RE: CBO report on Health Care costs

RE: CBO report on Health Care costs (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Mercnbeth -> RE: CBO report on Health Care costs (3/18/2010 1:05:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl no, silly, the assumptions you and willbe are making is that someone here is posting how incredible, insightful, or some such nonsense when no one has said that at all, least of all me. so take that cup of kool-aide and shove it. [:D] maybe as an enema, you might actually start to relax. The quality, manner, and subject of your response is indicative of the position of those having no intelligent argument in support of the this Bill. I have never been more "relaxed" and confident on the decisions I've made in anticipation of the actions taken by this administration. The results can be summarized by - I told you so. Your agenda based ignorance notwithstanding, I blame myself for expecting anything else. I am at fault for coming back to post relevant facts into the so called "political forum" which is, in reality a cesspool of comments such as yours. You obviously love residing in a cesspool - so enjoy!

ThatDamnedPanda -> RE: CBO report on Health Care costs (3/18/2010 1:14:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy Two votes for the bill were lost AFTER the publication of the CBO report. Who?

willbeurdaddy -> RE: CBO report on Health Care costs (3/18/2010 1:38:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy Two votes for the bill were lost AFTER the publication of the CBO report. Who? One from NY, One from VT. I forget the names. Edit: NY was Arcuri.

rulemylife -> RE: CBO report on Health Care costs (3/18/2010 2:16:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy There is no bill to cost. The CBO report is an estimate, not an official scoring, and has so many caveats that its meaningless. You know it's funny. I agree with you about the CBO estimates. They are notoriously inaccurate because it is impossible to make such far-reaching predictions. Yet when they estimate budget numbers all the conservatives jump on the band wagon to say how Obama's budget deficits will ruin the country. Yet when there is something that opposes your views then the CBO reports are "meaningless".

pahunkboy -> RE: CBO report on Health Care costs (3/18/2010 2:20:06 PM)
another thing they could do is make bankruptcy easier. being wiped out- is the crux of the matter- so why not address THAT part of it? Nevermind. Few here would see the logic in this.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: CBO report on Health Care costs (3/18/2010 2:25:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda quote: the bill would cut the deficit by $130 billion during the first decade. And it would reduce the deficit by another $1.2 trillion in the following decade, the source said That might be ballgame right there. The total cost is a bit higher than hoped, but with that amount of deficit reduction, it meets enough of the fundamental criteria that it should swing the vote. They were only 11 short, and this should be a big enough lever to pry 11 loose. And the key is, by lowering the deficit, it legitimizes the use of reconciliation. Now the reconciliation process is being used to lower the deficit. Except it doesnt really lower the deficit overall, it just shifts costs from Federal to State (all the CBO costs is Federal) or cuts medicare benefits.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: CBO report on Health Care costs (3/18/2010 2:29:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy Mayo Clinic pays medical doctors a fixed salary that is unaffected by patient volume. This practice is thought to decrease the monetary motivation to see patients in large numbers and increase the incentive to spend more time with individuals. Salaries are determined by the marketplace salaries for physicians in comparable large group practices. I hope you didnt post this thinking that it could actually work on a large scale without raising health care costs.

Musicmystery -> RE: CBO report on Health Care costs (3/18/2010 3:08:20 PM)
quote: I hope you didnt post this thinking that it could actually work on a large scale without raising health care costs. This depends on the existing regional health care. Some will see costs drop (MA, NY, similar states) and some will see costs rise (Alabama, Mississippi, similar states).

rulemylife -> RE: CBO report on Health Care costs (3/18/2010 3:16:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy another thing they could do is make bankruptcy easier. being wiped out- is the crux of the matter- so why not address THAT part of it? Nevermind. Few here would see the logic in this. You would have to elaborate on that PA. Bankruptcy is never a good thing for anybody, the people who owe money or the people who are owed money, so why would you want to make it easier?

pahunkboy -> RE: CBO report on Health Care costs (3/18/2010 3:20:51 PM)
because a huge amount of debt IS medical debt in a bankruptcy. it would be a way of letting the market decide.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: CBO report on Health Care costs (3/18/2010 3:28:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy There is no bill to cost. The CBO report is an estimate, not an official scoring, and has so many caveats that its meaningless. You know it's funny. I agree with you about the CBO estimates. They are notoriously inaccurate because it is impossible to make such far-reaching predictions. Yet when they estimate budget numbers all the conservatives jump on the band wagon to say how Obama's budget deficits will ruin the country. Yet when there is something that opposes your views then the CBO reports are "meaningless". I didnt say CBO reports are meaningless in general. I said THIS report is meaningless, because they dont have a bill to cost. They refused to issue anything but a PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE. That shouldnt be too hard for even you to understand.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: CBO report on Health Care costs (3/18/2010 3:30:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery quote: I hope you didnt post this thinking that it could actually work on a large scale without raising health care costs. This depends on the existing regional health care. Some will see costs drop (MA, NY, similar states) and some will see costs rise (Alabama, Mississippi, similar states). I was talking specifically about the Mayo model she posted. It cannot work large scale, and if anyone cant see why they should visit the remedial schooling thread in other topics.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: CBO report on Health Care costs (3/18/2010 3:31:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy because a huge amount of debt IS medical debt in a bankruptcy. it would be a way of letting the market decide. That isnt letting the market decide, that is forcing costs on the medical sector.

