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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Alighieri who wrote (846715)	4/1/2015 12:45:22 PM
From: i-node	1 Recommendation Recommended By TimF Respond to of 1573902

>> Those estimates address only the insurance coverage provisions of the ACA, which do not generate all of the act’s budgetary effects. Many other provisions, on net, are expected to reduce budget deficits. Considering all of the provisions—including the coverage provisions— CBO and JCT estimated in July 2012 (their most recent comprehensive estimate) that the ACA’s overall effect would be to reduce federal deficits. Do you know why CBO no longer makes forecasts on these other items? Because the law's implementation is so screwed up Elmendorf has said, essentially, "We simply cannot figure this out. We don't know what the numbers are, and we have no way of knowing. So, we're not even going to try anymore." It is NOT okay to then take numbers from before all the changes were made to the law and say, "These are it." The ONLY thing we know is that they have no idea what the numbers are, and cannot make any projection of them.

To: Alighieri who wrote (846715)	4/1/2015 2:48:04 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573902

Al, leaving out the part about deficit reduction from the very page you pasted that tries to sell the notion that deficit reduction claims have been removed is patently dishonest... They can no longer quantify the alleged deficit reduction, yet they still hold onto the position that the ACA somehow reduces the deficit. It's quite simple. They're backtracking from that claim because they really don't know how the ACA allows other federal programs to reduce their spending. Really Al, who's being dishonest here? I only highlight the portions of the report that support my argument for the sake of brevity. You're the one who's desperate to prove to me that there is some sort of SURPLUS, but even you can't give me exact figures. I already showed you the facts. ObamaCare spends more than it takes in. Period. What effect that has on the rest of the federal budget, or on the overall American economy, is up for debate, but there is no debate over the actual costs and revenues of the ACA. Tenchusatsu