Since we are now trusting CBO numbers... (Full Version)

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



Message

Thadius -> Since we are now trusting CBO numbers... (3/30/2010 2:47:28 PM)

Since we are now trusting and throwing around CBO numbers, I find it funny that nobody has brought up the latest CBO report. In the light of all these claims that certain projects will be reducing the deficit spending and the debt incurred by the country, the CBO seems to be contradicting the White House's claims to be doing that.

quote:

Full story at Washington Times
CBO report: Debt will rise to 90% of GDP

By David M. Dickson

President Obama's fiscal 2011 budget will generate nearly $10 trillion in cumulative budget deficits over the next 10 years, $1.2 trillion more than the administration projected, and raise the federal debt to 90 percent of the nation's economic output by 2020, the Congressional Budget Office reported Thursday.

In its 2011 budget, which the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) released Feb. 1, the administration projected a 10-year deficit total of $8.53 trillion. After looking it over, CBO said in its final analysis, released Thursday, that the president's budget would generate a combined $9.75 trillion in deficits over the next decade.

"An additional $1.2 trillion in debt dumped on [GDP] to our children makes a huge difference," said Brian Riedl, a budget analyst at the conservative Heritage Foundation. "That represents an additional debt of $10,000 per household above and beyond the federal debt they are already carrying."

The federal public debt, which was $6.3 trillion ($56,000 per household) when Mr. Obama entered office amid an economic crisis, totals $8.2 trillion ($72,000 per household) today, and it's headed toward $20.3 trillion (more than $170,000 per household) in 2020, according to CBO's deficit estimates.



One should note that the almost $10 Trillion spoke of in this article is on top of the current deficit and debt. How are these numbers sustainable? At what point do we say, it is time to cut down on spending? Even if we cut all military spending, it would only be a small drop in the bucket compared to $20.3 Trillion. Where do we go from here? I am looking for solutions, suggestions, and comments on this revelation.

I wish you well,
Thadius

P.S. Have a wonderful passover, for those that it applies to.

Edited to add the link to the story...



rulemylife -> RE: Since we are now trusting CBO numbers... (3/30/2010 3:56:08 PM)

The CBO cannot make an accurate prediction because it is impossible to forecast anything ten years in advance.

Remember that we are supposed to be experiencing a budget surplus this year?

[PDF] Fact Sheet on CBO Surplus Projections for FY 2000-2010File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View
For fiscal year 2000, CBO projects a unified surplus of $176 billion and a non-social security surplus of $23 billion.



Thadius -> RE: Since we are now trusting CBO numbers... (3/30/2010 3:58:29 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

The CBO cannot make an accurate prediction because it is impossible to forecast anything ten years in advance.

Remember that we are supposed to be experiencing a budget surplus this year?

[PDF] Fact Sheet on CBO Surplus Projections for FY 2000-2010File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View
For fiscal year 2000, CBO projects a unified surplus of $176 billion and a non-social security surplus of $23 billion.


If that is the case, then why are we supposed to trust the argument that CBO says that the new health care law will reduce the deficit over that period?



rulemylife -> RE: Since we are now trusting CBO numbers... (3/30/2010 4:20:02 PM)

I don't necessarily trust them but the difference is between a macro and micro analysis.

The CBO forecast on health care is based on the impact of that single issue.

The forecasts on the economy as a whole have too many variables involved.



Thadius -> RE: Since we are now trusting CBO numbers... (3/30/2010 4:32:56 PM)

The CBO forecast on health care also "supposedly" took into account the effects that the economy would have on the cost, and the effects it would have on the economy. The cool part of all of this, is we get to have a hearing on some of that impact April 21st.

As far as CBO predictions are concerned, they notoriously estimate low on the cost of things, so the actual figure is probably going to be much worse.

You aren't suggesting that the debt situation is going to get better if we continue on it's current path?



Kindandcruel -> RE: Since we are now trusting CBO numbers... (3/30/2010 4:36:17 PM)

Microchipping To Begin In 36 Months Under New Health Bill
The new Health Care Bill, H.R. 3200, just passed by Congress has within it the requirement that all people thereunder shall be microchiped.

The plans for this microchipping has been in the hooper going back to December of 2004.

