Quantcast

THE CBO REPORT ON OBAMACARE STATES THAT IT WILL COST DOUBLE THE ORIGINAL ESTIMATES, DOES THIS SURPRISE YOU???

Drue-AFCL 2012/03/17 19:59:47
Related Topics: Obamacare, Cbo, Surprise
You!
Add Photos & Videos
Add a comment above

Top Opinion

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • Tova1004 2012/03/19 11:14:38
    NO
    Tova1004
    +1
    The surprise is that the American people continue to sit back and allow that moron of a president run this nation into the ground
  • Tova1004 Tova1004 2012/03/19 11:15:27
    Tova1004
    +1
    Obama should be hung for treason
  • nothingbutthetruth 2012/03/19 10:28:50
    YES
    nothingbutthetruth
    Because it pure lies and garbage spilling):-
  • Broken 2012/03/18 20:18:52
    NO
    Broken
    +2
    I knew they were not telling the truth from the beginning. What else do you expect from those who take their orders from the Liar in Chief?
  • redneck 2012/03/18 18:28:26
    NO
    redneck
    +2
    No it dosen't surprise me at all,and the progressive retards will defend it.With no regulations on the insurance companies what do you think was going to happen when they add 25 million people with no insurance at all.Why do you think small business aren't hiring,the cost is to much.I may have to close my business because of this very thing.
  • SneakyPete 2012/03/18 16:08:50
    NO
    SneakyPete
    +2
    Like Nancy Pelosi said “We will not know what is in the bill until we pass it" and probably not until long down the road. We learn something new every day on the hidden cost built into the program.
  • DuncanONeil 2012/03/18 15:10:51 (edited)
    NO
    DuncanONeil
    +2
    And they still don't have the right number! Just look what happened to Medicare!
  • Viet Era medic 2012/03/18 14:02:30
    NO
    Viet Era medic
    +2
    Heck no. Nothing they do when it comes to money comes close at all to their assumptions.
  • Racefish 2012/03/18 13:30:32
    NO
    Racefish
    +3
    What has government "ever" done that cost less than we were told?
  • Wolfstar 2012/03/18 09:59:11
    NO
    Wolfstar
    +2
    It shouldn't surprise anyone. "We won't know what's in it until we pass it" ring a bell?
  • shadow76 2012/03/18 08:47:05
    NO
    shadow76
    +2
    I think they are still estimating way too low!
  • doc moto 2012/03/18 06:27:50
    NO
    doc moto
    +2
    It will go pass double and triple; the folks that votes for this snafu should be voted out of office, the O-Care is unconstitutional... You would be an idiot to think that anything the government runs (federal) and some (States) would see it run under cost and the funds not mismanaged!
  • Reggie☮ 2012/03/18 05:59:04
    NO
    Reggie☮
    +2
    This man is nothing more than a liar.
  • Aqua Surf BTO-t-BCRA-F 2012/03/18 04:21:25
    NO
    Aqua Surf BTO-t-BCRA-F
    +2
    Just another reason to put a stop to MaobamaCare.
  • wtw 2012/03/18 03:38:54
    NO
    wtw
    +2
    The CBO is almost always way off base and it usually cost way more than the CBO says. Also much of what was in Obama care was not even disclosed or read by few. Who knows how bad it wiull actuallly get when it goes into full force--that is why we need to stop this.
  • redneck wtw 2012/03/18 18:30:37
    redneck
    +2
    You need a law degree,to understand the double talk.
  • AL 2012/03/18 02:49:06
    NO
    AL
    +3
    I maybe pissed off, yet I'm sure not a bit surprised at all!
  • joe ramirez 2012/03/18 02:17:22
    NO
    joe ramirez
    +3
    Why would you believe anything that comes out of this man's mouth!
  • foxhound BN0 2012/03/18 01:21:11
    NO
    foxhound BN0
    +1
    that's how the government works. you promise to charge the least, then charge more later.
  • mich52 2012/03/18 00:21:21 (edited)
  • Bill mich52 2012/03/19 12:47:01 (edited)
    Bill
    +2
    {I'll never understand why right-winger's and their sites are so dishonest... This is a lie}
    RIGHT-WING SITES? THE CBO REPORT? THAT'S A RIGHT-WING SITE? DID YOU ACTUALLY READ IT? EVERYTHING YOU TRY TO SHOW AS "PROOF TO THE LIE" ACTUALLY CONTRADICTS WHAT YOU SAY!!!
    Where is the lie??? It was supposed to cost $900B, was it not? Let's read the CBO report MORE carefully.

