USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
Obama 10: Rahm it through.....even in the shower.
- Thread starter Plante26
- Start date
- Status
Re: Obama 10: Rahm it through.....even in the shower.
We also have to remember the CBO doesn't have much leeway on how they score a bill. They have to rely heavily on input from Congress, even if that input is based upon assumptions that have very little (if anything) to support them. The party in control can heavily influence the result they want to see from the CBO by providing what to any reasonable person are bogus assumptions.
Re: Obama 10: Rahm it through.....even in the shower.
Their profit margins were 7.5% this year. But like you said it's not capital intensive other then managing cashflow - payout. In one hand the profit margin doesn't look outrageous, but if the cashflow/payout ratio has changed from 90% to 80% in the last 10 years as reported. you've to wonder where that money is going.
Their profit margins were 7.5% this year. But like you said it's not capital intensive other then managing cashflow - payout. In one hand the profit margin doesn't look outrageous, but if the cashflow/payout ratio has changed from 90% to 80% in the last 10 years as reported. you've to wonder where that money is going.
Re: Obama 10: Rahm it through.....even in the shower.
Ummm.....as the CBO says, the next 10 years = 1.2T in savings.
Ummm.....as the CBO says, the next 10 years = 1.2T in savings.
Patman
Rodent of Unusual Size
Re: Obama 10: Rahm it through.....even in the shower.
so, if policies are getting more expensive that should mean its time for new people to enter the market... right? right? right? I mean, if the money is there then it should be easy, right? What would stop them?
---
Rover, do you really believe in your heart of hearts this is going to save money in the end? You know it won't... its not about savings to you or rufus... its your moral power play to show that you're not evil like those evil people. The only economists that think this is a good idea have the last name "Krugman" or are directly affiliated with Democratic party think tanks.
Here's one part to start with... doctors are already suggesting they are going to retire en masse. Does that increase or decrease the price of medicine?
Here's another one. The next topic is amnesty. This increases demand but even if it didn't it increases the number of people to cover. Does that increase or decrease the overall costs?
These shouldn't be hard and you won't have to wait for the Democrats to feed in idealistic inputs for you.
so, if policies are getting more expensive that should mean its time for new people to enter the market... right? right? right? I mean, if the money is there then it should be easy, right? What would stop them?
---
Rover, do you really believe in your heart of hearts this is going to save money in the end? You know it won't... its not about savings to you or rufus... its your moral power play to show that you're not evil like those evil people. The only economists that think this is a good idea have the last name "Krugman" or are directly affiliated with Democratic party think tanks.
Here's one part to start with... doctors are already suggesting they are going to retire en masse. Does that increase or decrease the price of medicine?
Here's another one. The next topic is amnesty. This increases demand but even if it didn't it increases the number of people to cover. Does that increase or decrease the overall costs?
These shouldn't be hard and you won't have to wait for the Democrats to feed in idealistic inputs for you.
Last edited:
walrus
Wind up workin' in a gas station
Re: Obama 10: Rahm it through.....even in the shower.
Preliminary estimates are so useful
Preliminary estimates are so useful
Re: Obama 10: Rahm it through.....even in the shower.
Well there it is. Case closed, end of debate, it's over. The CBO says it: so it is written, so too shall it come to pass.
I'm not against significant health care reform, but I just don't believe the CBO's prediction. Government financial projections when it comes to an completely new, unproven, untested program can't be taken at face value.
Well there it is. Case closed, end of debate, it's over. The CBO says it: so it is written, so too shall it come to pass.
I'm not against significant health care reform, but I just don't believe the CBO's prediction. Government financial projections when it comes to an completely new, unproven, untested program can't be taken at face value.
Re: Obama 10: Rahm it through.....even in the shower.
Anybody with experience with CBO estimates knows this...that some quote them as gospel only demonstrates the degree to which they will believe anything that can be put forth to support their position.
Anybody with experience with CBO estimates knows this...that some quote them as gospel only demonstrates the degree to which they will believe anything that can be put forth to support their position.
Re: Obama 10: Rahm it through.....even in the shower.
