+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 22
  1. #1
    Fact Checker Gomer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    Barely DC
    Posts
    10,095

    CBO cuts cost estimate for Obama healthcare law

    By reducing the estimated net 2012-2021 costs to $1.083 trillion from $1.131 trillion a year ago, the CBO report could help Democrats blunt some of the criticism over the high costs of extending coverage to some 47 million uninsured Americans, as they try to tout savings elsewhere in the law.

    These cost reductions are largely due to lower estimates for subsidies and tax credits associated with the law's planned insurance exchanges for individual coverage.
    CBO cuts cost estimate for Obama healthcare law

  2. #2
    Ultimate Member mad1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    5,155
    Soaring costs. ObamaCare will cost $1.76 trillion over a decade, according to a new projection released Tuesday by the Congressional Budget Office, rather than the $940 billion forecast when it was signed into law.

    The new 10-year projections cover nine years of ObamaCare’s implementation (2013-2022). Original estimates counted only six years of implementation — a budget gimmick to obscure the true cost of the law. At this rate, the conservative estimates of ObamaCare’s cost will be $2 trillion over 10 years, not the $1 trillion that President Obama promised.

    · Lost coverage. Sen. Mike Enzi (R-WY) released a statement saying that the CBO’s estimate also shows that the new health law will dramatically increase Medicaid spending and result in 4 million fewer people getting health insurance through their jobs. So much for being able to keep the coverage you have now “no matter what,” as the president promised.

    Opposition locked in. An AP-GfK poll taken early this month shows that only about a third of Americans (35 percent) support the health care law, while nearly half (47 percent) oppose it. That’s about the same split as when it passed.
    ObamaCare: If Possible, The News Is Getting Worse - Forbes
    Research is what I'm doing when I don't know what I'm doing

  3. #3
    Fact Checker Gomer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    Barely DC
    Posts
    10,095
    What the CBO sez:
    The Estimated Net Cost of the Insurance Coverage Provisions Is Smaller Than Estimated in March 2011

    CBO and JCT now estimate that the insurance coverage provisions of the ACA will have a net cost of just under $1.1 trillion over the 2012-2021 period-about $50 billion less than the agencies' March 2011 estimate for that 10-year period. (For comparison with previous estimates, these numbers cover the 2012-2021 period; estimates including 2022 can be found below.)

    CBO | CBO Releases Updated Estimates for the Insurance Coverage Provisions of the Affordable Care Act

  4. #4
    Ultimate Member mad1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    5,155

    The current estimate of the gross costs of the coverage provisions—$1,496 billion through 2021—is about $50 billion higher than last year's projection;

    The net cost was boosted by:

    An additional $168 billion in estimated costs for Medicaid and CHIP, and
    $8 billion less in estimated revenues from the excise tax on certain high-premium health insurance plans.

    This report also presents estimates through fiscal year 2022, because the baseline projection period now extends through that additional year. The ACA’s provisions related to insurance coverage are now projected to have a net cost of $1,252 billion over the 2012-2022 period; that amount represents a gross cost to the federal government of $1,762 billion, offset in part by $510 billion in receipts and other budgetary effects (primarily revenues from penalties and other sources).
    Last edited by mad1; March 15th, 2012 at 08:50 AM.
    Research is what I'm doing when I don't know what I'm doing

  5. #5
    Fact Checker Gomer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    Barely DC
    Posts
    10,095
    First... you find items that misrepresent what the CBO said... then you selectively cut and paste it yourself. I've put back what you selectively cut out in bold.

    Par for the course:
    The current estimate of the gross costs of the coverage provisions—$1,496 billion through 2021—is about $50 billion higher than last year's projection; however, the other budgetary effects of those provisions, which partially offset those gross costs, also have increased in CBO’s and JCT’s estimates—to $413 billion—leading to the small decrease in the net 10-year tally.
    The net cost was boosted by:
    • An additional $168 billion in estimated costs for Medicaid and CHIP, and
    • $8 billion less in estimated revenues from the excise tax on certain high-premium health insurance plans.
    But those increases were more than offset by a reduction of:
    • $97 billion in the projected costs for the tax credits and other subsidies for health insurance provided through the exchanges and related spending
    • $20 billion in the projected costs for tax credits for small employers, and
    • $107 billion in deficits from the projected revenue effects of changes in taxable compensation and penalty payments and from other small changes in estimated spending.
    Thank you for clearly illustrating that you have no qualms about using smoke and mirrors to try to deceive people.

