<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: What The CBO Said About Baucus Plan</title>
	<atom:link href="http://sweetness-light.com/archive/what-cbo-really-said-about-baucus-plan/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://sweetness-light.com/archive/what-cbo-really-said-about-baucus-plan</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 27 May 2012 02:00:57 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Right of the People</title>
		<link>http://sweetness-light.com/archive/what-cbo-really-said-about-baucus-plan#comment-163610</link>
		<dc:creator>Right of the People</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Oct 2009 16:44:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sweetness-light.com/archive/what-cbo-really-said-about-baucus-plan#comment-163610</guid>
		<description>Is this the new math?  Paying $829 billion for something will save us $81 billion??????  WTF are they talking about?  I guess it&#039;s like when my wife goes to the big sale because she will save so much on stuff we don&#039;t need instead of just not spending the money.  Now that&#039;s a real savings!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Is this the new math?  Paying $829 billion for something will save us $81 billion??????  WTF are they talking about?  I guess it&#8217;s like when my wife goes to the big sale because she will save so much on stuff we don&#8217;t need instead of just not spending the money.  Now that&#8217;s a real savings!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tater Salad</title>
		<link>http://sweetness-light.com/archive/what-cbo-really-said-about-baucus-plan#comment-163600</link>
		<dc:creator>Tater Salad</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Oct 2009 15:40:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sweetness-light.com/archive/what-cbo-really-said-about-baucus-plan#comment-163600</guid>
		<description>http://www.freep.com/article/20091008/NEWS15/910080451/1285/NEWS15/Pelosi-told-to-reject-health-tax</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.freep.com/article/20091008/NEWS15/910080451/1285/NEWS15/Pelosi-told-to-reject-health-tax" rel="nofollow">http://www.freep.com/article/2.....health-tax</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: proreason</title>
		<link>http://sweetness-light.com/archive/what-cbo-really-said-about-baucus-plan#comment-163599</link>
		<dc:creator>proreason</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Oct 2009 15:34:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sweetness-light.com/archive/what-cbo-really-said-about-baucus-plan#comment-163599</guid>
		<description>They are telling us that they will provide health insurance for 29 million unemployed people at 1/5th the cost of Medicare.

And since the &quot;new&quot; people being covered do not currently have health insurance, their health care costs will certainly be above average.

And the cuts in Medicare to &quot;pay&quot; for it are a joke.  Medicare costs are going up 9% per year, and the Baby Boomers are just now starting to enter the system.

This whole thing is a criminal lie by criminal politicians.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>They are telling us that they will provide health insurance for 29 million unemployed people at 1/5th the cost of Medicare.</p>
<p>And since the &#8220;new&#8221; people being covered do not currently have health insurance, their health care costs will certainly be above average.</p>
<p>And the cuts in Medicare to &#8220;pay&#8221; for it are a joke.  Medicare costs are going up 9% per year, and the Baby Boomers are just now starting to enter the system.</p>
<p>This whole thing is a criminal lie by criminal politicians.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chuckk</title>
		<link>http://sweetness-light.com/archive/what-cbo-really-said-about-baucus-plan#comment-163568</link>
		<dc:creator>Chuckk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Oct 2009 10:34:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sweetness-light.com/archive/what-cbo-really-said-about-baucus-plan#comment-163568</guid>
		<description>I can not think of a single time when CBO projections came in close to being correct. I&#039;ll bet a dollar to a donut that the &quot;plan&quot; will cost 3-5 times more than projecteed, and the benefits will be fewer than promised.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I can not think of a single time when CBO projections came in close to being correct. I&#8217;ll bet a dollar to a donut that the &#8220;plan&#8221; will cost 3-5 times more than projecteed, and the benefits will be fewer than promised.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tater Salad</title>
		<link>http://sweetness-light.com/archive/what-cbo-really-said-about-baucus-plan#comment-163547</link>
		<dc:creator>Tater Salad</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2009 21:28:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sweetness-light.com/archive/what-cbo-really-said-about-baucus-plan#comment-163547</guid>
		<description>To the Democrats in Congress who don’t quite get it: I want to offer a personal pledge. I – and a lot of other people – have every intention of removing you from Congress in the next election if you stand in the way of health care legislation that the people want. That is not a hollow or idle threat. We will come to your district and we will work against you, first in the primary and, if we have to, in the general election.  We do not want the &quot;Public Option&quot;.....period!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To the Democrats in Congress who don’t quite get it: I want to offer a personal pledge. I – and a lot of other people – have every intention of removing you from Congress in the next election if you stand in the way of health care legislation that the people want. That is not a hollow or idle threat. We will come to your district and we will work against you, first in the primary and, if we have to, in the general election.  We do not want the &#8220;Public Option&#8221;&#8230;..period!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: proreason</title>
		<link>http://sweetness-light.com/archive/what-cbo-really-said-about-baucus-plan#comment-163546</link>
		<dc:creator>proreason</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2009 20:37:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sweetness-light.com/archive/what-cbo-really-said-about-baucus-plan#comment-163546</guid>
		<description>FYI, there is no Baukus Bill.

