SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : A US National Health Care System? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Alighieri who wrote (16187)4/6/2010 9:45:53 AM
From: i-node1 Recommendation  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 42652
 
In the case of PartD they underestimated the cost.

Exactly. Underestimated by 40%/year in the first few years. YOU THINK THAT'S SOMETHING TO BE PROUD OF? It totally speaks to the inability of CBO to get even in the ballpart, EVEN in the first few years, let alone 10-20 years hence.

Part D came in under budget because it was a competently planned program. CBO could not even get THAT close.

(This legislation, however, destroyed that by closing the donut hole, which was one of the two features that made it so successful.)



To: Alighieri who wrote (16187)4/6/2010 12:58:13 PM
From: TimF2 Recommendations  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 42652
 
Recognizing the fact that the CBO tends to do very poorly in its estimates of government health care programs, doesn't imply or suggest cynicism, much less conspiracy theories. Its not a conspiracy. The CBO tries, its just a very difficult task.

The CBO's record in this area suggests its estimates can not be relied on, not that they are the result of some sort of conspiracy.


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News