Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (38771)	11/18/2009 7:05:08 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 71588

Way, WAY too many "ifs". That's two ifs, not many. And one of them is assumed in the question if your analyzing a health care "reform" proposal ("if this program passes", if it doesn't then obviously its policy effect is nil). So its really only one if (if it doesn't get repealed of massively changed for a sufficient length of time for its impact to be felt. I would have no confidence at all* in that exact scenario ever playing out in reality.* Do you have tremendously more confidence for the bill to be enacted and new program maintained for 10 years (as in the estimates you do seem to like), than for 15 or 20? (Which would fit my scenario. Other than the fact that its the official CBO requirement, what's so magical about 10 years?