Well, the good old Congressional Budget Office has stuck it to Obama again. Not that I'm complaining. The CBO is a non-partisan office whose job is to "score" legislation -- that is, tell Congress what the laws they think up would cost. So Obama submitted the latest version of his health care fiasco to CBO to see how much would be saved. $2 billion!!!! Wow! You know, that's a lot of money.
Except -- well, it's less than 1% of the projected spending. Not that I would turn down $2 billion if they sent me the check. But it doesn't mean squat compared to the trillions they plan on spending. $1,000,000,000,000. That's a trillion. Big number, huh? Comrade Zero just can't catch a break...which is a good thing.
I saw a line that made me stop cold. Here's a screen shot:
The highlight is mine. Stop and think about that line for a nanosecond. CBO says that savings can come by "reducing the quantity and intensity of services provided".
In English: You want to save money? Stop paying for stuff.
Like your blood pressure medicine, or your cholesterol medicine, or your diabetes testing strips. Or just a damn MRI to see if you have torn your rotator cuff...let alone the surgery to fix it.
Folks, if you're not pissed off about this, you are not paying attention.
Be afraid of Comrade Obama. Be very afraid.
Here's a link to the CBO website where you can get the entire letter.
H/T Politico
4 comments:
So now Sen. Hentry Taxman... err, Waxman... is crowing that the CBO has come back with figures that say ObamaCare will be "deficit neutral"... Never mind that the projected users figures that they estimated are unrealistic, substantially lower than ANY other study (e.g. Lewin Group). He's cited the "success" of Medicare as an argument in defense, ignoring that it requires the 3rd largest expenditure in the federal budget behind Social Security and defense (whose budget Obama is paring with a rusty sabre!) ... Logic students will easily recognize Taxman's argument as the fallacy of faulty generalization (cherry picking) here. Others should see it as a comparison to yet another federal entitlement program with well-publicized successes and well-hidden costs.
And the Blue Dog Dem's are patting themselves on the back for a "compromise" that cuts $100 Billion from the estimated trillion-dollar cost of the program. Folks, go to your local Target store... they hand out %10 discounts like candy as a balm to disgruntled customers, knowing the inconsequential effect it has on their bottom line.
I cut my AARP card in half and mailed it back with a note that read in part, "...your support of the as-proposed America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 has lost you my support -- politically and financially".
Good points. If you can't get 10% off just about anything you buy, you're not trying.
But I'm worried about you...worried that you sent money to AARP in the first place. Haven't you been listening? ;-)
Thanks for your comment.
TIW
The inconsequential effect it has on their bottom line.
--
Jenifer
Get the best FREE offers on the Best Home security Systems
Post a Comment