9.1 trillion dollar deficit.

[PatekPhilippe]

I notice not one person answered this question:

Name one entitlement program that came in on budget or below budget.

and The Barry says this program will be deficit neutral...even "lower the deficit"...yet the WH is predicting a 9.1 trillion dollar deficit over the next 10 years?

Please.....who's kidding who now?

 

[Ame®icano]

I notice not one person answered this question:

Name one entitlement program that came in on budget or below budget.

and The Barry says this program will be deficit neutral...even "lower the deficit"...yet the WH is predicting a 9.1 trillion dollar deficit over the next 10 years?

Please.....who's kidding who now?

There is one... government salaries.

 

[VaYank5150]

I notice not one person answered this question:

Name one entitlement program that came in on budget or below budget.

and The Barry says this program will be deficit neutral...even "lower the deficit"...yet the WH is predicting a 9.1 trillion dollar deficit over the next 10 years?

Please.....who's kidding who now?

And how about that defense budget?

 

[PatekPhilippe]

In the immortal words of Gunnery Sergeant Hartmann: "I'M ASKING THE FUCKEN QUESTIONS PRIVATE DO YOU UNDERSTAND!!!"

The answer to the entitlement question is NOT A SINGLE ONE HAS EVER, IN THE HISTORY OF THIS COUNTRY, EVER COME IN ON BUDGET OR BELOW.

Therefore I raise the issue on Obamacare as the primary source for this deficit projection. This program will cause a significant problem for the government. Number one because they can't even fix the 500 billion dollar fraud in Medicare. Number two they can't even make Social Security solvent by putting excess FICA taxes collected in a LOCK BOX. Number three...what makes you think the government can spend your money better than you? They will end up taxing the shit out of everything over the course of the next 4 years....you watch.

Fat ass tax
Sugary drink tax
Kool Aid tax
Smoker tax
Alcoholic tax
Cholesterol tax
Young person tax
Couch potato tax

you name it....it will more than likely be coming.

 

[The Rabbi]

Actually I think Bush's prescription drug benefit is at or below projections.
But the point is valid. No program ever comes in at budget, especially an entitlement. It's pretty simple: make something free or the lowest priced item out there and everyone will want one.
The health care reform is a complete joke. THe gov't is lying its ass off telling us it won't cost trillions of dollars. Even the Dums in Congress can't say this with a straight face.
Now Obama wants to spread a little wealth around more and send checks to old farts who don't deserve them. Fiscal responsibility just doesnt seem to be in his vocabulary.
But remember, this guy has never created wealth in his life, only spent other people's.

 

[Ame®icano]

Actually I think Bush's prescription drug benefit is at or below projections.But the point is valid. No program ever comes in at budget, especially an entitlement. It's pretty simple: make something free or the lowest priced item out there and everyone will want one.
The health care reform is a complete joke. THe gov't is lying its ass off telling us it won't cost trillions of dollars. Even the Dums in Congress can't say this with a straight face.
Now Obama wants to spread a little wealth around more and send checks to old farts who don't deserve them. Fiscal responsibility just doesnt seem to be in his vocabulary.
But remember, this guy has never created wealth in his life, only spent other people's.

Yes, Medicare Part D is way below the CBO estimates.

Reason? Private companies compete for the market share and naturally, price goes down.

 

[Ame®icano]

 

[PeterS]

What the F*CK does this mean? Does Obama know that his wreckless spending will double the National Debt? Or is he setting us up for justifying a massive tax increase on all working Americans?

Bush Jr doubled debt and Reagan tripled debt so let me ask you the same questions: Did they know their reckless spending would double and triple national debt. Were they setting us up for a massive tax increase on all working Americans?

So this justifys Obama's wreckless spending?

As much as it justifies Bush Jr's and Reagan's. If you are unhappy with Obama you must really be pissed at Reagan for tripling debt and little Bush for doubling debt when he was handed a balanced budget. Why single Obama out? Lets hear some venom for all evil spenders...

 

[The Rabbi]

Why single Obama out? Because he doubled down on the debt, increasing it to intractible levels. Also Reagan created the longest peacetime expansion in history. Bush fought a war against terrorist to make this country safe. Obama is handing out money to car dealers, the elderly--anyone in sight. There is no payback for his spending except debt to be paid by our grandchildren.

 

[Polk]

Actually I think Bush's prescription drug benefit is at or below projections.

It's at projections currently, but the numbers have been very erratic.

 

[Polk]

Actually I think Bush's prescription drug benefit is at or below projections.But the point is valid. No program ever comes in at budget, especially an entitlement. It's pretty simple: make something free or the lowest priced item out there and everyone will want one.
The health care reform is a complete joke. THe gov't is lying its ass off telling us it won't cost trillions of dollars. Even the Dums in Congress can't say this with a straight face.
Now Obama wants to spread a little wealth around more and send checks to old farts who don't deserve them. Fiscal responsibility just doesnt seem to be in his vocabulary.
But remember, this guy has never created wealth in his life, only spent other people's.

Yes, Medicare Part D is way below the CBO estimates.

Reason? Private companies compete for the market share and naturally, price goes down.

Medicare Part D was projected to cost 400 billion. The current estimates for the time frame say 395 billion. That's not a "way below".

 

[The Rabbi]

Actually I think Bush's prescription drug benefit is at or below projections.But the point is valid. No program ever comes in at budget, especially an entitlement. It's pretty simple: make something free or the lowest priced item out there and everyone will want one.
The health care reform is a complete joke. THe gov't is lying its ass off telling us it won't cost trillions of dollars. Even the Dums in Congress can't say this with a straight face.
Now Obama wants to spread a little wealth around more and send checks to old farts who don't deserve them. Fiscal responsibility just doesnt seem to be in his vocabulary.
But remember, this guy has never created wealth in his life, only spent other people's.

