LINK Well, double down. Any bets on triple or quad down the road? Predictable this was. Moron Obama is.
Yeah, blame Obama for it, it's 100% his fault that Congress fucked the bill every which way until it was a disaster, and then voted to pass it.
TKO, you've definitely got a good point there. Congress certainly deserves a lot of criticism for that pile of crap legislation. But ultimately, Obama signed that pile of crap legislation, so he definitely gets a piece of the blame too.
It's as much his blame as theirs. Perhaps more, specifically. He is one-third the government, after all. He never did do a very good job of leading his party on this issue and he certainly didn't save the Dems from the likes of Pelosi and Reid.
It's amazing how the Fox Noise "article" (read: hit piece) has a completely opposite claim compared to the supposed quoted source. I mean here's yesterday's CBO report on the estimated cost of the Health Care Reform Bill: http://www.cbo.gov/publication/43080 It's dated from two days ago and it's conclusion, and this is from the original source, is the exact opposite of Fox's claims. So gross costs higher but off setting budgetary effects mean it's basically a wash with the balance on still saving money over all. Once again Fox lies and only give people half of the information.
I'll have to dive into the CBO report to see what else it says but that will have to wait until after work. So far it's looking like Fox is once again only telling half the story.
People with sense knew that this was coming when the president's sycophants said "we need to pass this bill to see what's in it".
Are you dense? The actual CBO report says the exact opposite of what Fox claimed. They claimed cost went up because they now decided to count Medicare CHIP as part of the total cost of health care reform but since that cost is now accounted as under health care reform the Medicare expenditures went down by an equal amount. TOTAL COSTS ARE VIRTUALLY A WASH ACCORDING TO THE ACTUAL CBO REPORT. Fox is claiming "healthy care reform costs went up X" while the CBO report is saying they transferred costs from one agency to another so net costs are generally a wash. What is your major malfunction given how I already linked to the actual CBO report summary? Read the damn thing because the original source document doesn't support Fox's lies. They're literally only telling you half the story; follow the damn link to the original source.
I wish I could say I'm surprised you're this dumb but I can't. Just read the fucking CBO summary. It's one page long, dullard.
Reread post #8 from the actual CBO summary of their report. Especially: OK, let me spell it out for you. You have two checking accounts, normally you make the payment to your mortgage with one and you pay your credit card with the other. Now, if this month you decide to pay both your credit card and your mortage from one checking account did your costs actually go up? No. You paid more out of one account but you spent less from the other account. That's what they mean by gross costs go up but so do off setting budgetary effects. They're now considering Medicare CHIP to be part of Health Care Reform costs but total costs are a wash (Health care reform goes up by X but medicare goes down by X). In other words the government doesn't actually spend any additional money. The cost is transfered from one agency to another so while one agency pays more the other pays less. This isn't complicated and the fucking CBO spells it out for you. Fox is claiming "costs went up" but fails to report the CBO's summary that net costs are more or less the same. Use your pea brain, damn it.
Alternatively you could Google what the term net cost zero means. I can pay cost A with account B or I can pay cost A with account C, net cost it doesn't matter because I'm out cost A either way so my net cost is zero no matter which option I choose. Thus I can have medicare pay cost A or I can account cost A as being paid by "Obamacare" but there is no difference between either when it comes to my net cost because I'm still out A. I've just accounted for it differently.
Please quote. I've done it twice and you've rejected it so since I took the time to link to the actual report please quote the part which agrees with Fox that net costs supposedly go up $1.5 trillion. You can't because the summary specifically say, to quote for a third time:
At this point I have to ask, because it's becoming an issue, do you understand the difference between a gross cost and a net cost? It had to be asked.
What?! It doesn't say that! Where does it say that?! Where'd you get that from?! How many iguanas can fit in a standard business size briefcase?!
Obama pushed and pushed and pushed to get it passed. Granted, Congress should have told him to shut up, sit down and let the folks get the thing worked out RIGHT and cost effectively, instead of looking so great (all 2000+ pages of it that no one except the public ever read ...)
Jesus fuck me you are dumb. Second time, here is the cover sheet from the actual CBO report that Fox News claimed to be using as a source: http://www.cbo.gov/publication/43080 Read the god damned actual original source and you'll find exactly what I quoted from (it's only one page long and I used the same highlights so look at the section headers). Here's a hint: Fox is quoting gross cost numbers but ignoring the CBO's own explicit statement that the net costs are more or less a wash even using the methodology revisions. That's why I asked if you knew what the difference between a gross cost and a net cost is. I can create a $9,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999 increase in gross costs to one account but if I off set that by reducing another account I own by an equal amount then my net costs are zero. I've just transferred the same money around between my accounts and haven't actually spent any actual money. My -X cost is balanced by my +X cost to the other account. Fox quoted the +X cost but failed to mention that the CBO explicitly said the other account is -X cost to the other account so the net cost is zero. This isn't complicated, Skin. I'll give you another hint... Fox News lied to you, they didn't tell you what the actual CBO report said, and that's how propaganda works not actual factually based news organizations. We're not talking bias, we're talking out right lies and deception.
Lesson to be learned here. Go to original sources and see what they actually said, do not trust summaries of sources, especially summaries from questionable or highly partisan sources. From the original sources see if what the partisan source claimed is true. More often than not it is not true but at least you are in a position to argue from fact based on what the original source said. Climate change denialists, young earthers, flat earthers, creationists, they all love to lie about what original sources actually said. Go to the original source and then you know what was actually said instead of what some partisan liar said.
