw non-UAW shops close but UAW factories stay open. Terms that doled out ownership in GM with political favoritism as a guiding principle.

    These charges are not at issue. In the government-managed reorganization of GM, bond holders (secured bond holders, who normally are at the top of the pay-out chart) were given equity in the carmaker at a price of $2.7 billion per one percent ownership. The government ended up paying $834 million for every one percent it claimed; the UAW paid only $629 million.

    Why did the UAW receive such favorable treatment? The government at the time argued that the UAW was already making sufficient sacrifices. While true that union members gave up cost-of-living increases and agreed to a no-strike rule, they were protected against the kind of pay cuts that would have made GM truly competitive.

    Months earlier, Congress refused an emergency loan to the auto makers because the UAW would not lower pay to compete with foreign car makers operating in non-union U.S. factories. The reality is that the UAW could have been harder pressed. If GM and Chrysler had stopped turning out cars, the union was toast.

    It was not only the ownership share that was skewed towards the UAW. As jobs began to come back, it was the UAW plants that kicked into high gear. Workers at GM’s plant in Moraine, Ohio, who had been laid off in 2007, were not included in the re-hiring. Why? Because they did not belong to the UAW. The Moraine plant was reportedly one of GM’s most productive, but under the terms of GM’s reorganization, its workers were “banned from transferring to other plants,” according to Sharon Terlep at The Wall Street

    Read more at: http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2012/10/17/Obamas-Auto-Bailout-Was-Really-a-Hefty-Union-Payoff.aspx#page1

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

CAPTCHA Image

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>