Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: dario73 on January 07, 2011, 05:56:16 AM
-
Whatever you put in CBO - in front of them - they have to score what you put in front of them. They put this health care, we put the health care bill in front of them; the health care bill is full of gimmicks and spending tricks. Ten years of tax increases to pay for six years of spending, for starters. They double-count revenue for Social Security. They double-count revenue for this new CLASS Act program. They double-count Medicare cuts. They ignore the 'doc fix'. They did not include the $115 billion in spending that would be required just to set the bureaucracy up to run this new program.
"If you take out all the double-counting - if you add the counting they didn't count - it adds a $701 billion deficit. So, what CBO cannot do is tell you "we're not going to count the budget gimmicks that are in this legislation." They just have to estimate the bill as it's written, with all the gimmicks included. So, people around here know how to write legislation to manipulate the kind of cost estimate you're gonna get from the Congressional Budget Office. I sent a letter to the CBO, I asked them "Well, now look at these budget gimmicks, ignore these budget gimmicks. What then?" And it's what I just told you, this thing is a huge budget-buster. So, what they have is a piece of paper that they've manipulated to say this thing reduces the deficit.
I will eat my tie if that is the outcome of this law. But, they're trying to say by voting to repeal health care, we're going to raise the deficit - and we're just not gonna buy that economics. We're not gonna accept all these budget gimmicks, and that's why we're going to move ahead and repeal this thing anyway."
-
http://www.therightscoop.com/paul-ryan-ill-eat-my-tie-if-obamacare-reduces-the-deficit#
-
CBO goes by what they are told to do.
Anyone with a clue knows they completely screwed up the ObamaCare numbers.
-
CBO goes by what they are told to do.
Link to evidence they lied under Bush? I've seen none.
-
Link to evidence they lied under Bush? I've seen none.
Bro - are you really acting this dumb on purpose?
-
Bro - are you really acting this dumb on purpose?
No - but if we're venturing into CT terriroty - that gov nonpartisan agencies which have delivered data we've used for decades are suddenly falsifying info - then we have to look at ALL the data they've given us all along.
CBO is the basis for a shitload of govt spending. If it's all bullshit and we're screaming about obama - did obama cause the lying? Or did they do it before? Much bigger than some simple analysis is their role in everything else - IF indeed they're lying.
I see this continually on getbig - "Obama is having all the agencies lie about his budget, obamacare, UE numbers..." then we all point back to the numbers under Bush or Clinton to mock how bad obama is doing.
Obama convinced them to lie, but they were reliable under Bush and Clinton? Bring up charges! OR if they were bullshit under the other presidents, what are you whining about? 20 years of trumped up numbers and you're upset suddenly?
-
Do you pay attention to anything whatsoever?
Obama did not include the Doc Fix in what they sent to the CBO in order to get the number they wanted. When you include the DOC Fix, its in the red.
Same with this hokus pokus bs.
Dear God are you gone.
-
See, you resort to attacking me - when all I ask is for proof obama has convinced the CBo and BLS to falsify data for his political gain.
Okay, he excluded the doc fix. Is this the first time a president has done this? If yes, then it's an issue. If no, then why so serious?
-
See, you resort to attacking me - when all I ask is for proof obama has convinced the CBo and BLS to falsify data for his political gain.
Okay, he excluded the doc fix. Is this the first time a president has done this? If yes, then it's an issue. If no, then why so serious?
Because I don't like it when people who should know better intentionally play dumb.
-
Because I don't like it when people who should know better intentionally play dumb.
Did Clinton, Bush1, or Bush1 ever exclude the doc fix from BLS UE reporting?
Y or N? And link to evidence please.
-
Did Clinton, Bush1, or Bush1 ever exclude the doc fix from BLS UE reporting?
Y or N? And link to evidence please.
I didnt know the BLS was involved in health care. News to me.
-
CBO bases its analysis on the messed up numbers it is given.
Where is the CT in that?
-
CBO goes by what they are told to do.
Anyone with a clue knows they completely screwed up the ObamaCare numbers.
??? Oh please the CBO is wrong when you don't agree and right when you do. You're insane and your opinion has become worth little more than a gimmick.
-
??? Oh please the CBO is wrong when you don't agree and right when you do. You're insane and your opinion has become worth little more than a gimmick.
