GOP wants to increase the deficit?

[Cancel8]

"CBO and JCT estimated that the March 2010 health care legislation would reduce budget deficits over the 2010–2019 period and in subsequent years; consequently, we expect that repealing that legislation would increase budget deficits..."

..."getting rid of health-care reform would mean rescinding planned cuts in federal spending on health care, largely for Medicare.

Under the terms of Obama’s health bill, government payments to Medicare Advantage – plans run by private insurers that are an alternative to traditional Medicare – are supposed to be reduced by $132 billion over a decade, for instance.

Those plans now get around 14 percent more per person than traditional Medicare does.Payments for Medicare home health care would also be slashed by around $40 billion over ten years.

Second, repealing health-care reform would also entail rolling back scheduled tax increases and fees.

For example, individuals making over $200,000, and couples making over $250,000, face higher Medicare Part A (that’s hospital insurance) taxes under Obama’s health reforms.

Their Part A tax rate is supposed to go up 0.9 percent on January 1, 2013. That’s a big money raiser, estimated to bring in $210 billion between 2013 and 2019.

And it would be eliminated if the health care reform law is repealed.

So would planned fees levied on insurers, medical device manufacturers, and others.

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/120xx/doc12040/01-06-PPACA_Repeal.pdf

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politi...-law-repeal-Why-would-it-increase-the-deficit

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

complete rubbish....not raising taxes is NOT increasing the deficit

its nonsense to say repealing h/c will increase the deficit...h/c is estimated to cost trillions

CBO: Obamacare Would Cost Over $2 Trillion

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/cbo-obamacare-would-cost-over-2-trillion

 

[Bonestorm]

complete rubbish....not raising taxes is NOT increasing the deficit

its nonsense to say repealing h/c will increase the deficit...h/c is estimated to cost trillions

CBO: Obamacare Would Cost Over $2 Trillion

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/cbo-obamacare-would-cost-over-2-trillion

Let's see what the CBO (your source, mind you) has to say about the impact of repealing the Affordable Care Act on the deficit:

As a result of changes in direct spending and revenues, CBO expects that enacting H.R. 2 would probably increase federal budget deficits over the 2012–2019 period by a total of roughly $145 billion (on the basis of the original estimate), plus or minus the effects of technical and economic changes that CBO and JCT will include in the forthcoming estimate. Adding two more years (through 2021) brings the projected increase in deficits to something in the vicinity of $230 billion, plus or minus the effects of technical and economic changes.

http://cboblog.cbo.gov/?p=1750

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Let's see what the CBO (your source, mind you) has to say about the impact of repealing the Affordable Care Act on the deficit:




http://cboblog.cbo.gov/?p=1750

you should read the source more closely, it is a complete assumption, nothing more and they say they are still examining the issue.

and its hilarious how not spending 2 trillion on h/c will cost us money...

next time, get a more accurate and thorough cite

 

[Bonestorm]

you should read the source more closely, it is a complete assumption, nothing more and they say they are still examining the issue.

and its hilarious how not spending 2 trillion on h/c will cost us money...

next time, get a more accurate and thorough cite

You're an idiot.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

You're an idiot.

thats a great refutation

should have your link more closely

 

[Bonestorm]

thats a great refutation

should have your link more closely

It's all the refutation that is required. The CBO says that the repeal will increase the deficit. And it males perfect sense since the CBO said "ObamaCare" would decrease the deficit.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

It's all the refutation that is required. The CBO says that the repeal will increase the deficit. And it males perfect sense since the CBO said "ObamaCare" would decrease the deficit.

how certain are they of their preliminary less than detailed estimate?

 

[Bonestorm]

how certain are they of their preliminary less than detailed estimate?

Pretty damn certain.

Do me a favor and quote the language that leads you to believe that the CBO is a "complete assumption."

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Pretty damn certain.

Do me a favor and quote the language that leads you to believe that the CBO is a "complete assumption."

really...they are pretty damn certain?

let's see what they say about that:

Uncertainty Surrounding the Estimates. The projections of the bill’s
budgetary impact are quite uncertain, both because CBO has not completed
a detailed estimate of the effects of H.R. 2 and because assessing the effects
of making broad changes in the nation’s health care and health insurance
systems—or of reversing scheduled changes—requires assumptions about a
broad array of technical, behavioral, and economic factors

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/120xx/doc12040/01-06-PPACA_Repeal.pdf

ouch!

Because CBO and JCT estimated that the March 2010 health care legislation would reduce budget deficits over the 2010–2019 period and in subsequent years, we expect that repealing that legislation would increase budget deficits. The resulting increase in deficits projected for fiscal years 2012 through 2019 is likely to be similar in size to—but not exactly the same as—the reduction in deficits that was originally estimated to result from the enacted legislation.

the entire thing is based on this assumption...its ludicrious

 

[Bonestorm]

really...they are pretty damn certain?

let's see what they say about that:

ouch!

Yes, let's see the entirety of what they say about that instead of just the portion you selectively quoted:

Uncertainty Surrounding the Estimates. The projections of the bill’s
budgetary impact are quite uncertain, both because CBO has not completed
a detailed estimate of the effects of H.R. 2 and because assessing the effects
of making broad changes in the nation’s health care and health insurance
systems—or of reversing scheduled changes—requires assumptions about a
broad array of technical, behavioral, and economic factors. However,
CBO’s staff, in consultation with outside experts, has devoted a great deal
of care and effort to the analysis of health care legislation in the past few
years, and the agency strives to develop estimates that are in the middle of
the distribution of possible outcomes. As a result, CBO believes that its
estimates of the net budgetary effects of health care legislation have a
roughly equal chance of turning out to be too high or too low.

