President’s Budget Assumes $150 Billion in Savings from Health Care Reform

Can you just imagine the screams for IMPEACHMENT if George W. Bush had pulled a stunt like this?
This is “The Audacity of Hope”!

somemore obamanomics. which is will pay back the deficit with another deficit.how stupid do you think the AMERICAN public is. fairly stupid i assume. michelle obama has 30 assistants? for what?

There is no traditional way to solve the debt problem with our polical system. The only way to eliminate the debt is the Weimar Republic way whereby we inflate the debt away by printing money like crazy. Inflation is neither a Republican nor Democrat, and will settle the issue for us in a neutral way. Yes it will hurt Americans who have a wallet, but as a debtor nation where it seems more people owe money than have money, this might not be such a bad thing. What American would not love to pay off their mortgage with worthless paper? Naturally, our lenders in China, Japan and Kuwait will be devastated by this process. The writing is on the wall and even a casual observer can see that the government spending spree is ramping up, not down. With massive inflation, 10 years from now the rest of the world will still be reeling but we could be well on the way to a real tangible recovery and back on top.

tierra , THANK YOU, It is good to know that there are some Americans who have not been in a COMA for the last 10 years.
The Oil Companies and the Supreme Courts are in on this and should be stopped.
Obama has nothing but the people interest at Heart, for his legacy.
Go Obama, and
YES WE CAN

tierra..You sound like my dear departed grandfather…”Why I remember when I had to walk to school with cardboard in my shoes through 2 feet of snow….” “Why I remember the whole reason for this mess is Bush and Cheny…blah blah blah.” Yea, WE GOT IT…YOU DON’T LIKE BUSH NOR CHANEY…AND we ALL get that it took more than one administration to create this mess; HOWEVER, Bush and Chaney are no longer in office and Obama is beginning a second year with an record setting 3.8 T budget….ONLY adding more fuel to a already out of control fire..GEEZ hold politicians accountable…I’m betting the majority on this site, at this point, REALLY does not care if it is an Repub..Dem…Indep..who can find a solution for this mess….

I was going to buy a $300,00 fully
financed house but now decided not to
so now I am that much richer for not
having spent the money. I will put
the money in a savings account. Yes
does not make any sense, just like all
the funny math the government uses
to explain budgets. Good grief….
Dell its not the Audacity of Hope, its
the Audacity of a Dope.

One can only imagine how the Obama decade will be described. Of course, if he has his way, we’ll all be existing in a European-style social democracy and probably won’t much care.
________________________________
The Obama decade will – without a doubt – be framed in the context of the biggest economic collapse since the Great Depression that happened on the Bush administration watch.
Like every other major western industrialized country, the United States under Obama will be seen as trying to stablise the fractured economy and pull the country back onto its feet.

To criticize Obamanomics for creating an economic disaster is unfair. You can’t judge it by capitalist standards. It is entirely consistent with Obama’s socialist ambitions and must be judged in that light.
First, it assumes that all private income ALREADY belongs to the state, but simply has yet to be assessed for “vital services”. So, all of the whining about indebting our children and grandchildren before they are born is moot. There income, too, already belongs to the socialist state.
Second, it doesn’t matter if our gross domestic product shrinks precipitously, because underlying Obamanomics is the pursuit of equality of outcome at all costs, even if we all are reduced to third world living standards in the process.
Third, reducing America to third world standards helps achieve other Obama goals, like reducing our carbon footprint to third world levels, thereby setting an example that the rest of the world is sure to follow, reversing global warming in the process.
I could go on, but you get the point. Now, get with the program and stop whining.

This is not the greatest collapse since the Depression.By historic terms unemployment is low,there is no inflation and the market has been preserved.The current investment crisis is a crisis of confidence-Obama is so far over his head that investors do not feel that he has any rational policy that will lead to return on investment.Obama doesn’t understand how the market works-he has never held a real job,he never met a payroll.

jan, your criticism is confusing — exactly what is Jake Tapper taking as fact that isn’t fact? I see an easily checkable empirical assertion about the budget, and an opinion by Gibbs on whether the health bill will pass or not. Where is the blind acceptance of political propaganda you assert?

As I recall what followed the Weimar Republic wasn’t so hot for millions of people. I would be very wary of taking the Weimar Republic method of dealing with debt to heart. We just might end up with a man on a white horse who solves the debt problem by invading the countries holding the debt.

Tierra …. when you say this:
“The Obama decade will – without a doubt – be framed in the context of the biggest economic collapse since the Great Depression that happened on the Bush administration watch.”
You ONLY help the Republicans.
___________________________________
And I completely disagree with you.
The financial collapse under the Bush administration was the largest since the Great Depression – we are still feeling the impact of this and will for years to come.
The Republican pretend they could magically fix this if they could slime their way back into office – this is nonsense.
Most Americans understand exactly how much this economic collapse is costing the country in increased government support for struggling families, and decreased taxes contributing to the deficit.
The ‘reduce spending’ chant is as obvious and shallow as the other Republican chant ‘decrease taxes’.
The Republicans came into office in 2001 promising ‘smaller government’ and ‘government surpluses’. What they delivered was gross overspending, larger deficits and a doubling of the national debt – along with the war in Iraq, the huge economic collapse, the Halliburton messes, cozying up with the Saudi’s and big oil, North Korea testing its first nuclear weapon on Bush’s watch, Iran developing a secret nuclear facility on Bush’s watch, Bin Laden and al Qaeda escaping in Afghanistan . .. . and on and on and on.
The Republican record is well worth pointing out. And their attempts to attack and denomize the Democrats and the President.