Witness the actual FDA (Food and Drug Administration) document dated December 10, 2004 entitled “Class II Special Guidance Document: Implantable Radiofrequency Transponder System for Patient Identification and Health Information. This ten page document may be read on the FDA website at


http://www.fda.gov/downloads/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/GuidanceDocuments/ucm072191.pdf

Now witness the wording within H.R. 3200, “America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009” found on Congresses’ House Ways and Means website,


http://waysandmeans.house.gov/media/pdf/111/AAHCA09001xml.pdf

On page 1001 is “Subtitle C – National Medical Device Registry” which states,

“The Secretary shall establish a national medical device registry (in this subsection referred to as the ‘registry’) to facilitate analysis of postmarket safety and outcomes data on each device that … is or has been used in or on a patient…”

In other words, everyone microchipped pursuant to the new Health Care Bill must be registered with the Secretary. The “Secretary” is defined as the Secretary of Health and Human Services.

The date by which this registry is to begin is mandated on page 1006, which is 36 months after the Health Bill becomes law.

(2) EFFECTIVE DATE. – The Secretary of Health and Human Services shall establish and begin implementation of the registry under section 519(g) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as added by paragraph (1) by not later than the date that is 36 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, without regard to whether of not final regulations to establish and operate the registry have been promulgated by such date.

Therefore, under the law of H.R. 3200 recently passed by Congress, microchipping of Americans must begin by the year 2013.

Numerous times I have stated that our current Income Tax system shall be replaced with a tax upon all trade, and that everyone will have automatically deducted from every transaction of buying and selling a tax. But this tax is not the significant part.

Those refusing shall be certainly executed post haste or placed into the FEMA camps that have been built all over the nation. Troops have been training in quelling internal disquiet by force, so anybody or group that is against being chipped is taken out quickly. Once you are chipped the new dictatorship government has total control over your life, where you go what you do what you buy and if they don’t like you they turn off your chip and you cannot get anything… food, shelter, you no longer exist. This is because they also own the banking system now and will tie the chip to the financials of your life.

Now you know what is behind the new Health Bill, H.R. 3200.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hq3vtjXEGy8&NR=1


Ron Branson
JAIL4Judges
Judicial Accountability Initiative Law
The only answer!
[email protected]




rulemylife -> RE: Since we are now trusting CBO numbers... (3/30/2010 4:45:10 PM)

I'm not sure how you are arriving at the conclusion that they underestimate when they overestimated the surplus under Clinton would continue through the Bush administration.

As far as the current path, I can only take a wait and see attitude.  It's obvious that the Bush administration policies did not work. 

What I find interesting though is how people are now so worked up about the deficit and debt while there was no outcry when Bush ran yearly deficits and more than doubled the debt.





rulemylife -> RE: Since we are now trusting CBO numbers... (3/30/2010 4:55:26 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kindandcruel

Microchipping To Begin In 36 Months Under New Health Bill
The new Health Care Bill, H.R. 3200, just passed by Congress has within it the requirement that all people thereunder shall be microchiped.



I've already had mine implanted.

Maybe that's why I'm in favor of health care reform, the government is controlling my thoughts.



Thadius -> RE: Since we are now trusting CBO numbers... (3/30/2010 5:06:44 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

I'm not sure how you are arriving at the conclusion that they underestimate when they overestimated the surplus under Clinton would continue through the Bush administration.

As far as the current path, I can only take a wait and see attitude.  It's obvious that the Bush administration policies did not work. 

What I find interesting though is how people are now so worked up about the deficit and debt while there was no outcry when Bush ran yearly deficits and more than doubled the debt.




If you look back, I have and still do criticize Bush for his out of control spending. For the record I mentioned having a tea party around here well before this current (tea party) movement got started, and even had a bunch of posters around here saying they were up for it. Funny how some things change.

How do I come to the conclussion that CBO underestimates the cost of programs? One only look at their (including the group that used to make such predicions, House ways and means committee) history of predictions. They were off by some 816% when it came to the cost of Medicare, 165% on Medicare Part A, 150% on Medicare Home Care benefit, 2600% off on Social Security, 1600% on DHS...

They also are notorious for over-estimating savings and increases in GDP. Which is exactly what you presented in your citation, an example of their overestimations of revenues and savings.

Put those 2 things together and the picture gets even scarier, and one could reasonably assume that the debt will be at 90% of GDP sooner, if nothing else changes.

