June 15, 200917 yr Will cost over 1 trillion dollars. The bigger blow to the left is that it will only move a little over 16 million of the uninsured to the insured side of the ledger. So for $1T we still have 30 million without insurance... Government spending at its finest. With those kind of numbers, it will never pass (thank goodness). No link yet, but reported on CNN.
June 16, 200917 yr Will cost over 1 trillion dollars. The bigger blow to the left is that it will only move a little over 16 million of the uninsured to the insured side of the ledger. So for $1T we still have 30 million without insurance... Government spending at its finest. With those kind of numbers, it will never pass (thank goodness). No link yet, but reported on CNN. That computes to $62,500 per person for health insurance. Sounds like a great idea to me.
June 16, 200917 yr Here is the link.... http://www.foxbusiness.com/story/markets/cbo-issues-preliminary-report-cost-health-care-reform/
June 16, 200917 yr Author Here is the link.... http://www.foxbusiness.com/story/markets/cbo-issues-preliminary-report-cost-health-care-reform/ Thank you sir.:thumb: Let's see how far deep this is buried in the NY Times tomorrow...
June 17, 200917 yr Did no one else read the actual letter from the CBO and see the disclaimer saying that the figures do NOT represent a formal or complete estimate of the draft?
June 17, 200917 yr For $300 billion, we could insure 30 million people at a cost of $10,000 per person (which is high for single coverage health insurance), ... yet Kennedy would have a plan spending $1 trillion and leaving 30 million with no coverage? Simply remarkable. What a brilliant way to spend taxpayers dollars! :ohbrother:
June 17, 200917 yr Author Did no one else read the actual letter from the CBO and see the disclaimer saying that the figures do NOT represent a formal or complete estimate of the draft? Right. So you can probably expect their conservative estimate to increase... Of course this is not complete, but I am sure it is in the ball park, and it is a ridiculous amount of money for those type of results.
June 17, 200917 yr Did no one else read the actual letter from the CBO and see the disclaimer saying that the figures do NOT represent a formal or complete estimate of the draft? True, but how much blooming sense does it make to use the analysis as a starting point in the debate on health care reform if the numbers aren't accurate? Seems rather stupid to me.
June 18, 200917 yr True, but how much blooming sense does it make to use the analysis as a starting point in the debate on health care reform if the numbers aren't accurate? Seems rather stupid to me. That's what I didn't get. Why put out a report and then say "but hey we didn't take everything into account?"
June 18, 200917 yr Right. So you can probably expect their conservative estimate to increase... Of course this is not complete, but I am sure it is in the ball park, and it is a ridiculous amount of money for those type of results. So did you not see the bottom part of the story when you put this out as fact/gospel?
June 18, 200917 yr Author So did you not see the bottom part of the story when you put this out as fact/gospel? I did not put it out. The CBO did and CNN... As the title of my topic says, CBO releases information on Kennedy health plan. What are you disputing? Do you believe that these estimates are going to be off by let's be conservative and say 200 billion dollars and double the number of people covered. Still seem reasonable to you to pay 1.4T for 32 million people and still 20 million people left uncovered... My point was stated at the end of my first post. Government spending at its finest... Next...
June 18, 200917 yr That's what I didn't get. Why put out a report and then say "but hey we didn't take everything into account?" I have to assume that they want to start easing the shock to the taxpayers. I do agree with Gunner that based on past actions of the federal govt, this thing will cost more than these preliminary estimates, ala the Iraqi war cost, the bailout cost, etc., etc. Can you ever remember a time when the actual cost of some federal program came in lower than early estimates? Perhaps its happened, but I can't remember when it happened. Thus, I think Gunner has a legit concern and I have a feeling, if you were being completely forthright, you would be of the opinion that that the costs will be much higher than these early estimates. Who knows, maybe those "smart" politicians intentionally skewered the numbers that CBO is reporting to be high, so that when the actual numbers come in, the politicians can say "see, it wasn't as high as every one got lathered up about" and instead of it costing a trillion dollars with 16 million new people covered, it will be 16.2 million people. I think it would be naive on any one's part not to think that this progam will be ridiculously expensive and that everyone, including those middle class Americans that Obama made a promise do while campaigning, are going to be paying for it one way or the other. I understand the compassion support of this program, but at some point in time, we as a country, have to start thinking about whether we, through govt programs, can actually afford to take care of everyone in this country that either won't or can't take care of themselves. Did the founders of our country ever imagine the federal govt playing this role and having this power?
June 18, 200917 yr I did not put it out. The CBO did and CNN... As the title of my topic says, CBO releases information on Kennedy health plan. What are you disputing? Do you believe that these estimates are going to be off by let's be conservative and say 200 billion dollars and double the number of people covered. Still seem reasonable to you to pay 1.4T for 32 million people and still 20 million people left uncovered... My point was stated at the end of my first post. Government spending at its finest... Next... What am I disputing? I'm not technically disputing anything. I'm saying that if you read the link there's a HUGE qualifier at the bottom that completely makes the "claim" nothing more than a guess. When the CBO reviews the FINAL draft and then does their study we'll have a story. When they essentially say "don't take this as gospel because we haven't really looked at the final document" its a waste of time to debate it. Could they be right? Sure. Just like you could be right despite not having anything to substantiate your bet.
June 18, 200917 yr I have to assume that they want to start easing the shock to the taxpayers. I do agree with Gunner that based on past actions of the federal govt, this thing will cost more than these preliminary estimates, ala the Iraqi war cost, the bailout cost, etc., etc. Can you ever remember a time when the actual cost of some federal program came in lower than early estimates? Perhaps its happened, but I can't remember when it happened. Thus, I think Gunner has a legit concern and I have a feeling, if you were being completely forthright, you would be of the opinion that that the costs will be much higher than these early estimates. Who knows, maybe those "smart" politicians intentionally skewered the numbers that CBO is reporting to be high, so that when the actual numbers come in, the politicians can say "see, it wasn't as high as every one got lathered up about" and instead of it costing a trillion dollars with 16 million new people covered, it will be 16.2 million people. I think it would be naive on any one's part not to think that this progam will be ridiculously expensive and that everyone, including those middle class Americans that Obama made a promise do while campaigning, are going to be paying for it one way or the other. I understand the compassion support of this program, but at some point in time, we as a country, have to start thinking about whether we, through govt programs, can actually afford to take care of everyone in this country that either won't or can't take care of themselves. Did the founders of our country ever imagine the federal govt playing this role and having this power? There is no disputing that the cost is high/expensive. However, until we have any info to show an ROI what do we have?
June 18, 200917 yr Daschle has urged the President to drop the public option fearing that it will not pass. http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2009/06/daschle-folds-on-federal-public-health-care-plan.html
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.