Two things on the bolded. Politicians have no true idea what is going to happen in 10 years let alone 20 years from now in spending costs.

 

And the parties that are put into power over the next 10-20 years is going to tweak this thing like crazy and make any projections irrelevant.

 

When anyone begins talking about 10 to 20 years ago based on what a politician or report says, they need to give a serious consideration on how the political/economic climate is going to change and that it is not realistic numbers.

 

Based on that logic we would never do anything. When you start any endeavor, all you can do is take your best shot and be ready when changes are needed. I think that the cited report makes health care reform look like a GREAT bargain. We expand coverage by close to 15 percent and expand costs by less than 1 percent. I'll take that deal on almost anything.

Based on that logic we would never do anything. When you start any endeavor, all you can do is take your best shot and be ready when changes are needed. I think that the cited report makes health care reform look like a GREAT bargain. We expand coverage by close to 15 percent and expand costs by less than 1 percent. I'll take that deal on almost anything.

 

Except that it is not true.

 

I have bridge overlooking the ocean in Arizona that you can pay me a million dollars for. (What a bargain)

Except that it is not true.

 

I have bridge overlooking the ocean in Arizona that you can pay me a million dollars for. (What a bargain)

 

If the report that is getting everyone's panties in a wad isn't true, why cite it in the first place? It may not be true. Health care costs may go down more than they think. And I don't want a bridge in Canad. Someone might mistake me for an illegal Canadian and ask for my papers.

If the report that is getting everyone's panties in a wad isn't true, why cite it in the first place? It may not be true. Health care costs may go down more than they think. And I don't want a bridge in Canad. Someone might mistake me for an illegal Canadian and ask for my papers.

 

Nothing goes down in our country except our collective IQ.

 

This is another government entitlement program, but the time is coming when the payors say that is it, and charitites will be finished and we can find out who can fend for themselves.

Two things on the bolded. Politicians have no true idea what is going to happen in 10 years let alone 20 years from now in spending costs.

 

And the parties that are put into power over the next 10-20 years is going to tweak this thing like crazy and make any projections irrelevant.

 

When anyone begins talking about 10 to 20 years ago based on what a politician or report says, they need to give a serious consideration on how the political/economic climate is going to change and that it is not realistic numbers.

 

I agree that it is extremely difficult to assess. But to make any assessment of a policy there has to be an approximation based on the information available now. But, if we fear future politicians repealing the cuts this bill entails, then we have a much bigger problem with politicians than we do with this bill.

Based on that logic we would never do anything. When you start any endeavor, all you can do is take your best shot and be ready when changes are needed. I think that the cited report makes health care reform look like a GREAT bargain. We expand coverage by close to 15 percent and expand costs by less than 1 percent. I'll take that deal on almost anything.

 

Never said that we shouldn't try and do things. Gracious.

 

Just said when people start spouting off what it is going to cost in 10 to 20 years, I laugh because they have no clue.

I agree that it is extremely difficult to assess. But to make any assessment of a policy there has to be an approximation based on the information available now. But, if we fear future politicians repealing the cuts this bill entails, then we have a much bigger problem with politicians than we do with this bill.

 

We have politicians in this country and not leaders. Simple problem, complex solutions.

If the report that is getting everyone's panties in a wad isn't true, why cite it in the first place? It may not be true. Health care costs may go down more than they think. And I don't want a bridge in Canad. Someone might mistake me for an illegal Canadian and ask for my papers.

 

You seem to be pretty knowledgeable on government, can you name a single program that ever came in under the original cost estimates? Shoot, I'd settle for one that was over by only 10 percent within the first 10 year period. Not saying they don't exist, I'd just love to know of one.

You seem to be pretty knowledgeable on government, can you name a single program that ever came in under the original cost estimates? Shoot, I'd settle for one that was over by only 10 percent within the first 10 year period. Not saying they don't exist, I'd just love to know of one.

 

Didn't the government never fund No Child Left Behind? Kept hearing that all the time. So, if they didn't fund it and instead left the local districts pay for the requirements put on them by a BIPARISIAN bill, guess it didn't go over.