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 (42258)	3/19/2010 5:43:21 PM
From: TimF	1 Recommendation Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 71588

The CBO’s math and reality March 18th, 2010 \| Author: Bruce McQuain The just released CBO scoring for the Senate bill and reconciliation package comes in at $940 billion over ten years. A reminder: the benefits (i.e. spending) don’t begin until 2014. The taxation (revenue collection) begins immediately. A true number? The CBO says the cost over the first 4 years would be $17 billion. The last 6 would equal $923 billion. So isn’t this a better representation of true cost? $923/6*10 = $1,538 trillion or over 1.5 trillion dollars if the spending is factored evenly over the 10 years like it will be the following 10 years. And that doesn’t include the $200 billion yearly “doc fix” which was deliberately taken out of the bill to make it seem like less spending. Add that to their claimed “net” and see what it gets you. It’s certainly not $794 over 10 years or any deficit reduction. Note also the chart in the CBO report how the “net cost” is accomplished: Taxes and penalties. Penalties on individuals and employers. Taxes on “Cadillac” plans. Question – what happens when those all dry up as revenue streams? The scoring assumes a constant stream. I think we all know better than that. Of course the answer is they must find new revenue streams, i.e. new taxes (or “penalties” as they’re sure to deem them). Additionally full into the spending curve of the plan, we’re looking at around 200 billion a year. Over 10 years that 2 trillion dollars. Again, remember – the CBO’s scoring assumes absolutely no changes in the bill, revenue streams or projected spending over those 10 years. That’s absolute nonsense on a saltine cracker and we all know that. There is no way those revenue streams remain constant, there’s no way the spending on health care – if this is enacted – won’t be increased as the bill is built upon and despite the CBO’s guess for the following 10 years in which it says it will continue to “save” money, there’s very little to support that premise. In fact, the most telling line in the whole CBO report is this one: Our analysis indicates that H.R. 3590, as passed by the Senate, would reduce federal budget deficits over the ensuing decade relative to those projected under current law—with a total effect during that decade that is in a broad range between one-quarter percent and one-half percent of gross domestic product (GDP).3 The imprecision of that calculation reflects the even greater degree of uncertainty that attends to it, compared with CBO’s 10-year budget estimates. You can believe all this nonsense if you wish, but even the CBO isn’t real keen on its own calculations. And by the way, this post isn’t a swipe at the CBO – they score what they get and do it according to the statute under which they operate. But that doesn’t render the GIGO rule invalid... qando.net

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (42258)	6/20/2013 8:32:45 PM
From: Peter Dierks	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

Five Things to Know About CBO Projections and Estimates Yossi Gestetner June 20, 2013 Regardless where you stand on the immigration bill, the following information as to how the CBO operates is healthy to have in mind any time the CBO releases a projection: 1) The CBO is a calculator. They simply add up the numbers that Congress gives them. The CBO does not vouch for the figures they were given; they simply do the math. So if Congress tells them that a new bill will add an X amount of workers over the next decade, the CBO consolidates other projections of the decade -- such as their expected GDP/Economic growth -- and they produce a bottom line. Hence, the CBO said the immigration bill will save the U.S. $197 billion over the next decade. 2) The CBO is always shortsighted on economic growth. For example, in their 2000-2010 budget projection they didn't foresee the 9/11 attacks; the war on terror and the revelation of corporate corruption. As a result, they predicted trillions of surpluses over the next decade which never materialized. Worse, in early 2008, the CBO projected a net surplus of $335 billion in the 2009-2018 decade and we all know how that worked out. In other words, if the economy over the next decade does slightly worse than the current estimate, the $197 billion immigration savings is out the window because less of those 10 million will actually be employed, and more will be dependent on government programs. 3) Along the line of the above point, consider the following: In January 2009, three months into the financial crisis and a year into a recession, the CBO estimated, that the U.S. will run up only $2.9 trillion in deficits from Fiscal Year 2009 through the end of FY2013. Well, FY2013 is almost over and the U.S. is on path to have run up $5.7 trillion deficits in those five years. That's a $2.8 trillion oops by the CBO over a five-year period. How confident are you now that the $197 billion immigration "savings" over the first ten years will hold? 4) The above CBO estimates were made in January 2009. That was before the Stimulus and Obamacare passed. The Stimulus according to the Democrats, made things better economically and Obamacare reduced the deficit according the CBO. Right? That's amazing because if not for those two "deficit-cutting, economic-saving" Obama laws the CBO's January 2009 estimate would have been off by more than $2.8 trillion. So again how can we add the CBO's immigration projection into the debate? The CBO is a joke. 5) One more stat about the lovely CBO: In the above 2009 estimate, they projected that the Unemployment Rate will be on average 6.4% from 2011 through 2014, but the average UR in this period as of now is 8.2%. Worse, even if (again, an impossible if) the UR from now through the end of 2014 is at 5% each month, the four-year average will be 7%. As we know, if not for millions giving up to find a job the last four years, the current UR would be even higher than it is. In terms of jobs the UR stats show that the CBO overestimated by millions (yes, millions) the number of people who will be employed and pay tax in each of those four years. Since the CBO overestimated the employment issue four years ago at such a disastrous level, rest assure they did it again now in the immigration bill. Hence they came up with $197 billion in savings which will never materialize. The bottom line is the CBO works with -- but does not verify the accuracy of -- the numbers given to them by Congress. They added it up based on their economic projections which were repeatedly wrong over the last decade. Hence, the $197 billion in savings is a joke, as are all projected "savings" that the CBO produces every time americanthinker.com