Some republicans feel that defaulting won't be that bad

Started Oct 8, 2013 | Discussions thread
mas cervezas
Contributing MemberPosts: 663
Like?
Re: Well of course
In reply to rb59020, Oct 8, 2013

rb59020 wrote:

PolitiFact

"The Congressional Budget Office, the nonpartisan analytical arm of Congress, has calculated the gross cost of Obamacare’s coverage provisions at approximately $1.8 trillion over the same 10-year period. These costs include spending on increased payments for Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program, subsidies for insurance purchased on the newly created marketplaces, and tax credits for small businesses. (The CBO figure would be $1.2 trillion if you exclude Medicaid and CHIP on the theory that they’re expansions of existing entitlements, rather than new entitlements.)"

I don't believe these numbers either, but probably not for the same reason no doubt. I think they are way to low. How many Federal entitlement programs actually cost less than advertised?

In 2010 when the law was shoved down are throats the est. was $928 billion .

I notice you only mention the gross cost. Here is the CBO on the net difference if the ACA was repealed: (from the link to the CBO in the Politifact article, which by the way said Saxby Chamblis was full of it)

"Assuming that H.R. 6079 is enacted near the beginning of fiscal year 2013, CBO and JCT estimate that, on balance, the direct spending and revenue effects of enacting that legislation would cause a net increase in federal budget deficits of $109 billion over the 2013–2022 period. Specifically, we estimate that H.R. 6079 would reduce direct spending by $890 billion and reduce revenues by $1 trillion between 2013 and 2022, thus adding $109 billion to federal budget deficits over that period."

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow