Brenda Elliott at RBO asks "Who’s Going to Pay for the Government the Radical Left Dreams Of?"
Apparently on July 23, 2010 the White House Office of Management and Budget released the annual six-month budget review for Fiscal Year 2011.
From "A Mid-Year Update on the President’s Plan to Spend, and Then Tax, in Epic Proportions" at Economics21.org by James C. Capretta July 26, 2010:
"The numbers are eye-popping. The budget deficit in 2010 is expected to set a record at $1.471 trillion – or 10% of GDP. In 2011, the administration projects the deficit will again top $1.4 trillion. From 2010 to 2020, the Obama budget plan would run up a cumulative deficit of nearly $10 trillion, and the nation’s debt would reach $18.5 trillion in 2020, up from $5.8 trillion at the end of 2008.
Even more ominous for the (putative) president is the economic forecast. It shows unemployment remaining at over 8% through the 2012 presidential re-election campaign, despite the assumption that relatively normal economic growth would have been underway for more than two years by then.
The primary problem is quite plainly out of control federal spending."
Brenda at RBO suggests "Of course there is a simple answer. Stop spending"
That is WAY too simple, eh? Capretta says:
"If the federal government managed to return to the per-household spending level of the Reagan administration, the budget would be balanced by 2012 without any tax hikes. Too ambitious? Just returning to the per-household spending levels that existed before the current recession would balance the budget by 2019.
The out-of-control radicals in Congress are not going to do that. It’s not the plan. They’ve been waiting decades for this moment. They’re certainly not going to let the creation of a crisis slip through their collective fingers. Richard Cloward is smiling."
Also at Economics21.org, check out the "Promises vs Reality" of "Obamacare":
Promise #1: The new health law will not increase the federal budget deficit over the next twenty years, and will in fact cut the budget deficit over that time frame.
Reality: The claim of deficit reduction is based on accounting gimmicks, double-counting, budgetary sleight of hand, and implausible assumptions. CBO is required to estimate legislation as it is presented to it, smoke and mirrors and all. But a more careful examination of the legislation shows that it will greatly increase the budgetary exposure of the federal government, and thus almost certainly increase the budget deficit, not reduce it
===
Promise #2: The cost-curve will get bent downward, and families will save $2500 in annual premiums.
Reality: All evidence indicates that the new health law will increase overall health care costs, increase premiums, and increase tax burdens for the vast majority of Americans. In short, costs will go up collectively and for most households, not down.
===
Promise #3: The new health law lets people keep the coverage they have today if they like it.
Reality: The Reality: Millions of Americans will lose the coverage they have today involuntarily.
===
Promise #4: It's not a government takeover.
Reality: The new health law hands over to the federal government immense new powers, powers that will, over time, mean all important decisions about the organization and financing of American health care will need to meet the approval of federal agencies and bureaucrats
===
Promise #5: The new health law will improve, not hurt, the quality of American health care.
Reality: The new health law finances a massive health entitlement expansion with deeper price controls in federally-run insurance. The result will be a surge in demand coupled with much a more restricted number of willing suppliers of medical services.
===
Promise #6: The new health law will not raise taxes on the middle class.
Reality: The new health law includes at least a dozen new taxes that will directly or indirectly hit middle class families.
More details and proof, if you can stand the truth: here
No comments:
Post a Comment