My pretty damn certain statement is a whole lot closer to the truth than your statement that it is a "complete assumption."

the entire thing is based on this assumption...its ludicrious

First, it isn't an assumption. Second, it isn't ludicrous.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

the portion you bolded does not at all take away from this statement:

The projections of the bill’s
budgetary impact are quite uncertain,

i knew you would dishonestly spin away and not admit you fucked up, you walked right into it, i read that before i asked you the question, and you fell for it hook, line and sinker

 

[Bonestorm]

the portion you bolded does not at all take away from this statement:



i knew you would dishonestly spin away and not admit you fucked up, you walked right into it, i read that before i asked you the question, and you fell for it hook, line and sinker

When you've finished your onanistic pursuits, let me know what source you've got for your claim that repealing the law will not increase the deficit.

 

[cawacko]

How is the CBO going to accurately state in three years something is going to cost $300 billion rather than $325 billion? That doesn't pass the sniff test. They predicted budget surpluses as far as the eye could see a decade ago as if the dot com boom was going to continue forever.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

When you've finished your onanistic pursuits, let me know what source you've got for your claim that repealing the law will not increase the deficit.

remind me again how this statement means they are "pretty damn certain"

The projections of the bill’s
budgetary impact are quite uncertain

lmao...not just uncertain, but "quite" uncertain

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

"CBO and JCT estimated that the March 2010 health care legislation would reduce budget deficits over the 2010–2019 period and in subsequent years; consequently, we expect that repealing that legislation would increase budget deficits..."

..."getting rid of health-care reform would mean rescinding planned cuts in federal spending on health care, largely for Medicare.

Under the terms of Obama’s health bill, government payments to Medicare Advantage – plans run by private insurers that are an alternative to traditional Medicare – are supposed to be reduced by $132 billion over a decade, for instance.

Those plans now get around 14 percent more per person than traditional Medicare does.Payments for Medicare home health care would also be slashed by around $40 billion over ten years.

Second, repealing health-care reform would also entail rolling back scheduled tax increases and fees.

For example, individuals making over $200,000, and couples making over $250,000, face higher Medicare Part A (that’s hospital insurance) taxes under Obama’s health reforms.

Their Part A tax rate is supposed to go up 0.9 percent on January 1, 2013. That’s a big money raiser, estimated to bring in $210 billion between 2013 and 2019.

And it would be eliminated if the health care reform law is repealed.

So would planned fees levied on insurers, medical device manufacturers, and others.

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/120xx/doc12040/01-06-PPACA_Repeal.pdf

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politi...-law-repeal-Why-would-it-increase-the-deficit

Mojo, please tell me you aren't so stupid as to believe, we are going to add a sweeping new entitlement for 30 million Americans, and it's not going to cost us anything, in fact, it is going to DECREASE the deficit... I mean, are you REALLY that retarded?

The CBO is like a calculator... it calculates what it is given, nothing more, nothing less. It can't calculate information it is not given! When this massive boondoggle was being orchestrated and coordinated, care was taken to make sure the CBO score would be favorable, because that was the gimmick to get it passed. Much of the actual COST will not kick in until AFTER the 10-year window, which is all the CBO estimates costs on. So when we factor in those costs, as well as the smoke and mirrors used by double-counting Social Security and Medicaid revenues, the cost is well over $700 billion, as opposed to a much smaller amount CLAIMED by the Democrats with their bogus CBO figures. There is no "increase of the deficit" in repealing Obamacare, and to think that would even be the case, is beyond stupid and borderline mentally retarded. Sorry, it just is.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Pretty damn certain.

Do me a favor and quote the language that leads you to believe that the CBO is a "complete assumption."

the portion you bolded does not at all take away from this statement:

The projections of the bill’s
budgetary impact are quite uncertain
i knew you would dishonestly spin away and not admit you fucked up, you walked right into it, i read that before i asked you the question, and you fell for it hook, line and sinker

 

[Bonestorm]

OK. So I kinda walked into that one.

D'oh.

Getting back to the subject matter of the thread, can you point to your source for the idea that the repeal bill will not increase the deficit. I'm interested in seeing it.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

OK. So I kinda walked into that one.

D'oh.

Getting back to the subject matter of the thread, can you point to your source for the idea that the repeal bill will not increase the deficit. I'm interested in seeing it.

Again, how can a sane rational person claim that a program designed to afford medical coverage to 30 million extra people, isn't going to cost money? Futhermore, how does anyone who is sane, figure such a program is going to actually reduce the deficit? I mean, there shouldn't be a need for a linked source to tell you that what you are fantasizing is just not feasibly possible in the reality we live in. It's so far out there in left field, who would ever think they needed a web page to explain it's not possible?

You know what Nigel... If you refuse to take a shit, eventually, you will blow up like a big pregnant woman and die.... there isn't a web site link to prove to you that is true, but it is true. Do you not believe it?

 

[Damocles]

Again, how can a sane rational person claim that a program designed to afford medical coverage to 30 million extra people, isn't going to cost money? Futhermore, how does anyone who is sane, figure such a program is going to actually reduce the deficit? I mean, there shouldn't be a need for a linked source to tell you that what you are fantasizing is just not feasibly possible in the reality we live in. It's so far out there in left field, who would ever think they needed a web page to explain it's not possible?

You know what Nigel... If you refuse to take a shit, eventually, you will blow up like a big pregnant woman and die.... there isn't a web site link to prove to you that is true, but it is true. Do you not believe it?

Only the CBO who must use whatever assumptions given to them by Congress and whatever current tax tables exist assuming they are perpetual could possibly come up with such an irrational conclusion. That so many believe it is a testimony to the absolute faith some hold in government.