Edited to add: I can respect your position of wait and see.



tazzygirl -> RE: Since we are now trusting CBO numbers... (3/30/2010 8:28:12 PM)

Ever thought they are speaking about medical devices? pacemakers? insulin pumps? heart valves? artificial joints?

oddly enough, the mention of a "microchip" never appears in either source.

the conspiracy it would take to keep something as massive as you suggest... go back to thinking of other conspiracys.



housesub4you -> RE: Since we are now trusting CBO numbers... (3/31/2010 3:18:23 AM)

What I find interesting is how either party likes or dislikes the CBO numbers based on who's bill it is.

When it is a Dem bill, the Dems love and trust the CBO numbers why the GOP says they are meaningless

and when it is a GOP bill they love the CBO numbers and think they are dead on target, but then the Dems say the numbers they provide are meaningless

The more things change the more they stay the same, however the CBO or anyone has a hard time predicting 10, 15 or 20 years into our future, there are just to many possibilities


I'm still in support of the reform bill, if you remember Bush/Cheny in 2000 ran on health reform and did nothing but make the pharms even richer and screwed the people at home.  This bill may not be perfect, but it is a start and if the GOP think it so bad, they can do as they have stated and run their election on repealing it (though they have walked away from those ideas all ready)



Sanity -> RE: Since we are now trusting CBO numbers... (3/31/2010 7:36:56 AM)


Thank you for posting this, Thadius. Nice try but you should know by now how any thread about such a serious topic is bound to go so, for our Liberal friends, we may as well get this derail started:

B-B-B-B-BUSH!!!

What about trickle down? Hmm?

YOU RACIST! HOW DARE YOU TALK ABOUT THE ECONOMY!!!

Show us your snatch, bitch.

CLINTON ALMOST HAD A SURPLUS ONCE

Yur a dum dum dumy huh huh huh huh

Did I miss any of the typical hijacks or obfuscation attempts so often used by our resident Obama cheerleaders?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Thadius

Since we are now trusting and throwing around CBO numbers, I find it funny that nobody has brought up the latest CBO report. In the light of all these claims that certain projects will be reducing the deficit spending and the debt incurred by the country, the CBO seems to be contradicting the White House's claims to be doing that.

quote:

Full story at Washington Times
CBO report: Debt will rise to 90% of GDP

By David M. Dickson

President Obama's fiscal 2011 budget will generate nearly $10 trillion in cumulative budget deficits over the next 10 years, $1.2 trillion more than the administration projected, and raise the federal debt to 90 percent of the nation's economic output by 2020, the Congressional Budget Office reported Thursday.

In its 2011 budget, which the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) released Feb. 1, the administration projected a 10-year deficit total of $8.53 trillion. After looking it over, CBO said in its final analysis, released Thursday, that the president's budget would generate a combined $9.75 trillion in deficits over the next decade.

"An additional $1.2 trillion in debt dumped on [GDP] to our children makes a huge difference," said Brian Riedl, a budget analyst at the conservative Heritage Foundation. "That represents an additional debt of $10,000 per household above and beyond the federal debt they are already carrying."

The federal public debt, which was $6.3 trillion ($56,000 per household) when Mr. Obama entered office amid an economic crisis, totals $8.2 trillion ($72,000 per household) today, and it's headed toward $20.3 trillion (more than $170,000 per household) in 2020, according to CBO's deficit estimates.



One should note that the almost $10 Trillion spoke of in this article is on top of the current deficit and debt. How are these numbers sustainable? At what point do we say, it is time to cut down on spending? Even if we cut all military spending, it would only be a small drop in the bucket compared to $20.3 Trillion. Where do we go from here? I am looking for solutions, suggestions, and comments on this revelation.

I wish you well,
Thadius

P.S. Have a wonderful passover, for those that it applies to.

Edited to add the link to the story...



mnottertail -> RE: Since we are now trusting CBO numbers... (3/31/2010 8:04:41 AM)

OK, once more for the slow people.

If there would have been the outcry by our reasoned friends now concerned (very late in the game) about deficits, why didnt we avoid the Reagan deficits, the Bush I deficits and the Bush II deficits (purely spent on agression) all spent not for ourselves with our money but for ideological issues not concerning our well being, why---- then this wouldn't be much of a deficit, would it?

Nobody anywhere is saying that the deficit isn't too high and unsustainable, as certain sectors were in answering those who were against imperial agression were descrying the looting of our treasury. The reason Thad ain't quite getting the flack that you are, is that he hasn't come out here saying that the horrid deficits are all democratic fault and rewriting the history of this whichwe are all aware of, he is talking about where we are and going forward, without prevarication.

Ron



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875