  6. #6
    Indispensable Member surreal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    32,536
    Quote Originally Posted by Gomer View Post
    Par for the course:
    Thank you for clearly illustrating that you have no qualms about using smoke and mirrors to try to deceive people.
    Well duh...

  7. #7
    MR Meek and Mild Epidemic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    almost Virginia
    Posts
    11,587
    Blog Entries
    2
    I don't know where I fall on this CBO number.

    The smoke and mirrors can be swung in either direction . Who will be proven right will be when the bill comes in. I am not sure I could find a non biased number if I tried. Even if their is no bias I am not sure that the full cost could be reliably calculated due to the changing variables.

    One thing is sure it is a huge program in the end with many things that will change and grow over time. I tend to think in the end it will cost more than is indicated and more than we will be able to afford.

    Oh well I am sure they will have an explaination when that happens for why it was a good idea.

    It is out of my power to do anything about it, in 10 years either Gomer or I will be able to say "Told ya so!!!" to the other guy.

    In the end I do believe that this is what Americans want. There is chatter about wanting to reign in the budjet
    We are 1.5 trillion over budget. In 10 years we will be 15 trillion deeper in debt.

  8. #8
    Light to Counter the Dim MTAtech's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Long Island, NY, USA
    Posts
    12,273
    Quote Originally Posted by Mad1
    Soaring costs. ObamaCare will cost $1.76 trillion over a decade, according to a new projection released Tuesday by the Congressional Budget Office, rather than the $940 billion forecast when it was signed into law.
    This is from the actual CBO report:

    CBO and JCT now estimate that the insurance coverage provisions of the ACA will have a net cost of just under $1.1 trillion over the 2012–2021 period—about $50 billion less than the agencies’ March 2011 estimate for that 10-year period (see Table 1, following the text).3
    ...
    The current estimate of the gross costs of the coverage provisions ($1,496 billion through 2021) is about $50 billion higher than last year’s projection; however, the other budgetary effects of those provisions, which partially offset those gross costs, also have increased in CBO and JCT’s estimates (to $413 billion), leading to the small decrease in the net 10-year tally. Over the 10-year period from 2012 through 2021, enactment of the coverage provisions of the ACA was projected last March to increase federal deficits by $1,131 billion, whereas the March 2012 estimate indicates that those provisions will increase deficits by $1,083 billion.

    The net cost was boosted by an additional $168 billion in estimated costs for Medicaid and CHIP and $8 billion less in estimated revenues from the excise tax on high-premium health insurance plans. But those increases were more than offset by a reduction of $97 billion in the projected costs for the tax credits and other subsidies for health insurance provided through the exchanges and related spending, a reduction of $20 billion in the projected costs for tax credits for small employers, and a reduction of $107 billion in deficits from the projected revenue effects of changes in taxable compensation and penalty payments and from other small changes in estimated spending.

    This report also presents estimates through fiscal year 2022, because the baseline projection period now extends through that additional year. The ACA’s provisions related to insurance coverage are now projected to have a net cost of $1,252 billion over the 2012–2022 period (see Table 2, following the text); that amount represents a gross cost to the federal government of $1,762 billion, offset in part by $510 billion in receipts and other budgetary effects (primarily revenues from penalties and other sources). The addition of 2022 to the projection period has the effect of increasing the costs of the coverage provisions of the ACA relative to those projected in March 2011 for the 2012–2021 period because that change adds a year in which the expansion of eligibility for Medicaid and subsidies for health insurance purchased through the exchanges will be in effect. CBO and JCT have not estimated the budgetary effects in 2022 of the other provisions of the ACA; over the 2012–2021 period, those other provisions were previously estimated to reduce budget deficits.
    Get it? They added a year. The previous measured period was 2012–2021. Now it's 2012–2022. So of course the projection rises!

    Also, you are omitting the revenue generated in order to inflate the stated cost. By using the gross cost number instead of using the much lower net impact number is intellectually dishonest. That is like doing your household budget by only looking at your expenses without looking at your income. Another big lie.

