CBO estimate of Obama's deficit reduction plan

[Quantum Windbag]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syMFyzaBNUo]YouTube - ‪CBO: President's Speech Not A Serious Budget Plan‬‏[/ame]

 

[Quantum Windbag]

again now we believe the CBO?

That they do not estimate speeches? Can you give me a reason not to believe that statement?

The actual point here , which you obviously missed, is that Obama does not have a deficit reduction plan.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

again now we believe the CBO?

Since the LEFT has insisted on previous occasions that the CBO is truthful, factual and accurate, then pointing out what that body has said about Obama's proposals is not only acceptable but required. Deflecting from that by the left proves that previous statements made about the CBO are simply hot hair designed to be political talking points ONLY when the CBO agrees with them.

 

[Zander]

The CBO is non partisan. They work with what they are given.

Case in point: If they are told to calculate the economic effect of Obamacare over ten years and ten years only (during which time we collect 6 years of revenue and pay for 4 years of benefits) that is what they do. That is why they reported that Obamacare lowered the deficit. Ask them to extend the analysis to 15 years and you get a totally different picture...at 20 years- an economic disaster.

 

[The Rabbi]

Obama's first budget, proposed in Feb, was quietly deep sixed. His second one got no votes in Congress. None.
The Dems are not serious about deficit reduction. No wonder Cantor and Coburn have pulled out of talks. There is no one to talk to.

 

[Greenbeard]

The CBO is non partisan. They work with what they are given.

Case in point: If they are told to calculate the economic effect of Obamacare over ten years and ten years only (during which time we collect 6 years of revenue and pay for 4 years of benefits) that is what they do. That is why they reported that Obamacare lowered the deficit. Ask them to extend the analysis to 15 years and you get a totally different picture...at 20 years- an economic disaster.

Huh? They included a rough estimate of its financial impact in the second decade in the original analysis. The law cuts the deficit substantially more in the second decade than it does in the first.

Effects of the Legislation Beyond the First 10 Years

Although CBO does not generally provide cost estimates beyond the 10-year budget projection period, certain Congressional rules require some information about the budgetary impact of legislation in subsequent decades, and many Members have requested CBO’s analyses of the long-term budgetary impact of broad changes in the nation’s health care and health insurance systems. Therefore, CBO has developed a rough outlook for the decade following the 2010-2019 period by grouping the elements of the legislation into broad categories and (together with the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation) assessing the rate at which the budgetary impact of each of those broad categories is likely to increase over time. Our analysis indicates that H.R. 3590, as passed by the Senate, would reduce federal budget deficits over the ensuing decade relative to those projected under current law—with a total effect during that decade that is in a broad range between one-quarter percent and one-half percent of gross domestic product (GDP). The imprecision of that calculation reflects the even greater degree of uncertainty that attends to it, compared with CBO’s 10-year budget estimates.

Using that same analytic approach, the combined effect of enacting H.R. 3590 and the reconciliation bill would also be to reduce federal budget deficits over the ensuing decade relative to those projected under current law—with a total effect during that decade that is in a broad range around one-half percent of GDP. The incremental effect of enacting the reconciliation bill (over and above the effect of enacting H.R. 3590 by itself) would thus be to further reduce federal budget deficits in that decade, with a total effect that is in a broad range between zero and one-quarter percent of GDP.​

Now did you hear somewhere that the CBO didn't consider the impact of the legislation up to the 20-year-mark or did you just make that up yourself?

 

[Zander]

The CBO is non partisan. They work with what they are given.

Case in point: If they are told to calculate the economic effect of Obamacare over ten years and ten years only (during which time we collect 6 years of revenue and pay for 4 years of benefits) that is what they do. That is why they reported that Obamacare lowered the deficit. Ask them to extend the analysis to 15 years and you get a totally different picture...at 20 years- an economic disaster.

Huh? They included a rough estimate of its financial impact in the second decade in the original analysis. The law cuts the deficit substantially more in the second decade than it does in the first.

Effects of the Legislation Beyond the First 10 Years

Although CBO does not generally provide cost estimates beyond the 10-year budget projection period, certain Congressional rules require some information about the budgetary impact of legislation in subsequent decades, and many Members have requested CBO’s analyses of the long-term budgetary impact of broad changes in the nation’s health care and health insurance systems. Therefore, CBO has developed a rough outlook for the decade following the 2010-2019 period by grouping the elements of the legislation into broad categories and (together with the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation) assessing the rate at which the budgetary impact of each of those broad categories is likely to increase over time. Our analysis indicates that H.R. 3590, as passed by the Senate, would reduce federal budget deficits over the ensuing decade relative to those projected under current law—with a total effect during that decade that is in a broad range between one-quarter percent and one-half percent of gross domestic product (GDP). The imprecision of that calculation reflects the even greater degree of uncertainty that attends to it, compared with CBO’s 10-year budget estimates.