::) ::)
YES OR NO -
DID OBAMA INCLUDE THE DOC FIX IN WHAT THEY SENT TO THE CBO FOR SCORING?
YYYYEEEEESSSSSS
OR
NNNNNNOOOOOOOO
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
-
Notice how utterly clueless Obama is.
You morons still buying into the flim flam from bamacare are pathetic.
Like Ryan said: "ObamaCare would make Madoff Proud"
-
-
Critical Condition
NRO’s health-care blog.
Obamacare’s Cooked Books and the ‘Doc Fix’
May 24, 2010 5:12 P.M. By James C. Capretta
________________________ ________________________ _______-
The Obama administration continues to insist (see this post from White House budget director Peter Orszag) that the recently enacted health-care law will reduce the federal budget deficit by $100 billion over ten years and by ten times that amount in the second decade of implementation. They cite the Congressional Budget Office’s cost estimate for the final legislation to back their claims.
And it is undeniably true that CBO says the legislation, as written, would reduce the federal budget deficit by $124 billion over ten years from the health-related provisions of the new law.
But that’s not whole story about Obamacare’s budgetary implications — not by a long shot.
For starters, CBO is not the only game in town. In the executive branch, the chief actuary of the Medicare program is supposed to provide the official health-care cost projections for the administration — at least he always has in the past. His cost estimate for the new health law differs in important ways from the one provided by CBO and calls into question every major contention the administration has advanced about the bill. The president says the legislation will slow the pace of rising costs; the actuary says it won’t. The president says people will get to keep their job-based plans if they want to; the actuary says 14 million people will lose their employer coverage, many of whom would certainly rather keep it than switch into an untested program. The president says the new law will improve the budget outlook; in so many words, the chief actuary says, don’t bet on it.
All of this helps explain why the president of the United States would be so sensitive about the release of the actuary’s official report that he would dispatch political subordinates to undermine it with the media.
It’s not the chief actuary’s assignment to provide estimates of non-Medicare-related tax provisions, so his cost projections for Obamacare do not capture all of the needed budget data to estimate the full impact on the budget deficit. But it’s possible to back into such a figure by using the Joint Tax Committee’s estimates for the tax provisions missing from the chief actuary’s report. When that is done, $50 billion of deficit reduction found in the CBO report is wiped out.
And that’s before the other gimmicks, double counting, and hidden costs are exposed and removed from the accounting, too.
For instance, this week House and Senate Democratic leaders are rushing to approve a massive, budget-busting, tax-and-spending bill. Among its many provisions is a three-year Medicare “doc fix,” which will effectively undo the scheduled 21 percent cut in Medicare physician fees set to go into effect in June. CBO says this version of the “doc fix” would add $65 billion to the budget deficit over ten years. The entire bill would pile another $134 billion onto the national debt over the next decade.
If the Obama administration gets its way, this three-year physician-fee fix will eventually get extended again, and also without offsets. Over a full ten-year period, an unfinanced “doc fix” would add $250 to $400 billion to the budget deficit, depending on design and who is doing the cost projection (CBO or the actuary).
Administration officials and their outside enthusiasts (see here) say the Democratic Congress shouldn’t have to find offsets for the “doc fix” because everybody knows a fix needs to be enacted and therefore should go into the baseline. (By the way, the history of the sustainable growth rate [SGR] that Ezra Klein provides at the link above is a misleading one. The SGR was a replacement for a predecessor program that too had run off the rails — the so-called “Volume Performance Standard” enacted by a Democratic Congress in 1989.)
But supporting a “doc fix” is not the same as supporting an unfinanced one on a long-term or permanent basis. Not everybody in Congress is for running up more debt to pay for a permanent repeal of the scheduled fee cuts, which is why such a repeal has never been passed before. In the main, the previous administration and Congresses worked to find ways to prevent Medicare fee cuts while finding offsets to pay for it.
