• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

CBO: Obamacare to cost $1.76 Trillion over 10 years

cpwill

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
75,485
Reaction score
39,816
Location
USofA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
....that is almost double what we were told as the dang thing was being passed.

Everyone who was foolish enough to buy the line of BS about how "Obamacare will lower the deficit"..... Here's your sign.

President Obama's national health care law will cost $1.76 trillion over a decade, according to a new projection released today by the Congressional Budget Office, rather than the $940 billion forecast when it was signed into law.

Democrats employed many accounting tricks when they were pushing through the national health care legislation, the most egregious of which was to delay full implementation of the law until 2014, so it would appear cheaper under the CBO's standard ten-year budget window and, at least on paper, meet Obama's pledge that the legislation would cost "around $900 billion over 10 years." When the final CBO score came out before passage, critics noted that the true 10 year cost would be far higher than advertised once projections accounted for full implementation.


Today, the CBO released new projections from 2013 extending through 2022, and the results are as critics expected: the ten-year cost of the law's core provisions to expand health insurance coverage has now ballooned to $1.76 trillion......

and again. as cpwill keeps saying. Obamacare will never be fully implemented. not because of politics, or the supreme court, or anything else, but just plain because we can't. we do not have the fiscal capacity to add this putrid oozing monstrosity to the pile of entitlements we are already sinking under.
 
900 billion off? No wonder no one wants to give more money to this administration, their math seems a little fuzzy.
 
Beltway Confidential continues to be the most dishonest political site around.

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

So it is 1.762 T before you figure in offset cost reductions.

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.

Oh wait, so they also do not include all the cost savings.

Never, ever trust the Beltway Confidential. They never use the truth when a lie will suffice.
 
....that is almost double what we were told as the dang thing was being passed.

Everyone who was foolish enough to buy the line of BS about how "Obamacare will lower the deficit"..... Here's your sign.



and again. as cpwill keeps saying. Obamacare will never be fully implemented. not because of politics, or the supreme court, or anything else, but just plain because we can't. we do not have the fiscal capacity to add this putrid oozing monstrosity to the pile of entitlements we are already sinking under.

Has the whole country lost there freaking mind???????????????????? Where in the world do they expect this money to come from? Or is it true that Obama just wants this country to crash and burn? Im starting to think that is the case. I just cant see why else he would make such blantly stupid things like this.
 
900 billion off? No wonder no one wants to give more money to this administration, their math seems a little fuzzy.

Its just that new math, you know?
 
And people thought I was nuts in the other thread when I said we cannot afford it

(Unless of course they are just planning on printing up another trillion or two, and if they do that I am moving!)
 
900 billion off? No wonder no one wants to give more money to this administration, their math seems a little fuzzy.

No - I'm sure it makes perfect sense.

here's how:
 
Beltway Confidential continues to be the most dishonest political site around.



So it is 1.762 T before you figure in offset cost reductions.



Oh wait, so they also do not include all the cost savings.

Never, ever trust the Beltway Confidential. They never use the truth when a lie will suffice.

Y'know, the 1.76 trill might have even been worth it, if it was cutting costs rather than continuing to add to them. Since it has been implemented, or partially implemented, nothing but cost increases to health care have come our way, and so many of the working poor are still not covered. So far, the only ones who have seen benefits from it is big pharmaceuticals. Nothing like spending over a trillion and a half dollars to create a system which adds further to the cost of health care and hasn't done its job of additional coverage. I guess now that we have passed the bill, as pelosi said, we have seen what is in it. Nothing for us, except more costs both in deficits and higher overall health care costs.
 
Beltway Confidential continues to be the most dishonest political site around.



So it is 1.762 T before you figure in offset cost reductions.



Oh wait, so they also do not include all the cost savings.

Never, ever trust the Beltway Confidential. They never use the truth when a lie will suffice.

Let's use the CBO words then:

CBO Report said:
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).

So the gross cost to the federal government is accurate: 1,762 billion. Add in your (-510 billion) offset, and it's still higher than the 960 billion.

Will you at least acknowledge that the estimates are seeming to increase even with the offset from prior CBO estimates?
 
This should surprise nobody who was actually paying attention. The costs were shifted toward the out years to manipulate the CBO scoring methodology. Now we are two years in and those out year costs are starting to be picked up in the projections.

Obamacare was always going to be a budget buster from day one. Especially when you consider the laughable idea that 1/4 of the first ten year costs were going to be paid by ending the annual doc fix (ie ending the doc fix essentially puts half the hospitals in the country out of business). The idea that the Democratic party allowed themselves to be suckered into voting for this bill on a party line vote is absolutely astounding. They now own everything that goes wrong with it from here on out. Some of the realists within the party need to start circling the wagons and calling for repeal/reform.
 
Let's use the CBO words then:



So the gross cost to the federal government is accurate: 1,762 billion. Add in your (-510 billion) offset, and it's still higher than the 960 billion.

Will you at least acknowledge that the estimates are seeming to increase even with the offset from prior CBO estimates?

I did use the CBO's words. You also failed to read far enough in the CBO report, since the number does not contain the savings projections for 2022. I also point out that even your numbers disagree with how the story presented them.
 
I did use the CBO's words. You also failed to read far enough in the CBO report, since the number does not contain the savings projections for 2022. I also point out that even your numbers disagree with how the story presented them.

Again, you didn't answer the question.

Here it is again:

Will you at least acknowledge that the estimates are seeming to increase even with the offset from prior CBO estimates?
 
Again, you didn't answer the question.

Here it is again:

Will you at least acknowledge that the estimates are seeming to increase even with the offset from prior CBO estimates?

Sorry, I missed that. Yes, the estimates are up. How much is up in the air. Will you likewise admit that the article this thread is based on misrepresented the numbers?
 
Redress, why are you seemingly so confident that the cost savings will actually appear when the person who signed the bill into law lacks the political will to follow through with implementing them (ie ending the doc fix)?
 
Sorry, I missed that. Yes, the estimates are up. How much is up in the air. Will you likewise admit that the article this thread is based on misrepresented the numbers?

Thank you. And I'm trying to find the CBO report that identified the original 960 billion to see if that estimate included the offsets or if it was a gross estimate. Reason being, the article compares the 960 billion to the 1.7 T and claims it's doubled. It would be misrepresented if the 960 billion was adjusted and the 1.7T is gross or vice versa. I'm not having luck however finding that CBO report.
 
Redress, why are you seemingly so confident that the cost savings will actually appear when the person who signed the bill into law lacks the political will to follow through with implementing them (ie ending the doc fix)?

We are talking about projections. Projections work by assuming a set of circumstances.

Here, maybe this will help: Forecasting - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Thank you. And I'm trying to find the CBO report that identified the original 960 billion to see if that estimate included the offsets or if it was a gross estimate. Reason being, the article compares the 960 billion to the 1.7 T and claims it's doubled. It would be misrepresented if the 960 billion was adjusted and the 1.7T is gross or vice versa. I'm not having luck however finding that CBO report.

The 960 was net. The bill needed to come in under 1T net.
 
....that is almost double what we were told as the dang thing was being passed.

Everyone who was foolish enough to buy the line of BS about how "Obamacare will lower the deficit"..... Here's your sign.



and again. as cpwill keeps saying. Obamacare will never be fully implemented. not because of politics, or the supreme court, or anything else, but just plain because we can't. we do not have the fiscal capacity to add this putrid oozing monstrosity to the pile of entitlements we are already sinking under.

So help us get a universal-payer system implemented instead.
 
So help us get a universal-payer system implemented instead.

Help us remove state boundaries and implement better competition to drive down costs.
 
We are talking about projections. Projections work by assuming a set of circumstances.

And I am talking about the real world. The doc fix has been passed by Congress for the past two years. Thats $50 billion in mythological costs savings down the drain. So, what make you think any other costs savings will actually materialize?
 
No one can estimate the net benefits or lack thereof until the entire law is implemented. Of course, the cost have risen now because insurance companies want to offset potential future cost now while the getting is good (meaning people actually buy the nonsense that more such people went be offset by more healthy people). Of course, I disagree with the nearly the entire premise of which current health care is based. The fact is that savings arent passed to the to insurance customers, but the companies themselves and three fact that insurance covers nearly everything. Catastrophic insurance should be accessible to anyone, preexisting condition or not, in network rates as well. Had the anyone tired to actually tackle just these two points.earliet the entire insurance/medical system may not be so broken

Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk
 
And I am talking about the real world. The doc fix has been passed by Congress for the past two years. Thats $50 billion in mythological costs savings down the drain. So, what make you think any other costs savings will actually materialize?

If you are talking about the real world 10 years from now, you are making projections, which assume a set of circumstances.
 
...and of course the the savings "projections" are SO much more reliable than the original "cost" projections, too funny.

I did use the CBO's words. You also failed to read far enough in the CBO report, since the number does not contain the savings projections for 2022. I also point out that even your numbers disagree with how the story presented them.
 
...and of course the the savings "projections" are SO much more reliable than the original "cost" projections, too funny.


Ummmm...no one claimed that. Nice try though.
 
Then don't pretend you can rebut the OP....fact is The Bamster and his chorts lied about the cost.....lied about anyone but THEM reducing Medicare Benefits....and pretty much everything else.

Ummmm...no one claimed that. Nice try though.
 
Back
Top Bottom