Using that same analytic approach, the combined effect of enacting H.R. 3590 and the reconciliation bill would also be to reduce federal budget deficits over the ensuing decade relative to those projected under current law—with a total effect during that decade that is in a broad range around one-half percent of GDP. The incremental effect of enacting the reconciliation bill (over and above the effect of enacting H.R. 3590 by itself) would thus be to further reduce federal budget deficits in that decade, with a total effect that is in a broad range between zero and one-quarter percent of GDP.​

Now did you hear somewhere that the CBO didn't consider the impact of the legislation up to the 20-year-mark or did you just make that up yourself?

Thanks for the informatio, but the CBO does not provide formal estimates for Obamacare beyond 10 years. They usually do not. They did proffer an opinion, but even they (the CBO) acknowledge that it is nearly impossible to get an accurate estimate, even more so when the legislation is over 2000 pages long. From the CBO report

Estimating the effects of major changes to the health care and health insurance systems
over the next 10 years is very difficult and involves substantial uncertainty; generating
longer-term estimates is even more challenging and is fraught with even greater
uncertainty. As a result, CBO does not provide formal cost estimates beyond the 10-year
budget window

I still stand by my assumptions that if implemented Obamacare will be a huge expense that will far exceed the touted cost. The federal government’s track record when it comes to accurately measuring the future costs of health care programs are always dramatically underestimated. Medicare (entire program) was off by a factor 10- meaning it cost 10 times more than the original CBO estimate.

 

[Wiseacre]

The CBO scored ObamaCare based on the assumption that only 7% of businesses would drop HC insurance coverage. This week we saw a survey of employers that said 30% would drop HC insurance coverae for their employees and pay the tax penalty. Which means premiums and the costs to the taxpayers will be quite a bit higher than we were told. The survey went on to say that as many as 50% might drop coverage as they learn more about the plan, and maybe offer employees a pay hike instead. Might be cheaper for the business and also for the employee.

 

[Stephanie]

anyone notice the Liberals are shying away from this thread.??

very telling.

 

[FuelRod]

Budget is a four letter word to Democrats.

 

[Robert]

Budget is a four letter word to Democrats.

The Truth is even worse for them...have to laugh at the very sudden turn against the CBO by the same Muppet's that sing their praise when they see something that like.

 

[The Rabbi]

again now we believe the CBO?

That they do not estimate speeches? Can you give me a reason not to believe that statement?

The actual point here , which you obviously missed, is that Obama does not have a deficit reduction plan.

Do.I need to go link you to a few.threads where people like you say the cbo only gets info handed to them so its not correct?
using the cbo to justify your hate and partisan shit is quite hacky. Either you believe them when the info is and.bad.or.you don't believe anything from them period.

Do you read your own posts?

 

[Truthmatters]

The CBO is non partisan. They work with what they are given.

Case in point: If they are told to calculate the economic effect of Obamacare over ten years and ten years only (during which time we collect 6 years of revenue and pay for 4 years of benefits) that is what they do. That is why they reported that Obamacare lowered the deficit. Ask them to extend the analysis to 15 years and you get a totally different picture...at 20 years- an economic disaster.

Huh? They included a rough estimate of its financial impact in the second decade in the original analysis. The law cuts the deficit substantially more in the second decade than it does in the first.

Effects of the Legislation Beyond the First 10 Years

Although CBO does not generally provide cost estimates beyond the 10-year budget projection period, certain Congressional rules require some information about the budgetary impact of legislation in subsequent decades, and many Members have requested CBO’s analyses of the long-term budgetary impact of broad changes in the nation’s health care and health insurance systems. Therefore, CBO has developed a rough outlook for the decade following the 2010-2019 period by grouping the elements of the legislation into broad categories and (together with the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation) assessing the rate at which the budgetary impact of each of those broad categories is likely to increase over time. Our analysis indicates that H.R. 3590, as passed by the Senate, would reduce federal budget deficits over the ensuing decade relative to those projected under current law—with a total effect during that decade that is in a broad range between one-quarter percent and one-half percent of gross domestic product (GDP). The imprecision of that calculation reflects the even greater degree of uncertainty that attends to it, compared with CBO’s 10-year budget estimates.

Using that same analytic approach, the combined effect of enacting H.R. 3590 and the reconciliation bill would also be to reduce federal budget deficits over the ensuing decade relative to those projected under current law—with a total effect during that decade that is in a broad range around one-half percent of GDP. The incremental effect of enacting the reconciliation bill (over and above the effect of enacting H.R. 3590 by itself) would thus be to further reduce federal budget deficits in that decade, with a total effect that is in a broad range between zero and one-quarter percent of GDP.​

Now did you hear somewhere that the CBO didn't consider the impact of the legislation up to the 20-year-mark or did you just make that up yourself?

