aaahhhh... I see how he does that. He separates Medicaid from Medicare/Medicaid, and then includes Obamacare as a "program for the poor". and then he measures by change as a percentage of GDP rather than by "actual money cut" off of what it would otherwise cost. So, for example, Medicare continues to grow as a % of GDP through 2030, so Medicare expenditures haven't been lowered. Even though, in fact, they have been. 2050 was a good date for him to choose - he get's to "hide the rise", if I can appropriate another abuse of statistics. Though at least he is honest enough to admit that Obama and Ryan both cut Medicare by the same amount.
well, Klein is correct when he argues that Obamacare would be immensely expensive, and that thus cutting that disastrous program would be a massive reduction from the current assumes-Obamacare baseline.
but you may want to read the introductory paragraph for the CBO report he cites:
which is interesting. that being said, this source does not provide support for your contention. "government personnel costs", for example, are not a program for the poor...Those calculations do not represent a cost estimate for legislation or an analysis of the effects of any given policies. In particular, CBO has not considered whether the specified paths are consistent with the policy proposals or budget figures released today by Chairman Ryan as part of his proposed budget resolution...
and if you want to have a medicaid discussion, i'd be happy to discuss the superiority of block granting to our current boondoggle.