rulemylife -> RE: CBO report on Health Care costs (3/18/2010 3:36:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy I didnt say CBO reports are meaningless in general. I said THIS report is meaningless, because they dont have a bill to cost. They refused to issue anything but a PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE. That shouldnt be too hard for even you to understand. Willbeur, just out of curiosity, is there some reason you feel the need to be constantly antagonistic? I mean does it give you an ego boost, make you feel better about yourself, or what? Of course it is a preliminary estimate because there is no final bill yet as you yourself just said. So what exactly is your point?

willbeurdaddy -> RE: CBO report on Health Care costs (3/18/2010 3:38:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy I didnt say CBO reports are meaningless in general. I said THIS report is meaningless, because they dont have a bill to cost. They refused to issue anything but a PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE. That shouldnt be too hard for even you to understand. Willbeur, just out of curiosity, is there some reason you feel the need to be constantly antagonistic? I mean does it give you an ego boost, make you feel better about yourself, or what? Of course it is a preliminary estimate because there is no final bill yet as you yourself just said. So what exactly is your point? I was responding to your proclivity to misstate other peoples positions. That is the worst form of "antagonism" and I responded in kind.

tazzygirl -> RE: CBO report on Health Care costs (3/18/2010 4:13:15 PM)
I would rather a cesspool without you than a palace with you. But, eh, we dont always get what we want. And thank you for demeaning my intelligence. [:D] I love it when people underestimate me. As far as "told you so", actually, you didnt. I pretty much stopped listening to your rants about my government when you admitted to leaving. Its like when you decide to leave your job.... you are the prime example of why no boss would ever want you working out a notice.[;)] quote: The Bill requires that every American buy a "federally approved" insurance policy with "federally set" minimum standards to be determined by the yet to be established bureaucracy. One of 139 new bureaucracies mandated by the Bill. Since the bureaucrat in charge isn't seated and his/her committee hasn't determined the "minimum standard" how reliable is any number generated by the CBO? Every bill offered, since the first from Obama, has included that particular part about the federally approved policy. You should have read them when i told you too. No one stated the numbers were reliable... lol... again, your assumption that anyone did. Here is where your assumption started... yet even you, in all your self professed intelligence cant even recognize that. And you insult my intelligence??? Man! the boards are funny today!!

ThatDamnedPanda -> RE: CBO report on Health Care costs (3/18/2010 8:46:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy Two votes for the bill were lost AFTER the publication of the CBO report. Who? One from NY, One from VT. I forget the names. Edit: NY was Arcuri. Ah, OK. You're right. But the other one was from Massachusetts, and I forgot his name as well. But then again, 3 more (Markey, Schauer, and Gordon) have announced within the last several hours that they will now vote yes. I believe that means they only need 8 more votes in the next 3 days. Looking at the remaining undecideds, I count 5 probables (Bean, Baird, Periello, McNerny, and Barry), and as many as 11 leaning-toward-yes (Lynch, Capuano, Peters, Titus, Bishop, Sutton, Owens, Kind, Ortiz, Rodriguez, and Costello). And 20-some other undecideds who could go either way. Many of those are looking for a reason to say yes, and it's reasonable to expect some of them to go in at the last minute. Anything can happen over the next 60 hours, but quite frankly right now i like the math.

slvemike4u -> RE: CBO report on Health Care costs (3/18/2010 8:51:57 PM)
Yeah panda I like the math too...thanks for laying it all out.Have you considered a career in handicapping?

domiguy -> RE: CBO report on Health Care costs (3/18/2010 8:59:55 PM)
I's a done deal. The majority of the people that are complaining to\day will be telling their loved ones twenty years from now that they supported the President in this noble pursuit.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: CBO report on Health Care costs (3/18/2010 9:06:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy Two votes for the bill were lost AFTER the publication of the CBO report. Who? One from NY, One from VT. I forget the names. Edit: NY was Arcuri. Ah, OK. You're right. But the other one was from Massachusetts, and I forgot his name as well. But then again, 3 more (Markey, Schauer, and Gordon) have announced within the last several hours that they will now vote yes. I believe that means they only need 8 more votes in the next 3 days. Looking at the remaining undecideds, I count 5 probables (Bean, Baird, Periello, McNerny, and Barry), and as many as 11 leaning-toward-yes (Lynch, Capuano, Peters, Titus, Bishop, Sutton, Owens, Kind, Ortiz, Rodriguez, and Costello). And 20-some other undecideds who could go either way. Many of those are looking for a reason to say yes, and it's reasonable to expect some of them to go in at the last minute. Anything can happen over the next 60 hours, but quite frankly right now i like the math. AFAIC "you" are in a no win situation. Pass it with an up and down vote, it gets neutered in reconciliation. Pass it via the Slaughter rule, it is likely to be declared unconstitutioal, and the real slaughter is in November. If they had the votes, it would be voted on now, they wouldnt wait till Sunday. If they dont vote Sunday its all over, because the reps cannot possibly face their constituencies and come back and vote yes. Therefore they will vote Sunday, no matter what. With the pressure Obama is applying and the sleight of hand in the CBO numbers it may well pass, and its the beginning of a long cold 3 1/2 years for the Dems who vote for it.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.078125