Having worked in budgeting and forecasting for some time now, while I'm guessing many of you don't, I can tell you "No $H!t" about how its tough to forecast down the road. However, it doesn't mean you don't get a good deal of insight from doing so. The CBO tends to be conservative in its outlook and most likely are at this point.
But, let me counter ScottM, Patman, pirate and Colby. What estimate from whom DO you believe, and secondly, do you think that because future numbers are never set in stone we should just do nothing ever because nobody can truly predict the future with 100% accuracy (makes me wonder why you all bothered laying out money for a college education then).
Patman - yes, it will save money much like Clinton deficit reduction bill actually reduced the deficit (recall the same knuckledragger arguments and lack of support on that one also). In fact, strenuous GOP opposition can be traced to this point. If it passes and does what it said it would, your party is officially DOA.
As far as doctors retiring, that's amusing. So, instead of making 250K a year, they're going to retire because they only make 200K instead. Yeah - most people should have such problems.
Lastly, if by amnesty you mean illegal immigrants becoming naturalized, there's no effort to do that, and this bill bans illegal immigrants from getting subsidized coverage. Given those facts, I can assume you're support?
Having worked in budgeting and forecasting for some time now, while I'm guessing many of you don't, I can tell you "No $H!t" about how its tough to forecast down the road. However, it doesn't mean you don't get a good deal of insight from doing so. The CBO tends to be conservative in its outlook and most likely are at this point.
But, let me counter ScottM, Patman, pirate and Colby. What estimate from whom DO you believe, and secondly, do you think that because future numbers are never set in stone we should just do nothing ever because nobody can truly predict the future with 100% accuracy (makes me wonder why you all bothered laying out money for a college education then).
Patman - yes, it will save money much like Clinton deficit reduction bill actually reduced the deficit (recall the same knuckledragger arguments and lack of support on that one also). In fact, strenuous GOP opposition can be traced to this point. If it passes and does what it said it would, your party is officially DOA.
As far as doctors retiring, that's amusing. So, instead of making 250K a year, they're going to retire because they only make 200K instead. Yeah - most people should have such problems.
Lastly, if by amnesty you mean illegal immigrants becoming naturalized, there's no effort to do that, and this bill bans illegal immigrants from getting subsidized coverage. Given those facts, I can assume you're support?
Re: Obama 10: Rahm it through.....even in the shower.
I don't support doing "nothing ever because nobody can truly predict the future with 100% accuracy". In fact, I said I am in NOT AGAINST significant health care reform in my last post. Since my post was very short, I don't know how you could have missed this, unless you simply stop reading the minute you come across something that doesn't follow 100% with your personal viewpoints.
My response came due to your condescending ("Ummm.....") answer to a reasonable budgetary concern. "Duh...it'll save money. LOOK! The CBO says so!" was the gist of your post. Sorry if I'm just not as confident as you are in this coming true, given the track record of government projections at the local, state and national level on things that we have experience in doing--let alone in an area we don't.
I know you want to take the CBO's numbers at face value, as it is in line of what you'd like to be true, and is in line with the political ideology you support. Truth be told, it's in line with what I'd like to be true as well. I'm just not as willing to ignore the reality that budgetary projections are often way, way off...and using them to ease legitimate concerns about health care cost is kind of silly. You may as well predict which way a football will bounce, too.
I don't support doing "nothing ever because nobody can truly predict the future with 100% accuracy". In fact, I said I am in NOT AGAINST significant health care reform in my last post. Since my post was very short, I don't know how you could have missed this, unless you simply stop reading the minute you come across something that doesn't follow 100% with your personal viewpoints.
My response came due to your condescending ("Ummm.....") answer to a reasonable budgetary concern. "Duh...it'll save money. LOOK! The CBO says so!" was the gist of your post. Sorry if I'm just not as confident as you are in this coming true, given the track record of government projections at the local, state and national level on things that we have experience in doing--let alone in an area we don't.
I know you want to take the CBO's numbers at face value, as it is in line of what you'd like to be true, and is in line with the political ideology you support. Truth be told, it's in line with what I'd like to be true as well. I'm just not as willing to ignore the reality that budgetary projections are often way, way off...and using them to ease legitimate concerns about health care cost is kind of silly. You may as well predict which way a football will bounce, too.
Re: Obama 10: Rahm it through.....even in the shower.