    http://cbo.gov/publication/43...
    The net COSTS, specifically the combined effects on federal REVENUES and MANDATORY SPENDING, reflect:

    Gross ADDITIONAL COSTS of $1.5 TRILLION for Medicaid, the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP), tax credits and other SUBSIDIES for the PURCHASE of health insurance through the NEWLY established exchanges and related costs, and tax credits for small employers,
    Offset in part by about $0.4 trillion in receipts from PENALTY payments, the new excise TAX on high-premium insurance plans, and other budgetary effects (mostly INCREASES in tax revenues).

    That $0.4T is $400B in penalties and premium taxes and general tax revenues. Sounds great to me! When can we start.

    {Estimates Through Fiscal Year 2022

    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 ins...

    {I'll never understand why right-winger's and their sites are so dishonest... This is a lie}
    RIGHT-WING SITES? THE CBO REPORT? THAT'S A RIGHT-WING SITE? DID YOU ACTUALLY READ IT? EVERYTHING YOU TRY TO SHOW AS "PROOF TO THE LIE" ACTUALLY CONTRADICTS WHAT YOU SAY!!!
    Where is the lie??? It was supposed to cost $900B, was it not? Let's read the CBO report MORE carefully.

    http://cbo.gov/publication/43...
    The net COSTS, specifically the combined effects on federal REVENUES and MANDATORY SPENDING, reflect:

    Gross ADDITIONAL COSTS of $1.5 TRILLION for Medicaid, the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP), tax credits and other SUBSIDIES for the PURCHASE of health insurance through the NEWLY established exchanges and related costs, and tax credits for small employers,
    Offset in part by about $0.4 trillion in receipts from PENALTY payments, the new excise TAX on high-premium insurance plans, and other budgetary effects (mostly INCREASES in tax revenues).

    That $0.4T is $400B in penalties and premium taxes and general tax revenues. Sounds great to me! When can we start.

    {Estimates Through Fiscal Year 2022

    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).}

    There you have it, $1,762 billion (or $1,762 TRILLION) offset by $510B in penalties and taxes. No matter how one cuts it, it is STILL $1.762T, is it not? Offsets, penalties, fines, taxes etcetera paying for it still requires $1.762T.
    (more)
  • sjalan 2012/03/17 23:56:41
    NO
    sjalan
    +2
    BUT THAT IS LESS THAN HALF OF WHAT OUR CURRENT SYSTEM OF FOR PROFIT GREEDY INSURANCE COMPANIES WILL BE CHARGING!!

    GET RID OF FOR PROFIT INSURANCE COMPANIES AND MAKE IT ALL NOT FOR PROFIT.
  • sue 2012/03/17 23:33:49
    NO
    sue
    +2
    We knew he was a liar. Still to this day I can't understand how some people could vote for him.
  • johnc 2012/03/17 23:32:01
    NO
    johnc
    +1
    I did stats for a government agency, when I questioned too much, I got a nice retirement. the government -Obama/the democratic house. selected answer and moved numbers around until they got that answer.
    then again has the CBO ever been correct?
  • goatman112003 2012/03/17 23:28:19
    NO
    goatman112003
    +2
    Not in the least bit. The estimate by the republicans was almost 3 trillion when costs to the states was added in. and that was in 2009.
  • lee 2012/03/17 22:59:09 (edited)
    YES
    lee
    +2
    since that is NOT what they said at all.

    http://www.cbo.gov/publicatio...

    but don't let the facts get in your way.
  • mich52 lee 2012/03/18 00:29:13
  • Kiosk Kid 2012/03/17 22:51:35
    NO
    Kiosk Kid
    +2
    The real problem is that Doctors are going to quit. Why should Doctors put up Marxist Liberals when they don't have too? Doctors are going to tell them to shove their Obamacare.