    CBO: Health reform to cut deficit by $50 billion more than we thought - The Washington Post
    Last edited by MTAtech; March 15th, 2012 at 01:53 PM.
    Conservatives: "If the facts disagree with our opinion, ignore the facts -- or at least misrepresent them."

  9. #9
    Fact Checker Gomer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    Barely DC
    Posts
    10,095
    Quote Originally Posted by Epidemic View Post
    I don't know where I fall on this CBO number.

    The smoke and mirrors can be swung in either direction . Who will be proven right will be when the bill comes in. I am not sure I could find a non biased number if I tried. Even if their is no bias I am not sure that the full cost could be reliably calculated due to the changing variables.

    One thing is sure it is a huge program in the end with many things that will change and grow over time. I tend to think in the end it will cost more than is indicated and more than we will be able to afford.

    Oh well I am sure they will have an explaination when that happens for why it was a good idea.

    It is out of my power to do anything about it, in 10 years either Gomer or I will be able to say "Told ya so!!!" to the other guy.

    In the end I do believe that this is what Americans want. There is chatter about wanting to reign in the budjet
    We are 1.5 trillion over budget. In 10 years we will be 15 trillion deeper in debt.
    Here's the deal, Ep. I'm saying told you so right now. Mad1 tried to make a bogus claim about what the CBO said... even going so far as to selectively cut and paste parts from their site that didn't suit him. So in that regard, yes, "told ya so".

    I'm not making any other claims here.

  10. #10
    MR Meek and Mild Epidemic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    almost Virginia
    Posts
    11,587
    Blog Entries
    2
    that is not the "I told ya so" to which I speak.


    Whoa whoa whoa, calm down there big fella, you have a case premature "I told you so" We will have to wait, 5 to 10 years.

    I suggest the bogus claims will turn out to be the errors on the part of the CBO and the deceipt of those who made the initial claims.

    Unless you too believe that the CBO is likely in error, then we will have to give a group I told you so to MTA

    I though you had indicated in the past you felt Obama care would be a win for America. If that is not the case than sorry for pointing at you.


    I generally keep you in the almost perfectly in opposition to me category so I sometimes attribute words to you that may not be yours.
    Last edited by Epidemic; March 15th, 2012 at 02:30 PM.

  11. #11
    Fact Checker Gomer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    Barely DC
    Posts
    10,095
    Quote Originally Posted by Epidemic View Post
    that is not the "I told ya so" to which I speak.


    Whoa whoa whoa, calm down there big fella, you have a case premature "I told you so" We will have to wait, 5 to 10 years.

    I suggest the bogus claims will turn out to be the errors on the part of the CBO and the deceipt of those who made the initial claims.

    Unless you too believe that the CBO is likely in error, then we will have to give a group I told you so to MTA

    I though you had indicated in the past you felt Obama care would be a win for America. If that is not the case than sorry for pointing at you.


    I generally keep you in the almost perfectly in opposition to me category so I sometimes attribute words to you that may not be yours.
    "I'm not making any other claims here."

  12. #12
    MR Meek and Mild Epidemic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    almost Virginia
    Posts
    11,587
    Blog Entries
    2
    fair nuff

  13. #13
    Light to Counter the Dim MTAtech's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Long Island, NY, USA
    Posts
    12,273
    More:
    No, Obamacare’s Cost Didn’t Just Double. Sigh.

    Sorting through the deceptive attacks on health care reform gets old, even for me. But on Wednesday the Republicans and their allies made a claim so obviously misleading that they, and the media outlets parroting them, must have known they spreading false information.

    The basis for the claim is the Congressional Budget Office’s latest projections for the Affordable Care Act, which critics (and I!) like to call Obamacare. When Congress first passed the law, in the spring of 2010, CBO made official estimates of how much the law would cost, how many people would get insurance as a result, and so on. It updated that estimate one year later and has, now, updated it one more time.
    ...
    “The CBO’s revised cost estimate indicates that this massive government intrusion into America’s health care system will be far more costly than was originally claimed,” Tom Price, chairman of the House Republican Policy Committee, said. Within a few hours, both Fox News and the Washington Times were carrying online stories making the same claim. According to the Fox News account, CBO was “showing that the bill is substantially more expensive—twice as much as the original $900 billion price tag.”

