Deficit Reduction

  1. 2
    I'm starting a new thread for this because the article refers to deficit reduction, and not the fiscal cliff specifically.

    President Obama pledged that Obamacare would "not add a cent to the deficit." Now we are being told by the CBO that the most efficient way to reduce the deficit is to repeal portions of Obamacare.
    CBO: ObamaCare Offers Biggest Pot Of Deficit Cuts

    Read More At IBD: http://news.investors.com/ibd-editor...#ixzz2CUQQhXCO

    A Congressional Budget Office report on ways to reduce the deficit, released last week to help guide budget negotiators in the upcoming "grand bargain" talks, contains one eye-opening item.
    It turns out that the single biggest pot of potential deficit savings available to lawmakers is ... ObamaCare.
    In its list of "options to reduce mandatory spending" and cut the deficit, the CBO says that repealing ObamaCare's massive insurance subsidies would cut federal spending by $150 billion in 2020 alone. Repealing the individual mandate would save another $40 billion that year, the CBO says.
    No other single spending cut proposal on the CBO's list and no tax hikes under serious consideration in Washington comes close.
    Joe V and Spidey's mom like this.
  2. Get our hottest nursing topics delivered to your inbox.

  3. 158 Comments so far...

  4. 5
    Replace the insurance subsidies with a single payer system...
  5. 0
    Quote from Jolie
    I'm starting a new thread for this because the article refers to deficit reduction, and not the fiscal cliff specifically.

    President Obama pledged that Obamacare would "not add a cent to the deficit." Now we are being told by the CBO that the most efficient way to reduce the deficit is to repeal portions of Obamacare.
    CBO: ObamaCare Offers Biggest Pot Of Deficit Cuts

    Read More At IBD: http://news.investors.com/ibd-editor...#ixzz2CUQQhXCO

    A Congressional Budget Office report on ways to reduce the deficit, released last week to help guide budget negotiators in the upcoming "grand bargain" talks, contains one eye-opening item.
    It turns out that the single biggest pot of potential deficit savings available to lawmakers is ... ObamaCare.
    In its list of "options to reduce mandatory spending" and cut the deficit, the CBO says that repealing ObamaCare's massive insurance subsidies would cut federal spending by $150 billion in 2020 alone. Repealing the individual mandate would save another $40 billion that year, the CBO says.
    No other single spending cut proposal on the CBO's list and no tax hikes under serious consideration in Washington comes close.


    The single-payer system is by far the worst thing that could ever happen to healthcare. (Not to be confused with medicaid) This is exactly why I wanted my nursing degree. With ObamaCare implemented, most doctors will stop practicing and nurses will be all that is left. It's money down the drain
  6. 4
    Quote from MadyJohannah
    The single-payer system is by far the worst thing that could ever happen to healthcare. (Not to be confused with medicaid) This is exactly why I wanted my nursing degree. With ObamaCare implemented, most doctors will stop practicing and nurses will be all that is left. It's money down the drain
    Source, please? The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (the proper name of "Obamacare") has not had the majority of its parts take effect yet, so I'm not really sure where people are getting all of their information about what is going to happen. Yes, people can make predictions, but they are not set in concrete. Also, we badly needed health care reform. The PPACA may not be the best solution, but at least it's an attempt that can continue to be modified and revised.
    mariebailey, justin.j, tewdles, and 1 other like this.
  7. 1
    most doctors will not stop practicing medicine...
    fear mongering is rarely a good strategy for change, and we must change (evolve) that is our design.
    Last edit by tewdles on Nov 17, '12 : Reason: content
    mariebailey likes this.
  8. 3
    It doesn't happen often, but I totally (well not totally, but close enough) agree with you that we should end the insurance company subsidies, and we shouldn't make payment to a for-profit industry obligatory. These have been two of the big reasons progressives dislike this bill.

    I do think you're missing something in terms of the deficit, the ACA contains a mix of spending and savings, Obama was correct when he stated that it would not add to the deficit, the CBO stated that when all the spending and savings were totaled, the net result would be a $210 Billion reduction in the deficit over 10 years.

    The CBO's current proposal is to keep everything on the savings side of the equation, and get rid of some of the spending side, which I'm all for. There are some things we will need to deal with, however;

    In order to get the $150B deficit reduction the cost of a typical family's insurance plan will go up by about $1050/year, that $150B covered the uninsured that had been included in everyone else's plan previously. Basically, there's $150B worth of care that we can either pay for through the government or by adding it on to our premiums, there's no way to shift the costs that makes it just dissappear. The only option to actually not pay this is to refuse care. (Which is worth exploring)

    Changing medicaid to block grants for long term care will leave Nursing Home residents homeless (or at least without any way of paying their bills).

    A public option is also on this list, are you for that too?

    Raising the medicare age to 67 and cutting social security is something Obama has already indicated he's willing to give on.

    Changing medicaid's "cost-sharing structure" refers to shifting costs to the state's that are already cash strapped, I'm not how that would change the overall picture but I'm willing to give it a try.
    Quote from Jolie
    No other single spending cut proposal on the CBO's list — and no tax hikes under serious consideration in Washington — comes close.

    Letting tax cuts cuts expire on those making more than $250,000/year would reduce the deficit by $85 Billion/year, making it #2 on this list.


    tewdles, aknottedyarn, and herring_RN like this.
  9. 3
    I think Social Security should be considered separately since it's supported by a dedicated tax. Of course, that tax has been reduced to help stimulate the economy so putting it back right would make sense. However, raising the retirement age or changing social security benefits should be considered under solvency of that system and not to bail out the rest of the government.

    I'm curious to see what the President and Congress are able to come up with along the lines of 3:1 spending cuts to revenue to decrease the deficit.
    tewdles, aknottedyarn, and herring_RN like this.
  10. 3
    Quote from MunoRN
    ...snip...

    I do think you're missing something in terms of the deficit, the ACA contains a mix of spending and savings, Obama was correct when he stated that it would not add to the deficit, the CBO stated that when all the spending and savings were totaled, the net result would be a $210 Billion reduction in the deficit over 10 years.

    ...snip...

    Gosh! $210 Billion reduction over 10 years. That sure sounds like a lot, until you compare it to the money wasted in Iraq/Afghanistan. This is estimated at 2.4 - 3.7 Trillion dollars, roughly 11 - 18 times the projected savings/reduction in national debt promised by the ACA.

    In other words, we might see a 10 to 20 fold greater reduction in the national debt by merely halting our foreign escapades....excuse me...nation building...promoting democracy (yeah team!), and all that jazz.

    Wars are expensive. In dollars, and human lives.

    Novel concept, I know. Unfortunately, I'm confident that my country will continue to "project power" into regions such as the Middle East, Asia, and Central/South America. Sic semper tyrannis, eh wot?
  11. 3
    No argument that's small potatoes compared to our recent money wasting endeavors, we exceed that amount in corporate welfare in less than 2 years.

    We missed chances to save "big" numbers; a public option, nationally regulated health plans, and ending for-profit insurer subsidies could have saved about the same amount in a single year.
    tewdles, StNeotser, and herring_RN like this.
  12. 0
    I don't believe there is a sustainable way to provide healthcare while someone is trying to make a profit from it. Health insurance CEOs are made to make sure that profits every year exceed the last years. That's why health care gets so expensive.

    I think making businesses pay taxes and quit headquartering in the Cayman islands will help. Also the rich have never been richer so lets let them pay Reagan era taxes. It will not hurt them at all. If they are these wonderful job creators then they haven't fulfilled their part of the bargain in the past four years whilst paying lower tax rates than I do.


Top