    "According to an absolutely stunning new poll, 40 percent of all U.S. doctors plan to bail out of the profession over the next three years.

    "Considering the fact that the United States was already facing an acute shortage of doctors in the coming years, this has the potential to destroy the U.S. health care system.

    Not that the other elements of Obamacare weren't going to completely wreck it already, but if hordes of doctors start running for the exits this is going to create a health nightmare of unprecedented proportions.

    The new poll mentioned above was a Merritt Hawkins survey of 2,379 doctors for the Physicians Foundation which was conducted back in August."

    http://thedebtweowe.com/obama...
  • lee Kiosk Kid 2012/03/17 23:00:37
    lee
    if a doctor gives up medicine because s/he wants more money then all I can say is .. GOOD.

    wouldn't want that person as my doctor anyway.
  • Kiosk Kid lee 2012/03/17 23:05:27 (edited)
    Kiosk Kid
    The poll states forty percent of doctors. We are not talking about "a" Doctor.
  • lee Kiosk Kid 2012/03/17 23:12:38 (edited)
    lee
    +1
    oh, you mean this poll?

    do try a bit harder next time, will you?

    there's a good chap.




    Nate Silver: Poll is "simply not credible." In a September 16 post to his blog FiveThirtyEight.com, Silver listed five reasons why the IBD poll should be "completely ignore[d]":

    1. The survey was conducted by mail, which is unusual. The only other mail-based poll that I'm aware of is that conducted by the Columbus Dispatch, which was associated with an average error of about 7 percentage points -- the highest of any pollster that we tested.

    2. At least one of the questions is blatantly biased: "Do you believe the government can cover 47 million more people and it will cost less money and th quality of care will be better?". Holy run-on-sentence, Batman? A pollster who asks a question like this one is not intending to be objective.

    3. As we learned during the Presidntial campaign -- when, among other things, they had John McCain winning the youth vote 74-22 -- the IBD/TIPP polling operation has literally no idea what they're doing. I mean, literally none. For example, I don't trust IBD/TIPP to have competently selected anything resembling a random panel, which is harder to do than you'd think.

    4. They say, somewhat ambiguously: "Responses are still coming in." This is also highly uno...





    oh, you mean this poll?

    do try a bit harder next time, will you?

    there's a good chap.




    Nate Silver: Poll is "simply not credible." In a September 16 post to his blog FiveThirtyEight.com, Silver listed five reasons why the IBD poll should be "completely ignore[d]":

    1. The survey was conducted by mail, which is unusual. The only other mail-based poll that I'm aware of is that conducted by the Columbus Dispatch, which was associated with an average error of about 7 percentage points -- the highest of any pollster that we tested.

    2. At least one of the questions is blatantly biased: "Do you believe the government can cover 47 million more people and it will cost less money and th quality of care will be better?". Holy run-on-sentence, Batman? A pollster who asks a question like this one is not intending to be objective.

    3. As we learned during the Presidntial campaign -- when, among other things, they had John McCain winning the youth vote 74-22 -- the IBD/TIPP polling operation has literally no idea what they're doing. I mean, literally none. For example, I don't trust IBD/TIPP to have competently selected anything resembling a random panel, which is harder to do than you'd think.

    4. They say, somewhat ambiguously: "Responses are still coming in." This is also highly unorthodox. Professional pollsters generally do not report results before the survey period is compete.

    5. There is virtually no disclosure about methodology. For example, IBD doesn't bother to define the term "practicing physician", which could mean almost anything. Nor do they explain how their randomization procedure worked, provide the entire question battery, or anything like that.