Oh come on now and be fair , they were just starting to like the CBO again.


How these people can waffle and waffle in their rational for everything and look thmselves in the mirror is beyond me.

 

[kwc57]

again now we believe the CBO?

That they do not estimate speeches? Can you give me a reason not to believe that statement?

The actual point here , which you obviously missed, is that Obama does not have a deficit reduction plan.

Do.I need to go link you to a few.threads where people like you say the cbo only gets info handed to them so its not correct?
using the cbo to justify your hate and partisan shit is quite hacky. Either you believe them when the info is and.bad.or.you don't believe anything from them period.

You're way off topic here. When questioned about Obama's reduction plan, the CBO said they do not estimate speeches..........because all Obama has done is make speeches and not offered a plan. How can the CBO offer an opinion on........nothing?

 

[RDD_1210]

Budget is a four letter word to Democrats.

The Truth is even worse for them...have to laugh at the very sudden turn against the CBO by the same Muppet's that sing their praise when they see something that like.

Who turned against the CBO? This is where you don't back up one of your posts again.

 

[Zander]

The CBO is non partisan. They work with what they are given.

Case in point: If they are told to calculate the economic effect of Obamacare over ten years and ten years only (during which time we collect 6 years of revenue and pay for 4 years of benefits) that is what they do. That is why they reported that Obamacare lowered the deficit. Ask them to extend the analysis to 15 years and you get a totally different picture...at 20 years- an economic disaster.

Huh? They included a rough estimate of its financial impact in the second decade in the original analysis. The law cuts the deficit substantially more in the second decade than it does in the first.

Effects of the Legislation Beyond the First 10 Years

Although CBO does not generally provide cost estimates beyond the 10-year budget projection period, certain Congressional rules require some information about the budgetary impact of legislation in subsequent decades, and many Members have requested CBO’s analyses of the long-term budgetary impact of broad changes in the nation’s health care and health insurance systems. Therefore, CBO has developed a rough outlook for the decade following the 2010-2019 period by grouping the elements of the legislation into broad categories and (together with the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation) assessing the rate at which the budgetary impact of each of those broad categories is likely to increase over time. Our analysis indicates that H.R. 3590, as passed by the Senate, would reduce federal budget deficits over the ensuing decade relative to those projected under current law—with a total effect during that decade that is in a broad range between one-quarter percent and one-half percent of gross domestic product (GDP). The imprecision of that calculation reflects the even greater degree of uncertainty that attends to it, compared with CBO’s 10-year budget estimates.

Using that same analytic approach, the combined effect of enacting H.R. 3590 and the reconciliation bill would also be to reduce federal budget deficits over the ensuing decade relative to those projected under current law—with a total effect during that decade that is in a broad range around one-half percent of GDP. The incremental effect of enacting the reconciliation bill (over and above the effect of enacting H.R. 3590 by itself) would thus be to further reduce federal budget deficits in that decade, with a total effect that is in a broad range between zero and one-quarter percent of GDP.​

Now did you hear somewhere that the CBO didn't consider the impact of the legislation up to the 20-year-mark or did you just make that up yourself?

Oh come on now and be fair , they were just starting to like the CBO again.


How these people can waffle and waffle in their rational for everything and look thmselves in the mirror is beyond me.

Sorry you are so stupid. I have proven by the link to the CBO report, that the CBO did not score the Obamacare legislation beyond 10 years.

Do you know how to read?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

again now we believe the CBO?

That they do not estimate speeches? Can you give me a reason not to believe that statement?

The actual point here , which you obviously missed, is that Obama does not have a deficit reduction plan.

Do.I need to go link you to a few.threads where people like you say the cbo only gets info handed to them so its not correct?
using the cbo to justify your hate and partisan shit is quite hacky. Either you believe them when the info is and.bad.or.you don't believe anything from them period.

For the record, I always believe the CBO gives an accurate estimate within the constraints of the law and the available data. The problem is that the law requires them to make certain assumptions, and the data they use is sometimes cherry picked by whoever is giving them a plan to analyze.

That does not make using them as a reference invalid, it just means you have to understand their bias and acknowledge it. That process is known as critical thinking, you should try it sometime.

Given the limits of the CBO I still absolutely accept it when they tell me they do not analyze speeches.

None of that changes the fact that Obama does not have a deficit reduction plan, which is the point of this thread. The reason I know this is I made the thread, and I know what I meant when I did it. So that makes your insistence in making this about the fact that the CBO only does what it is told a little telling.

Nice deflection.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

That they do not estimate speeches? Can you give me a reason not to believe that statement?

The actual point here , which you obviously missed, is that Obama does not have a deficit reduction plan.