But that’s not the policy of the Obama administration. The truth is the president and his allies in Congress worked overtime to pull together every Medicare cut they could find — nearly $500 billion in all over ten years — and put them into the health law to pay for the massive entitlement expansion they so coveted. They could have used those cuts to pay for the “doc fix” if they had wanted to, as well as for a slightly less expansive health program. But that’s not what they did. That wasn’t their priority. They chose instead to break their agenda into multiple bills, and “pay for” the massive health entitlement (on paper) while claiming they shouldn’t have to find offsets for the “doc fix.” But it doesn’t matter to taxpayers if they enact their agenda in one, two, or ten pieces of legislation. The total cost is still the same. All of the supposed deficit reduction now claimed from the health-care law is more than wiped out by the Democrats’ insistent march to borrow and spend for Medicare physician fees.
And the games don’t end there. CBO’s cost estimate assumes $70 billion in deficit reduction from the so-called “CLASS Act.” This is the new voluntary long-term-care insurance program that hitched a ride on Obamacare because it too created the illusion of deficit reduction. People who sign up for the insurance must pay premiums for at least five years before they are eligible to draw benefits. By definition, then, at start-up and for several years thereafter, there will be a surplus in the program as new entrants pay premiums and very few people draw benefits. That’s the source of the $70 billion “savings.” But the premiums collected in the program’s early years will be needed very soon to pay actual claims. Not only that, but the new insurance program is so poorly designed it too will need a federal bailout. So this is far worse than a benign sleight of hand. The Democrats have created a budgetary monster even as they used misleading estimates to tout their budgetary virtue.
There is much more, of course. CBO’s cost projections don’t reflect the administrative costs required to micromanage the health system from the Department of Health and Human Services. The number of employers looking to dump their workers into subsidized insurance is almost certainly going to be much higher than either CBO or the chief actuary now projects. And the price inflation from the added demand of the newly entitled isn’t factored into any of the official cost projections.
We’ve seen this movie before. When the government creates a new entitlement, politicians lowball the costs to get the law passed, and then blame someone else when program costs soar. Witness Massachusetts. Most Americans are sensible enough to know already that’s what can be expected next with Obamacare.
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:mMFmJAm5rvQJ:www.nationalreview.com/critical-condition/55996/obamacare-s-cooked-books-and-doc-fix/james-c-capretta%20obamacare%20doc%20fix&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
________________________ ________________________ ________________
Case closed.
Can I give some of you idiots following bama?pelosi/Reid over the cliff some assistance with a shove or kick?
-
GREAT NEWS! GO RYAN GO!
________________________ ________________________ ________________________
Budget Chairman: House Budget Won't Include Funds for Obamacare...
Cybercast News Service ^ | 1/7/2011 | Matt Cover
________________________ ________________________ ________________________ _
House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) said on Thursday that the budget produced by his committee will reflect spending levels that assume Obamacare has been repealed and that Republicans will then use "mechanisms" inserted into the annual appropriations bills that fund the various departments of the federal government to stop Obamacare.
Given the widely accepted assumption that the Democratic majority Senate and President Barack Obama will not agree to legislation that repeals Obamacare, CNSNews.com asked Ryan if Republicans were going to defund implementation of the health-care legislation instead.
Under the Constitution, the Executive Branch cannot spend money unless it has been appropriated by Congress, and Congress cannot appropriate money without the approval of both the Senate and the House, which the Republicans now control.
"Everyone expects that the repeal bill will pass the House and then either not pass the Senate or certainly not get signed by the president," CNSNews.com asked. "In your budget will there be any funding for that bill?"
“So, obviously we plan on repealing it and our budget should reflect repeal of the health care law, and we will do that," said Ryan. "The real question I think you are trying to get at is defunding this law. That occurs in the appropriations process. So, what the budget does is send the numbers, the cap, to the appropriators. They write the spending bills. And inside of those spending bills is where we do plan on pursuing other mechanisms of trying to repeal this law."
CNSNews.com asked Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D.-Nev.) yesterday if he would shut down the government in order to save Obamacare if the Republican majority House sent the Senate appropriations bills that included language prohibiting funding for the implementation of Obamacare. Reid did not directly answer the question, but said House Republicans "have to understand that the health care bill is not going to be repealed” and that they “should get a new lease on life and talk about something else.”
-
Notice how utterly clueless Obama is.
You morons still buying into the flim flam from bamacare are pathetic.