Yes, Medicare Part D is way below the CBO estimates.

Reason? Private companies compete for the market share and naturally, price goes down.

Medicare Part D was projected to cost 400 billion. The current estimates for the time frame say 395 billion. That's not a "way below".

Five billion dollars isn't significant? In whose universe?
And any program that comes in below cost is remarkable.

 

[Ame®icano]

Actually I think Bush's prescription drug benefit is at or below projections.But the point is valid. No program ever comes in at budget, especially an entitlement. It's pretty simple: make something free or the lowest priced item out there and everyone will want one.
The health care reform is a complete joke. THe gov't is lying its ass off telling us it won't cost trillions of dollars. Even the Dums in Congress can't say this with a straight face.
Now Obama wants to spread a little wealth around more and send checks to old farts who don't deserve them. Fiscal responsibility just doesnt seem to be in his vocabulary.
But remember, this guy has never created wealth in his life, only spent other people's.

Yes, Medicare Part D is way below the CBO estimates.

Reason? Private companies compete for the market share and naturally, price goes down.

Medicare Part D was projected to cost 400 billion. The current estimates for the time frame say 395 billion. That's not a "way below".

Check your "facts".

The 10-year cost of the drug subsidy program, originally estimated at $634 billion, has been revised to about $395 million, Nelligan said Thursday in a telephone interview.

Arizona StarNet

Saving about $6 billion a year is way below then originally estimated.

The prescription drug program for seniors has cost about one-third less — about $50 billion — than originally estimated since it started in January 2006.

When the program started, the Congressional Budget Office had predicted it would cost $74 billion a year by 2008. Medicare actuaries predicted even higher costs. Seniors have seen savings, too. The monthly premium for basic drug coverage was $26.70 in 2008 — a third less than forecast.

Medicare drug program snips $6B from year's tab - USA Today

 

[Polk]

Yes, Medicare Part D is way below the CBO estimates.

Reason? Private companies compete for the market share and naturally, price goes down.

Medicare Part D was projected to cost 400 billion. The current estimates for the time frame say 395 billion. That's not a "way below".

Five billion dollars isn't significant? In whose universe?
And any program that comes in below cost is remarkable.

Five billion is barely one percent of total program cost. That's no more significant than a football team trailing 70-0 kicking a field goal would be.

Also, the program hasn't come in below cost. These figures are based on preliminary estimates. Those exact same estimate a year ago said the program was costing at least 700 billion over the ten year window, almost double the originally stated cost.

 

[Polk]

Yes, Medicare Part D is way below the CBO estimates.

Reason? Private companies compete for the market share and naturally, price goes down.

Medicare Part D was projected to cost 400 billion. The current estimates for the time frame say 395 billion. That's not a "way below".

Check your "facts".

The 10-year cost of the drug subsidy program, originally estimated at $634 billion, has been revised to about $395 million, Nelligan said Thursday in a telephone interview.

Arizona StarNet

Saving about $6 billion a year is way below then originally estimated.

The prescription drug program for seniors has cost about one-third less — about $50 billion — than originally estimated since it started in January 2006.

When the program started, the Congressional Budget Office had predicted it would cost $74 billion a year by 2008. Medicare actuaries predicted even higher costs. Seniors have seen savings, too. The monthly premium for basic drug coverage was $26.70 in 2008 — a third less than forecast.

Medicare drug program snips $6B from year's tab - USA Today

The 634 billion figure is a later estimate. The original claim was that the bill would cost 400 billion.

Backers say the $400 billion Medicare Prescription Drug Modernization Act will provide much-needed help for the nation's 40 million senior citizens to buy medications; critics say it is a giveaway to drug makers and insurance companies and a prelude to the dismantling of the program.

CNN.com - Bush signs landmark Medicare bill into law - Dec. 8, 2003

 

[Midnight Marauder]

i dont think many people can even conceive of a trillion dollars...here is my question...scare me...what comes after a trilllion?

Quadrillion, my Dear.

cause we are gonna be there without radical change....but this has been a run away train for a while.

Just need 990 trillion more to get to the quad!

 

[The Rabbi]

Medicare Part D was projected to cost 400 billion. The current estimates for the time frame say 395 billion. That's not a "way below".

Five billion dollars isn't significant? In whose universe?
And any program that comes in below cost is remarkable.

Five billion is barely one percent of total program cost. That's no more significant than a football team trailing 70-0 kicking a field goal would be.

Also, the program hasn't come in below cost. These figures are based on preliminary estimates. Those exact same estimate a year ago said the program was costing at least 700 billion over the ten year window, almost double the originally stated cost.

OK, you win.
So if this program is costing so much more, why is it Obamacare is somehow going to be different and cost what the estimates say? Isn't it reasonable that Obamacare will in fact cost triple or more whatever bogus estimates they've given?

 

[Polk]

The reason why the current health care proposal should come in close to cost is simple: at core, it's replacing costs that exist in the current system.

 

[The Rabbi]

The reason why the current health care proposal should come in close to cost is simple: at core, it's replacing costs that exist in the current system.

Pfff. ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You aren't serious, are you?

 

[Polk]

The reason why the current health care proposal should come in close to cost is simple: at core, it's replacing costs that exist in the current system.

Pfff. ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You aren't serious, are you?

You really think those people without health insurance aren't be treated today? Of course they are. It's just not until they get a lot sicker (which drives up cost) and they're receiving the treatment in the ER (which also drives up cost and the cost gets passed on to everyone else).