Sugarshack, Like many Moonbats, it usually takes you several times to comprehend a point, much less a news article. In this case, I refer you back to the Congressional Budget Office's report, of which I provided the link earlier. You noted a part of the article, now quit cherry picking, and try to comprehend what our own government is trying to tell the Moonbat community!!
Here's the link one more time: http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/103xx/doc10311/06-16-ConradLetter.htm I suggest that you read my initial post also Sean. Clearly, you haven't a clue about what it is that you are talking about. On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 3:31 PM, VT VirtualTruth <[email protected]>wrote: > > Gee once again Keith is no where to be found! > > Once again Keith gets OWNED by the Truth! > > On Jun 24, 10:25 am, VT VirtualTruth <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Dumb Ass Keith in Tampa if you had READ your OWN post.... > > > > TOTAL COSTS WITH EXISTING HEALTHCARE PROGRAMS... > > The federal government’s financing of health care will total more than > > $1 trillion in 2009, all told. Federal outlays for Medicare and > > Medicaid are about $700 billion; tax preferences for health care > > (especially the exclusion of premiums for employment-based health > > insurance from income and payroll taxes) amount to more than $250 > > billion; and the federal government also pays for veterans’ health > > care, public health initiatives, and other health programs. Already, > > those direct and indirect payments for health care account for nearly > > 60 percent of total health expenditures for the nation. > > > > WILL THIS REDUCE COSTS?....... > > Therefore, changes in government policy have the potential to yield > > large reductions in both national health expenditures and federal > > health care spending without harming health. Moreover, many experts > > agree on some general directions in which the government’s health > > policies should move—typically involving changes in the information > > and incentives that doctors and patients have when making decisions > > about health care. > > Bundle Payments to Hospitals and Other Providers > > The Commonwealth Fund estimated that this proposal would reduce > > federal spending by over $200 billion between 2010 and 2020. > > > > Finally STUPID the cost of the plan is 1.6 Trillion over TEN YEARS! > > > > On Jun 24, 8:49 am, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Uhm......Sugarshack, > > > > > I don't know why I bother, I guess it is because I like you, but like > any > > > child, sometimes there comes a time when I must take your pants down > and > > > spank you. > > > > > From the Congressional Budget Office: > > > > > "The federal government’s financing of health care will total more > than $1 > > > trillion in 2009, " > > > > >http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/103xx/doc10311/06-16-ConradLetter.htm > > > > > As usual, you are ignoring the facts, and like most Moonbats, you seem > to > > > want to cherry pick. Even Kennedy's plan will cost over one trillion > > > initially. You might want to look at the numbers, and here is an > article > > > that frames the actual costs a little better. > > > > > Can you say, "One Point Six Trillion"??? (Just in the first year, and > this > > > doesn't cover everyone!!!) > > > > >http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/18/AR200. > .. > > > > > On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 8:06 AM, VT VirtualTruth > > > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > > Keith, your 99% sure is usually 100% wrong, > > > > It is 10 years. > > > > > >http://www.newsdaily.com/stories/tre55e74c-us-usa-healthcare-cbo/ > > > > > > On Jun 23, 7:09 pm, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Sean, > > > > > > > I don't have the numbers in front of me, and I don't have time to > go and > > > > > look for them now, but I am 99 percent positive, that the Democrat > plan, > > > > > (all versions of it) were not 1 trillion in ten years. The plan(s) > were > > > > one > > > > > trillion in one year, like by 2010, and that was using low ball > numbers. > > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 6:57 PM, VT VirtualTruth > > > > > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > > > > So let's do the math, $250 a month for basic > > > > > > high deductible health insurance. That comes to > > > > > > $3000 a year per person. > > > > > > > > 40,000,000 Uninsured people. > > > > > > > > Total cost $120,000,000,000 a year. > > > > > > or 1.2 Trillion in 10 years, > > > > > > > > The No-Publicans were against The Democrat health > > > > > > plan because in 10 years it would cost over $1 Trillion. > > > > > > > > I am using LOW numbers by the way.....My insurance > > > > > > costs $1400 a month for a family with dental. > > > > > > > > On Jun 23, 5:20 pm, snarky <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > If so, what are your thoughts? > > > > > > > > >http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123931859150606821.html > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
