My Two Cents on the Election

[trojanma]

Don't take my word for it this is from the CBO. The most impartial arbiter of cost in our government.


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


"10-year budget window by grouping the elements of the legislation into broad categories
and assessing the rate at which the budgetary impact of each of those broad categories is
likely to increase over time. The categories are as follows:


• The gross cost of the coverage expansions, consisting of exchange subsidies, the net
costs of expanded eligibility for Medicaid, and tax credits for employers: Those
provisions have an estimated cost of $199 billion in 2019, and that cost is growing
at about 8 percent per year toward the end of the 10-year budget window. As a
rough approximation, CBO assumes continued growth at about that rate during the
following decade.
• The excise tax on high-premium insurance plans: JCT estimates that the provision
would generate about $35 billion in additional revenues in 2019 and expects that
receipts would grow by roughly 10 percent to 15 percent per year in the following
decade.
• Other taxes and other effects of coverage provisions on revenues: Increased
revenues from those provisions are estimated to total $74 billion in 2019 and are
growing at about 7 percent per year toward the end of the budget window. As a
rough approximation, CBO assumes continued growth at about that rate during the
following decade.
• Changes to the Medicare program and changes to Medicaid and CHIP other than
those associated directly with expanded insurance coverage: Savings from those
provisions are estimated to total $106 billion in 2019, and CBO expects that, in
combination, they would increase by nearly 15 percent per year in the next decade.

All told, the legislation incorporating the manager’s amendment would reduce the federal
deficit by $16 billion in 2019, CBO and JCT estimate. In the decade after 2019, the gross
cost of the coverage expansion would probably exceed 1 percent of gross domestic
product (GDP), but the added revenues and cost savings would probably be greater.
Consequently, CBO expects that the legislation, if enacted, would reduce federal budget
deficits over the ensuing decade relative to those projected under"


So in Summary
Expansion costs 199 billion
Excise Tax -35 billion
Other effects -74 billion
Changes to Medicare -106 billion

A reduction of 16 billion for 2019.

[jribs]

You are being a sheep. And you didn't answer my questions. In addition, what this does not mention is how the quality of care will be drastically reduced. NICE how much MORE TAXES we the people are going to have to pay. You must like giving away your hard earned money what in the end is an inferior product and I (and maybe you if you are living on food stamps) get no benefit. With a quick search I can counter your above with an article that came out since the CBO info you have above. If I search harder I can find others....please note (not the article but the info) that this is coming from....the CBO!!!! Today, the CBO believes that Obamacare will spend more money, raise more tax revenue, and reduce the deficit less than the agency thought in 2010. And things could get worse. This is only a portion of the article here and the link below so you can read the rest for yourself. Basically your argument is weak. In essences we (those of who pay taxes) are going to be paying more, getting less and causing more damage to this country. Stop being a sheep, educate yourself with more then what CNBC or any other of the left slated tv is spewing and do some independent research. This is just a small thing that is causing harm to this country and shows that this president has been bad for our country and unfortunalty I am no longer proud of this country that by the way I did serve for (because I wanted to not because I needed to).
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


For the purposes of this analysis, I looked at three sets of CBO projections: (1) the
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
report that was published hours before the final Obamacare vote in Congress; (2) the
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
report estimating the deficit impact of repealing Obamacare; and (3) the
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
report estimating the deficit impact of repealing Obamacare after the Supreme Court ruling. The first report looked at the fiscal impact of the law from 2010-2019; the second from 2012-2021; and the third from 2013-2022. Hence, there are two ways to compare the three reports: first, an apples-to-apples comparison of the seven years (2013-2019) common to the three reports; second, by comparing the total ten-year cost of the law reported in each case, to show how the law’s costs increase over time. There are small technical differences between the first report and the next two, because repealing Obamacare is different from passing it. But these three reports are the ones that go into Obamacare’s fiscal impact at the level of detail I needed to conduct this analysis.
Spending projections for 2013-2019 have increased by $124 billion In 2010, the CBO estimated that Obamacare’s spending on new programs would amount to $929 billion from 2013-2019, and a ten-year cost of $944 billion. Those figures increased to $956 billion and $1,442 billion respectively in 2011, and $1,053 billion and $1,856 billion in 2012. By “spending on new programs” I mean all the spending in Obamacare on new programs, principally the cost of expanding coverage via Medicaid and the new exchanges. These figures don’t include the cuts to Medicare, which I will discuss later. What’s remarkable is that this increased spending comes despite the fact that the CBO estimated that state cutbacks in the Medicaid program, in the wake of the Supreme Court ruling, would reduce government spending by $84 billion from 2012-2022. In 2010, the CBO estimated that Obamacare’s tax increases would amount to $626 billion from 2013-2019, and $631 billion over ten years. In 2011, the CBO estimated totals of $624 and $968 billion, respectively. In the most recent report, the CBO projected a 2013-2019 total of $672 billion, and a ten-year total of $1,221 billion.