    Silver added: "There are pollsters out there that have an agenda but are highly competent, and there are pollsters that are nonpartisan but not particularly skilled. Rarely, however, do you find the whole package: that special pollster which is both biased and inept. IBD/TIPP is one of the few exceptions."

    Fox News itself acknowledged that the poll is "not scientific." During Neil Cavuto's discussion of the IBD/TIPP poll on the September 16 edition of Fox News' Your World, the on-screen graphic indicated that the poll was "not scientific":
    (more)
  • Kiosk Kid lee 2012/03/17 23:46:45
    Kiosk Kid
    +1
    Notice how you didn’t give any reference, you just spewed. You need to produce facts with quotes and reference. My reference gave two different polls.

    “The new poll mentioned above was a Merritt Hawkins survey of 2,379 doctors for the Physicians Foundation which was conducted back in August.” That was August 2010.

    “*An IBD/TIPP poll taken in August 2009 found that 4 out of every 9 American doctors said that they "would consider leaving their practice or taking an early retirement" if Congress passed Obamacare.”

    Merritt Hawkins poll said 4 out of 10 Doctors would quit and the IBD/TIPP said 4 out of 9 Doctors would quit.

    You need facts not crap.
  • lee Kiosk Kid 2012/03/18 05:33:42 (edited)
    lee
    I got to that "crap" by goggling IBD/TIPP which was the only poll mentioned in the article you posted...

    try it yourself.. its fun
  • Kiosk Kid lee 2012/03/18 14:08:19
    Kiosk Kid
    "What is even more frightening is that the results of the Merritt Hawkins survey are right in line with what we have been seeing in other polls over the past year. Just consider the following examples....

    *An IBD/TIPP poll taken in August 2009 found that 4 out of every 9 American doctors said that they "would consider leaving their practice or taking an early retirement" if Congress passed Obamacare."

    http://thedebtweowe.com/obama...

    The results of the Merritt Hawkins poll is in line with the earlier IBD/TIPP poll. The Merritt Hawkins poll was taken after Obamacare was passed.

    Also 60 doctor owned hospitals have been cancelled because of Obamacare.

    "In fact, the new health care law has already forced the cancellation of at least 60 doctor-owned hospitals that were scheduled to open soon according to the executive director of Physician Hospitals of America."

    http://thedebtweowe.com/obama...
  • lee Kiosk Kid 2012/03/18 18:17:38
    lee
    did you goggle the "Merritt Hawkins survey"... since I discredited the one, I'll let you do the other one.
  • Kiosk Kid lee 2012/03/19 16:27:50 (edited)
    Kiosk Kid
    You didn't discredit anything. You spewed a bunch of accusations but provided no reference to back up your accusations.
  • lee Kiosk Kid 2012/03/19 19:00:35
    lee
    http://www.fivethirtyeight.co...

    nate silver... its not hard to find.

    discredited.

    not scientific
  • Bill lee 2012/03/19 00:09:54
    Bill
    {2. At least one of the questions is blatantly biased: "Do you believe...}
    Well, Obama managed to get that same holy run-on sentence out in dozens of speeches, Robin. How do you think he got the healthcare crap sold to a bunch of Dems?
  • lee Bill 2012/03/19 19:03:10
    lee
    that's right, ignore the other reasons, and just focus on the grammar one...

    way to cement your argument.
  • Bill lee 2012/03/20 13:18:18 (edited)
    Bill
    ??? What grammar are you talking about? All I said is that that was what Obama has been saying.

    {"Do you believe the government can cover 47 million more people and it will cost less money and the quality of care will be better?".}

    Here is what Obama is saying in his sales pitch, ""The government can cover 47 million more people and it will cost less money and the quality of care will be better?".

    Don't tell me you haven't heard him say that? I answered your reply perfectly (now, a little more perfectly.)

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/07/29 15:00:58

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals