You did not read the linked story did you? You managed to not address any of the points of contention they had with the comments of Ryan. Congratz! Well done!
I was responding to lpast. I've long since given up on him ever having logically connected points making a rational argument supported by data.
however, as I read the article, I come to a few points:
1. they agree with Ryan that the CBO said Medicare A was going to collapse in 2020, but they point out reporting that states if the economy really roars back into full swing we might last a little (not a lot, not even a medium) longer.
......checking...... nope, don't see the economy in full swing.
2. They point out that Ryan is only referencing Medicare A, and there are two other portions of Medicare on the table (D, I notice they don't mention, is slain by Obamacare under current law - given that D is the only program in our history to come in at 40% under cost, that strikes me as amazingly stupid, but anti-market fanatics will be anti-market fanatics). But (as they
do note) part B is funded out of the General Fund, which is
already drawing a $1.5 Trillion deficit.
and that leads us into the hilarious part which is this:
...CBO’s projections for Medicare didn’t say that the SMI trust fund was in danger of exhaustion. In fact, in its 2010 report, the Social Security and Medicare Boards of Trustees said that Parts B and D were "both projected to remain adequately financed into the indefinite future because current law automatically provides financing each year to meet the next year’s expected costs."..
they are talking about drawing from the General Fund.
they are saying don't worry if we are spending way more money than we are bringing in and have no savings to cover - the law makes this spending mandatory, which means we will just cease to have a department of education, a department of labor, a department of defense, a department of housing and urban development, a department of agriculture..... So, just so long as we are willing to have our government
stop doing anything else; we aren't broke for several more years. hooray?
and again, i feel compelled to point out: who
cares if the date is 2020, 2018, or 2027? the need to reform the program
before we get to the point where current retirees would have to suffer is not diminished.
By the way, the first time that the Medicare trust fund was projected to collapse was 1970. The projection was it would collapse in 1972.
and you stop quoting there, which is interesting, because it goes on to say:
...the HI trust fund has faced a projected shortfall." For example, in 1970, the Trustees report said the fund would be insolvent in 1972, and in 1980 the fund was expected to be depleted in 1994. Politicians keep finding ways to postpone any insolvency...
it's not the magic or strength of the program, it's that we keep finding solutions.
which is precisely what Paul Ryan is doing now.