Colby, you're following the same tactic as anti-reformers though, even if you do indeed want reform to happen. That does no good.
Here's what it sounds like from you. We can't trust the CBO (or anybody apparently) so lets not do this particular bill. Great, then what do you want to do? That's the question none of the delay/stop/start from the beginning crowd never seems to get around to answering. So, I'll put that question directly to you.
Next, because apparently you missed this, what many people like myself has said repeatedly is that if something needs adjusting down the road, you do it. Its not a constitutional amendment that will take 2/3rd of Congress and 3/4ths of states to change.
Lastly, the idea that forecast predictions are the same as predicting a football bouncing is what I'd expect out of a simpleton Sarah Palin type person. Unlike a random bounce, you can control the direction of these things in the CBO estimate. Lets say the CBO is off 20%. Great - that still means over 1 trillion in deficit reduction. Why would anybody in their right mind be against something like that with such a large margin of error that still puts this bill way in the black?
Anywhere you go, business, govt etc, there's always the "oh well - I'd like to support this but we don't know what might happen later" crowd. These people are useless. If everybody thought like them, we'd all still be sitting in caves trying to figure out if rocks were edible, which pretty much sums up modern day conservative thought.
Colby, you're following the same tactic as anti-reformers though, even if you do indeed want reform to happen. That does no good.
Here's what it sounds like from you. We can't trust the CBO (or anybody apparently) so lets not do this particular bill. Great, then what do you want to do? That's the question none of the delay/stop/start from the beginning crowd never seems to get around to answering. So, I'll put that question directly to you.
Next, because apparently you missed this, what many people like myself has said repeatedly is that if something needs adjusting down the road, you do it. Its not a constitutional amendment that will take 2/3rd of Congress and 3/4ths of states to change.
Lastly, the idea that forecast predictions are the same as predicting a football bouncing is what I'd expect out of a simpleton Sarah Palin type person. Unlike a random bounce, you can control the direction of these things in the CBO estimate. Lets say the CBO is off 20%. Great - that still means over 1 trillion in deficit reduction. Why would anybody in their right mind be against something like that with such a large margin of error that still puts this bill way in the black?
Anywhere you go, business, govt etc, there's always the "oh well - I'd like to support this but we don't know what might happen later" crowd. These people are useless. If everybody thought like them, we'd all still be sitting in caves trying to figure out if rocks were edible, which pretty much sums up modern day conservative thought.
ScottM
**** it feels good to be a bankster
Re: Obama 10: Rahm it through.....even in the shower.
If the proponents of "reform" agree to some sort of clawback of their paychecks, pensions and other monies if the CBO numbers are too low, I'd be happy to agree with them. However, by the time these numbers finally hit the budget most of the current MOC will be off lobbying or dead, and we'll be stuck with the result.
And to be clear, if you can take off your partisan glasses for a minute, I don't disagree that the current health system needs a lot of work to provide better access and lower costs. However, I don't really see this bill as addressing those issues over the long-term, and the political expediency exhibited by all sides the past few weeks makes me retch.
If the proponents of "reform" agree to some sort of clawback of their paychecks, pensions and other monies if the CBO numbers are too low, I'd be happy to agree with them. However, by the time these numbers finally hit the budget most of the current MOC will be off lobbying or dead, and we'll be stuck with the result.
And to be clear, if you can take off your partisan glasses for a minute, I don't disagree that the current health system needs a lot of work to provide better access and lower costs. However, I don't really see this bill as addressing those issues over the long-term, and the political expediency exhibited by all sides the past few weeks makes me retch.
Re: Obama 10: Rahm it through.....even in the shower.
Right. I don't blindly trust the people who tell me what I want to hear and equally blindly discard the people who give me bad news. I try to look at the big picture, not just hold a partisan "WE wanna do this and nothing will stop US, no matter what anyone says" mentality that so prevails in government (Iraq War, health care, etc). Indeed, I am guilty as charged.
Right. I don't blindly trust the people who tell me what I want to hear and equally blindly discard the people who give me bad news. I try to look at the big picture, not just hold a partisan "WE wanna do this and nothing will stop US, no matter what anyone says" mentality that so prevails in government (Iraq War, health care, etc). Indeed, I am guilty as charged.