Do.I need to go link you to a few.threads where people like you say the cbo only gets info handed to them so its not correct?
using the cbo to justify your hate and partisan shit is quite hacky. Either you believe them when the info is and.bad.or.you don't believe anything from them period.

You're way off topic here. When questioned about Obama's reduction plan, the CBO said they do not estimate speeches..........because all Obama has done is make speeches and not offered a plan. How can the CBO offer an opinion on........nothing?

Nice to see that somebody can actually comprehend a post and extrapolate the point that is being made.

 

[boedicca]

The CBO is non partisan. They work with what they are given.

Case in point: If they are told to calculate the economic effect of Obamacare over ten years and ten years only (during which time we collect 6 years of revenue and pay for 4 years of benefits) that is what they do. That is why they reported that Obamacare lowered the deficit. Ask them to extend the analysis to 15 years and you get a totally different picture...at 20 years- an economic disaster.

Huh? They included a rough estimate of its financial impact in the second decade in the original analysis. The law cuts the deficit substantially more in the second decade than it does in the first.

Effects of the Legislation Beyond the First 10 Years

Although CBO does not generally provide cost estimates beyond the 10-year budget projection period, certain Congressional rules require some information about the budgetary impact of legislation in subsequent decades, and many Members have requested CBO’s analyses of the long-term budgetary impact of broad changes in the nation’s health care and health insurance systems. Therefore, CBO has developed a rough outlook for the decade following the 2010-2019 period by grouping the elements of the legislation into broad categories and (together with the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation) assessing the rate at which the budgetary impact of each of those broad categories is likely to increase over time. Our analysis indicates that H.R. 3590, as passed by the Senate, would reduce federal budget deficits over the ensuing decade relative to those projected under current law—with a total effect during that decade that is in a broad range between one-quarter percent and one-half percent of gross domestic product (GDP). The imprecision of that calculation reflects the even greater degree of uncertainty that attends to it, compared with CBO’s 10-year budget estimates.

Using that same analytic approach, the combined effect of enacting H.R. 3590 and the reconciliation bill would also be to reduce federal budget deficits over the ensuing decade relative to those projected under current law—with a total effect during that decade that is in a broad range around one-half percent of GDP. The incremental effect of enacting the reconciliation bill (over and above the effect of enacting H.R. 3590 by itself) would thus be to further reduce federal budget deficits in that decade, with a total effect that is in a broad range between zero and one-quarter percent of GDP.​

Now did you hear somewhere that the CBO didn't consider the impact of the legislation up to the 20-year-mark or did you just make that up yourself?

And these estimates are all moot now that the "glitch" which makes millions of middle class people eligible for Medicaid has been discovered.

 

[Wiseacre]

The CBO is non partisan. They work with what they are given.

Case in point: If they are told to calculate the economic effect of Obamacare over ten years and ten years only (during which time we collect 6 years of revenue and pay for 4 years of benefits) that is what they do. That is why they reported that Obamacare lowered the deficit. Ask them to extend the analysis to 15 years and you get a totally different picture...at 20 years- an economic disaster.

Huh? They included a rough estimate of its financial impact in the second decade in the original analysis. The law cuts the deficit substantially more in the second decade than it does in the first.

Effects of the Legislation Beyond the First 10 Years

Although CBO does not generally provide cost estimates beyond the 10-year budget projection period, certain Congressional rules require some information about the budgetary impact of legislation in subsequent decades, and many Members have requested CBO’s analyses of the long-term budgetary impact of broad changes in the nation’s health care and health insurance systems. Therefore, CBO has developed a rough outlook for the decade following the 2010-2019 period by grouping the elements of the legislation into broad categories and (together with the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation) assessing the rate at which the budgetary impact of each of those broad categories is likely to increase over time. Our analysis indicates that H.R. 3590, as passed by the Senate, would reduce federal budget deficits over the ensuing decade relative to those projected under current law—with a total effect during that decade that is in a broad range between one-quarter percent and one-half percent of gross domestic product (GDP). The imprecision of that calculation reflects the even greater degree of uncertainty that attends to it, compared with CBO’s 10-year budget estimates.

Using that same analytic approach, the combined effect of enacting H.R. 3590 and the reconciliation bill would also be to reduce federal budget deficits over the ensuing decade relative to those projected under current law—with a total effect during that decade that is in a broad range around one-half percent of GDP. The incremental effect of enacting the reconciliation bill (over and above the effect of enacting H.R. 3590 by itself) would thus be to further reduce federal budget deficits in that decade, with a total effect that is in a broad range between zero and one-quarter percent of GDP.​

Now did you hear somewhere that the CBO didn't consider the impact of the legislation up to the 20-year-mark or did you just make that up yourself?

And these estimates are all moot now that the "glitch" which makes millions of middle class people eligible for Medicaid has been discovered.

Wonder what the numbers will be when they factor that in. I'm guessing an extra trillion or two.