[trojanma]

How can you in one sentence say that we are uninformed sheep following propaganda and then follow your argument with an article that is propaganda(How else can you call something that refers to the ACA as Obamacare). This speaks to part of the issue in our society as it is very difficult to get real facts without some spin on them.

There are three CBO estimations on the eventual cost of the ACA. THough you have to realize that the third is a virtual situation of the effect on the budget if the ACA were to be repealed. Ironically repealing the ACA would result in an increase in deficits.

"Deficits would be increased under H.R. 6079 because the net savings from eliminating the insurance coverage provisions would be more than offset by the combination of other spending increases and revenue reductions:"
HR6079 is the republican act of congress to repeal the ACA

The numbers are ugly. why? Healthcare in this country is ugly. Americans treat healthcare like it is a drive through window at McDonalds. Many providers oblige them.

Universal Healthcare is important.
Why?
It is all about productivity.
Without access to care people get sick-> if they get sick they don't work-> if they are chronically sick and their chronic preventable diseases don't get fixed they go on disability-> Eventually our disability/social support system will crack- Now these disabled people will either die or have to be cared for by their families hurting productivity of healthy people.

This is why the vast majority of industrialized nations have Universal Coverage!

[Spesh]

Can we really vote for a man that is bankrupting our country and taking us on the fast track toward Greece (with no one to bail us out) and and only wants to make EVERYONE middle class. Socialism at its best.

Conservative definition of Socialism: anytime any money goes into anything whatsoever its socialism. You know, anything except for defense. Then its redblooded, erection worthy, cowboy pistol firing, god fearing capitalism.

Edit: And cant stop laughing at this "discussion". Only on this forum could we have people suggest the reason they are voting for Romney is due to Obamacare. Because, you know, Romney is totally against universal health care of any kind. He understands its socialism!

[JamesBW43]

I am sorry but I have to disagree...I do a lot of research to make informed decisions and I have yet to read anything other then that it will break the budget in the future. The ones that say that it will obliterate the budget are immediately are right wing and the ones that say it will be balanced are left wing or Government literature. More neutral information says that (if I remember correctly) by 2020 or 2012 it will be hemorrhaging like some of our other current Government sponsored plans.
BUT...If it is so wonderful and 90% of the criticism is untrue then how come..... 1.) I am experiencing it first had with my healthcare plan that we have been told straight forward that it is preparation for obamacare. (My plan used to be very good, not cheap but good.) Now it just sucks. And 2.) My Physician who, for now I can still go and see, is retiring in two years to go and take up teaching? You can call it "ACA" but if it looks like crap and smells like crap...guess what?

This is just one topic that I am very disgusted about with the current president (and I VOTED for him) and truth is he makes me sick....just hope I get over it before obamacare kicks in or I have to give my fair share and be taxed for it.

What exactly are you experiencing with your health care plan that the ACA is the cause of? Did your physician actually say he/she was retiring due to the ACA? And if so, did he/she say why?

[jribs]

I call it Obamacare because that is the ugly word that is put on it and if fits the whole thing is ugly or as I eluded to earlier is crap. You want to call it ACA because that is a nice (politically sheepish correct) way to say it and whatever viewpoints you watch want you to call it....you still have not answered my questions and your argument is not convincing.
"This is why the vast majority of industrialized nations have Universal Coverage!"....First off we are not like every other industrialized nation and that is what once made us great. Second, didn't your mother ever tell you that if everyone else jumped off the cliff???.....My health care was just fine prior to the current president....AND I didnt have to pay for everyone else.

Slesh-First off read my other posts and you can see that this not the only reason I wont vote for him again. I am not thrilled about Romney either but he is the lesser of two evils. I call it socialism because that is the model it follows. What do you call it? Paying your fair share?