Last edited:
Re: Obama 10: Rahm it through.....even in the shower.
And nothing in this paragraph says what you do support, and roughly how much it would save. Just a vague "I support reform" Great. What specifically?
And nothing in this paragraph says what you do support, and roughly how much it would save. Just a vague "I support reform" Great. What specifically?
And nothing in this paragraph says what you do support, and roughly how much it would save. Just a vague "I support reform" Great. What specifically?
And nothing in this paragraph says what you do support, and roughly how much it would save. Just a vague "I support reform" Great. What specifically?
ScottM
**** it feels good to be a bankster
Re: Obama 10: Rahm it through.....even in the shower.
I can say I don't support the extra $100M+ cost hitting Caterpillar's bottom line the first year as a result of this "reform". But hey, it's just money, and maybe jobs, right?
I can say I don't support the extra $100M+ cost hitting Caterpillar's bottom line the first year as a result of this "reform". But hey, it's just money, and maybe jobs, right?
Re: Obama 10: Rahm it through.....even in the shower.
Sacrasm aside, I still put the question to you. Where do you stand? Simply put, we don't live in a world where everything we'd like to see is going to end up in the bill. Here is the reality of the situation:
You either pass this specific bill, or you live with the system as it is for another generation. Its no more complicated than that. The idea that you "start over" is false. Starting over = nothing gets done. Either something happens now, or it doesn't for decades. Trying to prove your intellectual heft by pointing out this and that which you don't like is a wimpy cop out. I'm sure there are these great mythical solutions to the problem which everybody seems to have yet nobody puts forth. So, what are they, and what hope do they have of actually getting enacted. Politics is the art of the possible, not pie-in-the-sky dreaming. My position is clear. Not only is this better than the current situation, it puts in motion the ability to keep tinkering with health care to continually improve it. That's the real test.
I can say I don't support the extra $100M+ cost hitting Caterpillar's bottom line the first year as a result of this "reform". But hey, it's just money, and maybe jobs, right?
Sacrasm aside, I still put the question to you. Where do you stand? Simply put, we don't live in a world where everything we'd like to see is going to end up in the bill. Here is the reality of the situation:
You either pass this specific bill, or you live with the system as it is for another generation. Its no more complicated than that. The idea that you "start over" is false. Starting over = nothing gets done. Either something happens now, or it doesn't for decades. Trying to prove your intellectual heft by pointing out this and that which you don't like is a wimpy cop out. I'm sure there are these great mythical solutions to the problem which everybody seems to have yet nobody puts forth. So, what are they, and what hope do they have of actually getting enacted. Politics is the art of the possible, not pie-in-the-sky dreaming. My position is clear. Not only is this better than the current situation, it puts in motion the ability to keep tinkering with health care to continually improve it. That's the real test.
Re: Obama 10: Rahm it through.....even in the shower.
That's funny, a majority of Americans polled say exactly where they stand and yet it is ignored, anyway. Does it matter?
You claim nothing will get done if this is passed. That may be better than trillions of dollars more in debt passed to 95% of the population in order to fill a estimated health care gap for 10% of the population. What about the damage to Medicare? So, where is this open dialog Obama promised in order to review tort reform ideas and other Repub plans that are being dismissed? You think a token one week conference is a fair allowance for this debate?
It also may weaken an already poor economy further, regardless of the claims by lib/dems that this bill will actually reduce the deficit. That doesn't include thousands of jobs lost in the insurance industry.
This is a recipe for disaster and the president and his party are cutting backdoor deals to ram it through. Disgusting display of politics and usurping of what the American public truly wants. Keep up the fine work of thumbing the nose at the people and telling them that the politicians know what is better for America than what the people know. The marginalizing of democracy continues.
That's funny, a majority of Americans polled say exactly where they stand and yet it is ignored, anyway. Does it matter?
You claim nothing will get done if this is passed. That may be better than trillions of dollars more in debt passed to 95% of the population in order to fill a estimated health care gap for 10% of the population. What about the damage to Medicare? So, where is this open dialog Obama promised in order to review tort reform ideas and other Repub plans that are being dismissed? You think a token one week conference is a fair allowance for this debate?