The CBO scoring was done on &quot;concepts&quot;.  The legal languagehas not been written.

http://legalinsurrection.blogspot.com/2009/10/there-is-no-baucus-bill.html

It&#039;s vapor ware.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>FYI, there is no Baukus Bill.</p>
<p>The CBO scoring was done on &#8220;concepts&#8221;.  The legal languagehas not been written.</p>
<p><a href="http://legalinsurrection.blogspot.com/2009/10/there-is-no-baucus-bill.html" rel="nofollow">http://legalinsurrection.blogs.....-bill.html</a></p>
<p>It&#8217;s vapor ware.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Petronius</title>
		<link>http://sweetness-light.com/archive/what-cbo-really-said-about-baucus-plan#comment-163540</link>
		<dc:creator>Petronius</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2009 18:53:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sweetness-light.com/archive/what-cbo-really-said-about-baucus-plan#comment-163540</guid>
		<description>Sound analysis, Pro.  

In addition to the tax on medical insurance policies, the plan includes Sen. Baucus&#039; proposed innovation tax on manufacturers of medical devices and diagnostics, and pharmaceuticals.  (I am uncertain whether the $196B  &quot;Other provisions&quot; (taxes) includes the innovation tax -- there are too many gimmick taxes concealed in this plan.)

As a general rule, you do not tax something unless you want less of it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sound analysis, Pro.  </p>
<p>In addition to the tax on medical insurance policies, the plan includes Sen. Baucus&#8217; proposed innovation tax on manufacturers of medical devices and diagnostics, and pharmaceuticals.  (I am uncertain whether the $196B  &#8220;Other provisions&#8221; (taxes) includes the innovation tax &#8212; there are too many gimmick taxes concealed in this plan.)</p>
<p>As a general rule, you do not tax something unless you want less of it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: proreason</title>
		<link>http://sweetness-light.com/archive/what-cbo-really-said-about-baucus-plan#comment-163532</link>
		<dc:creator>proreason</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2009 18:16:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sweetness-light.com/archive/what-cbo-really-said-about-baucus-plan#comment-163532</guid>
		<description>Of course, the whole thing is a fantasy.

But here is the breakdown teased out of the garbly-gook:

New Taxes (treated as &quot;income&quot; to the government:):
.....201 B......New excise tax on insurance policies (avg about $300 annually per family)
.....196 B......&quot;Other provisions&quot;.  i.e., Taxes.  (Avg about $300 annually per family)

Service Reductions (Treated as &quot;cost reductions&quot;):
.....404 B.....Medicare reductions (avg about $100 per year per Medicare recipient)
.....110 B.....Savings from &quot;other sources&quot;

New Costs:
.....829 B....Credits and subsidies, Medicaid and Chips costs

Observations:
- Medicare has gone up by 9% annually forever.  Now they claim 1/2 billion in savings.  Zero chance.  Real growth will be more than 9% because the baby boomers are coming online.
- 397 billion in new taxes
- 829 billion in new costs over 10 years for 29 million people.  $2858 per year per new covered life.  This is laughably low.  The only policy you could buy for that would be a $20,000 deductable policy, and that wouldn&#039;t count the costs of deductables and co-pays

Proreason&#039;s analysis:

- the 829 B cost will be at least 1,600 B
- the 514 B in cost reductions won&#039;t happen.  Medicare is projected at 420B in 2009.  Over 10 years, if we assume an unrealistically low growth factor of 6%, cost will increase by 2 trillion (2,000 Billion)
- the 397 B in new taxes is low, because tax estimates are ALWAYS low, but I&#039;ll leave it as is

Conclusion, the true cost will be at least 829 B + 2,000B + 397B = 3.2 Trillion.

The reason it&#039;s low is that if you take Medicare out of the equation, the cost is 2,900 per person per new covered life (in other words, the 829B must be low by a factor of 2).  The current Medicarie budget is 420 B for about 50 million covered lives, or about 8,000 per person p.a., and it is HEAVILY subsized by private industry because Medicare only pays about 82% of true costs.  So they are telling us that the cost per person will be reduced by 64% per person.  SURE it will.  And Bill Ayers didn&#039;t mean it either.

My understated 3.2 Trillion is about 4,200 per taxpaying taxpayer every year.  For two-income families that&#039;s 8,400 per year.....and up.....forever.....to insure 29,000,000 people who already have medical care.  (but to be honest, 60% of that is increased medicare costs, which they falsely assume will actually decrease, even though the baby boomers are aging and people are living longer.)