Which makes it that much more puzzling that the White House is basically cutting loose from health reform this year.

The Obama decade will – without a doubt – be framed in the context of the biggest economic collapse since the Great Depression that happened on the Bush administration watch.
Like every other major western industrialized country, the United States under Obama will be seen as trying to stablise the fractured economy and pull the country back onto its feet.
Posted by: tierra | Feb 1, 2010 7:49:32 PM
WOW! You are really hedging your bets now aren’t you! If the Obama presidency is a complete failure all 4 or 8 years will be George Bush’s fault. That is TRULY amazing, tierra.

The entire 2008 campaign was based on lies. Obama, Pelosi, Reid and other liberals made promises and pledges they did not keep. Now, Obama is campaigning for 2010 and 2012! Americans are fed up with HCF and Cap and Trade. We want them to create jobs and reduce debt, among other things. Obama and the liberals in Congress plan to cram this down our throats, regardless of what it takes. They made deals “behind closed doors” at our expense. We don’t want this massive, intrusive, corrupt government. What happened to transparency and C-Span?

Your mantra of “worst since the Depression” is merely a smokescreen
___________________________________
Nonsense. Even the smallest amount of research will confirm the economic collapse under the Bush administration was the worst since the Depression.
Soon you and the Republicans will be claiming the economic collapse under the Bush administration was really an economic triumph!

okay tierra, explain exactly what is in the stimulus? and why is it such a failure?

The stimulus is not a failure. It has done almost what other stimulus programs in other western industrialised countries have done; it has shored up state governments, it has provided some relief for families and individuals hit by unemployment – and in doing so has kept others in work by the use of those funds to pay for goods and services, it has reduced taxes, it has funded infrastructure projects – this is what simulus programs do.
Unemployment is past 8%, it has gone up to double digits. I’m not sure who that keeps in work…Maybe the guys named Plouffe, Orszag, Emmanuel, Axelrod, Geithner… CA is in deeper debt…Success!

CA is in deeper debt…Success!
Posted by: The Usual | Feb 1, 2010 11:54:03 PM
____________________________________
You might want to do some research on the Recovery and Reinvestment act and what it’s actually doing.
California is receiving about $85 billion in stimulus funds – imagine the shape California would be at if Republican votes had carried the day voting ‘no’ against this plan.
Do you have any idea how many more people would be out of work if you pulled $85 BILLION in funds out of California?

Present Obama is simply playing games to cover his lack of leadership and his failure to pass the legislation he claimed as his #1 priority.
They put the health care ‘savings’ into their budget projections so that when HCR doesn’t pass they can accuse Republicans of ‘blowing a hole in the budget’ and ‘increasing deficits by 1.2 trillion’ and so forth.
Get it?
Pretend the savings are really there, so that when everyone sees they aren’t you can blame your opponent.

industrialised countries
Posted by: tierra | Feb 1, 2010 11:46:47 PM
__________________
December 16, 1773. Or perhaps, April 19, 1775

Dear Leader said:
“The plan I’m announcing tonight would meet three basic goals. It will provide more security and stability to those who have health insurance. It will provide insurance for those who don’t. And it will slow the growth of health care costs for our families, our businesses, and our government….
….Now, add it all up, and the plan I’m proposing will cost around $900 billion over 10 years … most of these costs will be paid for with money already being spent — but spent badly — in the existing health care system. The plan will not add to our deficit. The middle class will realize greater security, not higher taxes. And if we are able to slow the growth of health care costs by just one-tenth of 1 percent each year — one-tenth of 1 percent – it will actually reduce the deficit by $4 trillion over the long term.”

“Do you have any idea how many more people would be out of work if you pulled $85 BILLION in funds out of California?”
Do you? How many jobs have been created in California (12.4% unemployment) with the stimulus funds?

industrialised countries
Posted by: tierra | Feb 1, 2010 11:46:47 PM
Isn’t “industrialised” the British spelling of “industrialized”? Hmmmm. That’s interesting.

Americans have short memories alright.
The Carter years gave us 20% (yes 20%) interest rates, high inflation, high unemployment and a president unwilling to do what it took to fix it (cut taxes and let Americans spend their own money).

Cute. Sarah Palin is laundering money through her PAC. People have donated money to her PAC and what does PAC do with over $63,000 of that money? Why they buy Sarah Palin’s books – and who gets that money? Why Sarah Palin and her book company. Cute.
Posted by: tierra | Feb 2, 2010 1:45:01 AM
You know what happens when you ASSUME, tierra. Please post your source that Palin is receiving royalties from these purchases
____________________________________
When an author’s books are sold the author receives royalties, as does the book publisher – please quote your source that Palin is not receiving royalties.

“please quote your source that Palin is not receiving royalties.
You shouldn’t make the assertion to begin with, that Palin is receiving royalties, if you can’t support it. Asking someone to prove she is not receiving royalties is rather, uh, superfluous. No?