Like Ryan said: "ObamaCare would make Madoff Proud"
QFT
-
Mr. Ryan was proven correct. I will repeat this again. Mr. Ryan knows more THAN ANY DEMOCRAT AND LIBERAL about the deficit, government spending and the scam that is Obamacare.
-
Liberals like 240 and KC are right. If America is destroyed in the process, so be it. Either you have to agree with everything that the CBO says all the time, or you have to disagree with what the CBO says all the time. You're not allowed to use the evidence availible and think for yourself. Thinking for yourself encourages evil republican principles such as logic, math and reason. When you have clear evidence that those who drafted a piece of legislation without reading it used numerous accounting gimmicks to lie to the public, well then you're just being a racist and negative.
Being negative is unamerican and threrefore, criticizing Obama means you hate America. 333 do you hate America? I think you do.
-
Liberals like 240 and KC are right. If America is destroyed in the process, so be it. Either you have to agree with everything that the CBO says all the time, or you have to disagree with what the CBO says all the time. You're not allowed to use the evidence availible and think for yourself. Thinking for yourself encourages evil republican principles such as logic, math and reason. When you have clear evidence that those who drafted a piece of legislation without reading it used numerous accounting gimmicks to lie to the public, well then you're just being a racist and negative.
Being negative is unamerican and threrefore, criticizing Obama means you hate America. 333 do you hate America? I think you do.
Like I always say: what is good for Obama always seems to be bad for America and vice versa.
-
Just look at how liberal morons deal with reality. The Dems lied about Obamacare. It is a scam. Yet, what is most important to them is that Glenn Beck lost a million viewers in the last 6 months. LOL!!! That shows liberalism is a mental disease.
-
what was the date the CBO started becoming full of shit? Jan 2009?
-
what was the date the CBO started becoming full of shit? Jan 2009?
Did you even watch Ryan' clip (Whichnow is completely verified in light on Sebellius' WWTTFF admission)?
-
240- if its so full of shit, why did the dems attempt to use the CBO to explain how Osamacare would be funded-- and since they failed to do so without exposing the CBO as bullshit, wouldn't that essentially lead to three conclusions, all of which implicate that Osamacare is a total bust for America from a fiscal point of view? (1) The CBO is bullshit and uses inaccurate numbers, therefore the WH should have known better that sooner or later their game of smoke and mirrors would be exposed (stupidity and dishonesty). AND (2) The Dems knew that there was no way to pay for Osamacare so they rammed it through, lied on purpose and didn't care that the hocus pocus accounting measures they submitted to the CBO would be discovered ( dishonesty and contempt for the American people). (3) The CBO is bullshit because it uses numbers the WH would pull out of thin air, but thats ok because the CBO never uses accurate numbers and if the American people find out, we'll just blame the CBO and Sarah Palin. (Treason, dishonesty, stupidity).
Take your pick. All I know is that if everyone knows the CBO is bullshit, the Osama administration was either too stupid to figure out that they would be exposed, or they didn't give a shit as long as the lefts ideological centerpiece was forced upon the American public.
Either way the jig is up.
-
Dems hiding costs that would destroy their entire healthcare agenda? They're taking a page right out of the playbook all those Wall St. banksters who work for Obama wrote.
-
I removed my comment. I think I misunderstood 240.
-
I agree that obama is so full of shit it's unbelievable. Check my post history recently... i've defeinitely come off the obama nuthugging. when I do *spin*, I try to include a notice so people don't take it seriously. Spinning is often more fun than looking at the reality of this shitty spot our nation is in.
As far as the CBO - unless the repub candidate will stand up during the debates and make the (viewable as CT) claim that the CBO is full of shit - it will appear to be a fair and reliable body by those swing voters.
And since the repub candidate will use bullshit numbers down the road - when he/she claims UE has improved, etc - I doubt they'll speak that CT out loud.
-
This is about obamaCare. 240 - did you see my thread with Conrad admitting ObamaCare is a ponzi scam?
-
The CBO can only score what number it is given.
So, take that as you will.
-
Sebellius vindicated ryan and the rest of us this week.
-
what was the date the CBO started becoming full of shit? Jan 2009?
bump
-
Bump
Notice how utterly clueless Obama is.
You morons still buying into the flim flam from bamacare are pathetic.
Like Ryan said: "ObamaCare would make Madoff Proud"