And this is the cheap bill.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Of course, the whole thing is a fantasy.</p>
<p>But here is the breakdown teased out of the garbly-gook:</p>
<p>New Taxes (treated as &#8220;income&#8221; to the government:):<br />
&#8230;..201 B&#8230;&#8230;New excise tax on insurance policies (avg about $300 annually per family)<br />
&#8230;..196 B&#8230;&#8230;&#8221;Other provisions&#8221;.  i.e., Taxes.  (Avg about $300 annually per family)</p>
<p>Service Reductions (Treated as &#8220;cost reductions&#8221;):<br />
&#8230;..404 B&#8230;..Medicare reductions (avg about $100 per year per Medicare recipient)<br />
&#8230;..110 B&#8230;..Savings from &#8220;other sources&#8221;</p>
<p>New Costs:<br />
&#8230;..829 B&#8230;.Credits and subsidies, Medicaid and Chips costs</p>
<p>Observations:<br />
- Medicare has gone up by 9% annually forever.  Now they claim 1/2 billion in savings.  Zero chance.  Real growth will be more than 9% because the baby boomers are coming online.<br />
- 397 billion in new taxes<br />
- 829 billion in new costs over 10 years for 29 million people.  $2858 per year per new covered life.  This is laughably low.  The only policy you could buy for that would be a $20,000 deductable policy, and that wouldn&#8217;t count the costs of deductables and co-pays</p>
<p>Proreason&#8217;s analysis:</p>
<p>- the 829 B cost will be at least 1,600 B<br />
- the 514 B in cost reductions won&#8217;t happen.  Medicare is projected at 420B in 2009.  Over 10 years, if we assume an unrealistically low growth factor of 6%, cost will increase by 2 trillion (2,000 Billion)<br />
- the 397 B in new taxes is low, because tax estimates are ALWAYS low, but I&#8217;ll leave it as is</p>
<p>Conclusion, the true cost will be at least 829 B + 2,000B + 397B = 3.2 Trillion.</p>
<p>The reason it&#8217;s low is that if you take Medicare out of the equation, the cost is 2,900 per person per new covered life (in other words, the 829B must be low by a factor of 2).  The current Medicarie budget is 420 B for about 50 million covered lives, or about 8,000 per person p.a., and it is HEAVILY subsized by private industry because Medicare only pays about 82% of true costs.  So they are telling us that the cost per person will be reduced by 64% per person.  SURE it will.  And Bill Ayers didn&#8217;t mean it either.</p>
<p>My understated 3.2 Trillion is about 4,200 per taxpaying taxpayer every year.  For two-income families that&#8217;s 8,400 per year&#8230;..and up&#8230;..forever&#8230;..to insure 29,000,000 people who already have medical care.  (but to be honest, 60% of that is increased medicare costs, which they falsely assume will actually decrease, even though the baby boomers are aging and people are living longer.)</p>
<p>And this is the cheap bill.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason Gillman</title>
		<link>http://sweetness-light.com/archive/what-cbo-really-said-about-baucus-plan#comment-163529</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason Gillman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2009 17:45:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sweetness-light.com/archive/what-cbo-really-said-about-baucus-plan#comment-163529</guid>
		<description>here&#039;s the bottom line..  CBO says it will result in lowering of the Deficit.

Which isn&#039;t lying..  if the bill it examined is what will pass..  even given the incredible penalties and NEW Taxes included..  But...  there WILL be a public option added, and it will be done as stealthily as can be.

THEN..  there is a concern that Illegals will STILL be able to get in as being part of the &quot;population,&quot; rather than separated as non citizens..

Same poo.. different day</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>here&#8217;s the bottom line..  CBO says it will result in lowering of the Deficit.</p>
<p>Which isn&#8217;t lying..  if the bill it examined is what will pass..  even given the incredible penalties and NEW Taxes included..  But&#8230;  there WILL be a public option added, and it will be done as stealthily as can be.</p>
<p>THEN..  there is a concern that Illegals will STILL be able to get in as being part of the &#8220;population,&#8221; rather than separated as non citizens..</p>
<p>Same poo.. different day</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: P. Aaron</title>
		<link>http://sweetness-light.com/archive/what-cbo-really-said-about-baucus-plan#comment-163527</link>
		<dc:creator>P. Aaron</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2009 17:01:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sweetness-light.com/archive/what-cbo-really-said-about-baucus-plan#comment-163527</guid>
		<description>But IF, any government agency used REAL ACCOUNTING PRACTICES that private businesses have to use, the bill would be recognized for the fecal matter it is.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>But IF, any government agency used REAL ACCOUNTING PRACTICES that private businesses have to use, the bill would be recognized for the fecal matter it is.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

