I think you misunderstood. It's bullshit not because he didn't say it, but because it isn't an answer to the relevant question.
Andrew Sullivan article
- Thread starter Mott the Hoople
- Start date
I think you misunderstood. It's bullshit not because he didn't say it, but because it isn't an answer to the relevant question.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
how so? you said:
and i gave you bush's policy. perhaps you ought to back up your own claim instead of whining about the cite i gave you which explained bush's policy.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Yes... I was referring to the numbers from the 2010 report. My bad on that. The 2011 report had more of the same bullshit.
Again... what has to happen for the other $124B in deficit reduction?
1) Massive cuts to Medicare reimbursement rates... which Congress for the past ten years has refused to allow to happen... yet you believe that somehow they will magically do it now.
2) Medicare advantage will be cut, knocking many seniors off the progam... yeah... the Dems will let that actually happen
3) The tax on insurance policies HAS to go into effect, yet unions have already gotten the start date pushed back from 2014 to 2018. I wonder if they will go ahead with it in 2018? Pipe dream.
4) The subsidies have to end in 2019 as projected... yeah... we all know how good Congress is at taking away subsidies to individuals
5) Employers have to maintain coverage... yet we keep hearing story after story of how they will drop coverage.
Again, if you feed the CBO a bunch of bullshit that you 'intend' future Congress's to do, even though you know the chances are slim that they will... the CBO has to run the projections based on the bullshit you tell them 'will' happen.
You can believe the idiots in DC if you wish. Intelligent people see exactly where this is headed.
The relevant question is whether Bush policy was to utilize special forces to take out bin Laden without Pakistani prior approval, not whether Bush would authorized thousands of ground troops to go after him.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
why do i even bother trying to help you back up your claim. quit your bitching and go find it yourself.
It has nothing to do with the ACA.
It should happen. Medicare Advantage shouldn't exist. It is a waste of money and a failed experiment.
2018 is the date included in the ACA. Whether they go ahead with it in 2018 has nothing to do with the ACA.
Not sure what you're talking about here. Do you have a link?
No, we don't.
The nice thing about the ACA is that the things will happen unless Congress does something to change it. The only way to assess legislation is to assess the legislation, not what might happen if a future Congress decides that it doesn't like certain provisions. If future Congresses change it, that isn't a problem with the ACA, it's a problem with future Congresses.
Your claim is that the ACA does not cut the deficit, but will increase it and you haven't posted a damn thing in support of it.
OK.
cawacko
Well-known member
Don't we have the original CBO projections on Medicare and Medicaid and neither of those came anywhere close?
Maybe its because I'm biased I don't know but to me it doesn't pass the sniff test. The combination that their projections on major programs like this in past have been wrong along with knowing that one can play with data that is being inputed to affect a certain desired output is how the deficit reduction number came about. We also know costs are continuing to rise and people are going to want more services. That is not a recipe for a program that is going to reduce the deficit.
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
That's some strange fuzzy math your using their. Did you even bother looking at the chart I posted? Ya know the one from the CBO that shows the actual costs?
The costs under the affordable health care act for the poor who required government subsidized insurance is more then offset by the 40 million who can afford it that will be required to pay for it. Now I know you'd rather tell those poor people "Fuck you, die!" cause they're poor but that's a notion that violates my Christian beliefs.
Good question. I don't recall asking for assistance. I don't really give a shit about Bush's policy.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
right...that is why you mentioned it in the first place
you do realize you acting like an ankle biter...
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Of course they weren't close. They used the same bullshit then that Dung believes now. There is no way in hell they cut medicare payments to docs by 25-40%. It isn't going to happen.
So your point is that the projections of the CBO in the 1960s are relevant to projections in 2009? The CBO projections on that latest expansion of the welfare state, Medicare Part D, overstated the costs. And your suggestions of partisanship or fudging data on the part of the CBO are completely unfounded.
It's a pretty simple formula for deficit reduction: projected new revenues are higher than projected costs.
right...that is why you mentioned it in the first place
you do realize you acting like an ankle biter...
You're boring as hell. Post something clever or interesting for once.
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
I'm sorry.....I am not prepared to argue with your fantasies.....suffice it to say that you're wrong but will never accept it....fortunately you're only one vote.....
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
don't try and fob your inadequecies off on me....you post a statement, and then bitch when i try and help you figure out the truth
life, get one
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
The CBO's data are fantasy......riiiiiight.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
The data isn't the fantasy... the expectations put on future Congress's is the fantasy. For THIS Congress to proclaim what some FUTURE Congress MUST do is absurd at best. Especially given the topic and the precedent set of ignoring such previous requirements. To pretend that they are suddenly going to adhere to the requirement of cutting medicare payments to docs is nothing short of absurd.
This Congress isn't saying what a future Congress must do, it says what the law is. The Congress passed a law that does what it does. If a future Congress decides that it wants to change the law, that isn't a flaw with the Affordable Care Act.
I also think this whole line of argument is hilarious coming from someone who opposed raising the debt ceiling unless this Congress set limits on what future Congresses can spend. Not terribly consistent, SF.
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
no, your misrepresentation of the data is the fantasy......less than a year after the first analysis and before a penny had been spent they revised it showing it was going to be over $135 billion more expensive than originally stated.......I'm sure the rest of it is gone by now.....
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
Since when is posting data misrepresenting it? LOL I posted data and then I linked my source to the data. The only one misrepresenting is you.
