Really? Really? If the average American spends $940 on a couch most likely they will tell you that they had spent a thousand dollars. Buy a car for $9400 in most cases you would be hard pressed to find someone who didn't feel that you had spent ten grand. So really democrats, do you really think that the American public is so dense that you can tell us that you AREN'T spending a TRILLION dollars to take over 1/6 of the economy?
And am I the only person who this morning is questioning the supposed non-partisan makeup of the Congressional Budget Office. Can I possibly be the only one who thinks that the delay with receiving the (barely but) under a Trillion price tag is a little suspect. I tend to believe that there was a lot more jockeying back and forth between Dems and the CBO to ensure that this number was what they needed. And now that they have the UNDER A TRILLION price tag they are giddy and moving forward with a vote on Sunday.
I may not be the greatest mathematician but if something costs $940 billion over the first ten years and that figure includes a planned Medicare savings (yeah like that has ever happened) of $120 billion, doesn't that mean that the bill actually costs $1.06 Trillion?? The planned savings from Medicare would include cuts that would affect millions of seniors who will lose a great portion of their benefits and they would be forced to foot even more of their healthcare costs. I thought that Nancy Pelosi wanted to close the donut hole not the other way around. And this is all dependent upon generating these savings. The CBO also projects that "total federal Medicare and Medicaid outlays will rise from 4 percent of GDP in 2007 to 12 percent in 2050 and 19 percent in 2082. So if the CBO predicts that the percent of GDP is going to grow that dramatically, how can they also state that they predict that there is a savings?
Feel free to email the author at stephanie@vpmedia.com
No comments:
Post a Comment