It also may weaken an already poor economy further, regardless of the claims by lib/dems that this bill will actually reduce the deficit. That doesn't include thousands of jobs lost in the insurance industry.
This is a recipe for disaster and the president and his party are cutting backdoor deals to ram it through. Disgusting display of politics and usurping of what the American public truly wants. Keep up the fine work of thumbing the nose at the people and telling them that the politicians know what is better for America than what the people know. The marginalizing of democracy continues.
Re: Obama 10: Rahm it through.....even in the shower.
I'd rather stay on the subject I wrote about, if you don't mind, which was your dismissive "Ummm...the CBO says" response to the concern of the financial cost of the current health care initiative. If you'll recall, the point I was making was that many poeple who have formed a strong opinion on a subject (like you) simply accept the sources that tell them they want to hear while skewering the ones who tell them the opposite. Whether or not there is any meat to the source is secondary; their agreement with the message is first and foremost what makes them validate the information or dismiss it. That's what I believe you did, and I identified it as such. And I don't care if you see that or don't, but I'm sure I'm not the only one who observed it.
As far as my position, I'll be 100% honest. You're not a guy I'd discuss politics with, at least not online. I've seen enough of your posts to form the opinion that you rarely consider anyone's viewpoint, and you don't engage in any productive give and take. You're hardly alone in that mentality, which is why I rarely do more than lurk in these threads, but forgive me if I don't feel obligated or inclined to list out my positions on political issues for your (ahem) "consideration". I'd be better served to play tennis for an hour with a backboard; metaphorically, I'd accomplish the same thing.
I'd rather stay on the subject I wrote about, if you don't mind, which was your dismissive "Ummm...the CBO says" response to the concern of the financial cost of the current health care initiative. If you'll recall, the point I was making was that many poeple who have formed a strong opinion on a subject (like you) simply accept the sources that tell them they want to hear while skewering the ones who tell them the opposite. Whether or not there is any meat to the source is secondary; their agreement with the message is first and foremost what makes them validate the information or dismiss it. That's what I believe you did, and I identified it as such. And I don't care if you see that or don't, but I'm sure I'm not the only one who observed it.
As far as my position, I'll be 100% honest. You're not a guy I'd discuss politics with, at least not online. I've seen enough of your posts to form the opinion that you rarely consider anyone's viewpoint, and you don't engage in any productive give and take. You're hardly alone in that mentality, which is why I rarely do more than lurk in these threads, but forgive me if I don't feel obligated or inclined to list out my positions on political issues for your (ahem) "consideration". I'd be better served to play tennis for an hour with a backboard; metaphorically, I'd accomplish the same thing.
Last edited:
Re: Obama 10: Rahm it through.....even in the shower.
The problem with your analysis is that the CBO is an independent arbitrator in all of this. I'm dismissive (and you should be too) of a Heritage Foundation study being held as having equal authenticity. As far as the CBO telling me what I want to hear, they've giving to my knowledge the only unbiased analysis out there. That their conclusion backs up the Dem position doesn't mean it should now be discredited. Fact, is if they had said this doesn't reduce the deficit, the bill would have been sunk. They are the most credible source of info on this subject, unless you'd care to throw a different source out there.
To your second point, no offense but it wreaks of timidity. As I said earlier, reality is simple choice. Pass this bill as is despite its imperfections, or keep the status quo. Anybody who can't opine on that is a waste of bandwith on this thread. Why? Because that's the real life choice facing the country.
The problem with your analysis is that the CBO is an independent arbitrator in all of this. I'm dismissive (and you should be too) of a Heritage Foundation study being held as having equal authenticity. As far as the CBO telling me what I want to hear, they've giving to my knowledge the only unbiased analysis out there. That their conclusion backs up the Dem position doesn't mean it should now be discredited. Fact, is if they had said this doesn't reduce the deficit, the bill would have been sunk. They are the most credible source of info on this subject, unless you'd care to throw a different source out there.
To your second point, no offense but it wreaks of timidity. As I said earlier, reality is simple choice. Pass this bill as is despite its imperfections, or keep the status quo. Anybody who can't opine on that is a waste of bandwith on this thread. Why? Because that's the real life choice facing the country.
- Status