    If CBO had truly determined that health care reform’s cost will be twice the original estimates, it would be huge news. But CBO said nothing of the sort.
    ...
    The new law also calls for new revenue, in the form of taxes and penalties. It also reduces spending, mostly through Medicare, to help offset the cost of the coverage expansion. When the Affordable Care Act became law, CBO estimated that the net result of all these changes, taken together, would be to reduce the deficit. Now, with this revised estimate,CBO has decided the law will reduce the deficit by even more money.

    Yes, you read that right: The real news of the CBO estimate is that, according to its models, health care reform is going to save even more taxpayer dollars than previously thought.
    ...
    Conservatives: "If the facts disagree with our opinion, ignore the facts -- or at least misrepresent them."

  14. #14
    Light to Counter the Dim MTAtech's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Long Island, NY, USA
    Posts
    12,273
    Conservatives: "If the facts disagree with our opinion, ignore the facts -- or at least misrepresent them."

  15. #15
    Tech IMO Bug Finder pickel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 1999
    Location
    Jackson,MS
    Posts
    13,518
    You know something with all this whining and bitching about Obombma care.
    We're talking about PEOPLE here !! American Citizens, who pay taxes and want to live in good health. Bush & Co. pissed away BILLIONS an two stupid ass wars. Many families are living without a husband, wife , brother , sister, etc. Many are living a life of misery due to their war injuries that their relatives , without any choice, have to deal with everyday. And the debate over extending healthcare to our own citizens gets me sick to my stomach.
    I'm living on borrowed time and , by rights, without medical assistance, should have been in my grave 10 years ago. And All you selfish , healthy guys ridicule our President for spending our money to reduce the chance of others to have an opportunity to live a life free of the impairments that have invaded their body.
    That really sux.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOtab0BKOGY
    The Nation which forgets it's defenders will itself be forgotten
    You cannot make peace with dictators. You have to destroy them–wipe them out!

  16. #16
    Light to Counter the Dim MTAtech's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Long Island, NY, USA
    Posts
    12,273
    Pickel (Preacher) --> MTAtech (choir)
    Conservatives: "If the facts disagree with our opinion, ignore the facts -- or at least misrepresent them."

  17. #17
    The Jiggawatts, Marty! tony_j15's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Joplin, MO
    Posts
    16,985
    Blog Entries
    1
    --> Tony (choirboy)
    All 1.21 of them.

  18. #18
    Living the dream The Real Bingo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    AFG
    Posts
    22,936
    Wow, $48bn in savings. That's like one day's worth of interest for the federal government.

  19. #19
    The Jiggawatts, Marty! tony_j15's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Joplin, MO
    Posts
    16,985
    Blog Entries
    1
    If ya hate hard enough and long enough, ya can find a problem with anything.
    All 1.21 of them.

  20. #20
    Ultimate Member brandon184's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Wasilla
    Posts
    12,305
    Quote Originally Posted by The Real Bingo View Post
    Wow, $48bn in savings. That's like one day's worth of interest for the federal government.
    "Conservatives" are funny. $500 million (1.04% of 48 billion) on Solyndra is a SCREW UP OF EPIC PROPORTIONS! SCANDALOUS! But $48 billion saved? Pfft... A meaningless amount. Slice through a $10 million/year social program for the poor? ... "Every penny counts!"

    The credibility reservoir leaks like a sieve.

Quick Reply Quick Reply

If you are already a member, please login above.

What is the color of the sky?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. CBO, Obamacare to cost more and insure less.
    By mad1 in forum DebateIMO: Politics, Religion, Controversy
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: March 15th, 2012, 10:14 AM
  2. Cost estimate for Obamacare insurance aid jumps $111B
    By mad1 in forum DebateIMO: Politics, Religion, Controversy
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: March 2nd, 2012, 08:31 PM
  3. CBO: Obama's health care plan cuts deficit
    By MTAtech in forum DebateIMO: Politics, Religion, Controversy
    Replies: 88
    Last Post: March 20th, 2010, 10:09 PM
  4. Cost of Healthcare vs. Life Expectancy
    By brandon184 in forum DebateIMO: Politics, Religion, Controversy
    Replies: 77
    Last Post: January 5th, 2010, 03:10 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Copyright 2014 All Enthusiast, Inc