James- I did not go in to specifics with my doctor and it has been over a year since I have seen him. I try to get somewhat informed with out being nosy or overbearing. However the conversation was something to the effect of: "Can I get your view on "Obamacare" (that is a bad word by the way) and his response was a simple " I will be getting out of healthcare with in the next couple of years and maybe look at being a professor at .....(I don't remember)...the next thing that was said was either "Cough" or "little pressure here." I used to have a traditional HMO health plan. I don't know what they call it now but I have very high deductibles that must be reached. Stupid things like I cannot go to a specialist with out a referral among a number of things. So now I don't go to the doctor. If I break something or get hospitalized then hopefully it will pay off but in the mean time my cost have gone up for crappier care. I have people that work for me that have kids and are suffering with all of the money out of pocket they have to pay now that previously was not an issue since it was a copay. It is sad. But what is sadder is that I and anyone that pays taxes will be paying MORE for worse care..and that is the one thing that trojanma cannot deny or wont address.

[Spesh]

Slesh-First off read my other posts and you can see that this not the only reason I wont vote for him again. I am not thrilled about Romney either but he is the lesser of two evils. I call it socialism because that is the model it follows. What do you call it? Paying your fair share?

Taxes.

And i forgot, it follows a socialist model and all socialism is wrong and evil. My question is: why do you hate the military? And cops, why are cops inherently evil? Also public transportation, how evil are those bus drivers? Schools, how come schools are so horrible(this one is like lobbing a beachball across the plate)? Space exploration, how communist is landing on the moon?

Coming in here talking about how bad Obama is(which you really havent, youve just talked about how bad Fox News thinks Obama is) isnt convincing anyone that Romney is the lesser of two evils. All you are saying is Obama has been bad, which is assure you no one in here has been comatose for the last 4 years and notices. And even if they were comatose Obama set up that death panel and offed them....wait a second.....

Anyways, ive stated it repeatedly, but it doesnt seem to stick: to convince people that Romney is the lesser of two evils you would actually have to talk about the benefits of a Mitt Romney presidency. As there are very few benefits, i can see why this straw man argument against Obama keeps coming up.

[Dolphins9954]

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[JackFinfan]

I call it Obamacare because that is the ugly word that is put on it and if fits the whole thing is ugly or as I eluded to earlier is crap. You want to call it ACA because that is a nice (politically sheepish correct) way to say it and whatever viewpoints you watch want you to call it....you still have not answered my questions and your argument is not convincing.
"This is why the vast majority of industrialized nations have Universal Coverage!"....First off we are not like every other industrialized nation and that is what once made us great. Second, didn't your mother ever tell you that if everyone else jumped off the cliff???.....My health care was just fine prior to the current president....AND I didnt have to pay for everyone else.

Slesh-First off read my other posts and you can see that this not the only reason I wont vote for him again. I am not thrilled about Romney either but he is the lesser of two evils. I call it socialism because that is the model it follows. What do you call it? Paying your fair share?

James- I did not go in to specifics with my doctor and it has been over a year since I have seen him. I try to get somewhat informed with out being nosy or overbearing. However the conversation was something to the effect of: "Can I get your view on "Obamacare" (that is a bad word by the way) and his response was a simple " I will be getting out of healthcare with in the next couple of years and maybe look at being a professor at .....(I don't remember)...the next thing that was said was either "Cough" or "little pressure here." I used to have a traditional HMO health plan. I don't know what they call it now but I have very high deductibles that must be reached. Stupid things like I cannot go to a specialist with out a referral among a number of things. So now I don't go to the doctor. If I break something or get hospitalized then hopefully it will pay off but in the mean time my cost have gone up for crappier care. I have people that work for me that have kids and are suffering with all of the money out of pocket they have to pay now that previously was not an issue since it was a copay. It is sad. But what is sadder is that I and anyone that pays taxes will be paying MORE for worse care..and that is the one thing that trojanma cannot deny or wont address.

I think people want to call it ACA because that's the actual name of the bill. What a crazy idea, calling a bill by its name instead of some silly nickname.

[jribs]

That is a very old argument and doesn't fly anymore...thank you but try again. When did it become okay to just say "Pay more taxes". At what point do I have to stop paying more and more taxes so you can have free medical care? or for that matter foodstamps. My taxes are ridiculous enough that I am tired of paying for you and everybody else.

You too are just another sheep. Obviously you have not read what I have said previously, I do research independent of left wing or right wing media outlets. I would be lying if I said I have never been to either Fox or CNBC when checking out information, it hard not to come across these news articles but you are obviously are so stuck on your CNBC channel (telling us how great Obama is) to get informed about what I have been talking about. The one benefit is that he is not Obama but that is obvious...Tell me what are my benefits of keeping Obama around?

And by the way, I don't hate the military, I served proudly for eight years and did 4 tours during the first gulf war. Space exploration...do you live in Florida? NASA is a shell of what it once was. You do realize we are depending on the (cant believe I have to say this) RUSSIANS to take us to space.

So tell me, how is your healthcare? or are you waiting for me to pay for it?