Obama’s Talking Points vs. Reality

In a swindle that would make Bernie Madoff look like an amateur, Barack Obama has gotten a substantial segment of the population to believe that he can add millions of people to the government-insured rolls without increasing the already record-breaking federal deficit.

Those who think in terms of talking points, instead of realities, can point to the fact that the Congressional Budget Office has concurred with budget numbers that the Obama administration has presented.

Anyone who is so old-fashioned as to stop and think, instead of being swept along by rhetoric, can understand that a budget— any budget— is not a record of hard facts but a projection of future financial plans. A budget tells us what will happen if everything works out according to plan.

The Congressional Budget Office can only deal with the numbers that Congress supplies. Those numbers may well be consistent with each other, even if they are wholly inconsistent with anything that is likely to happen in the real world.

The Obama health care plan can be financed without increasing the federal deficit— if the administration takes hundreds of billions of dollars from Medicare. But Medicare itself does not have enough money to pay its own way over time.

However money is juggled in the short run, the government’s financial liabilities are increased by adding this huge new entitlement of government-provided insurance. The fact that these new financial liabilities can be kept out of the official federal deficit projection, by claiming that they will be paid for with money taken from Medicare, changes nothing in the real world.

I can say that I can afford to buy a Rolls Royce, without going into debt, by using my inheritance from a rich uncle. But, in the real world, the question would arise immediately whether I in fact have a rich uncle, not to mention whether this hypothetical rich uncle would be likely to leave me enough money to buy a Rolls Royce.

In politics, however, you can say all sorts of things that have no relationship with reality.

If you have a mainstream media that sees no evil, hears no evil and speaks no evil— when it comes to Barack Obama— you can say that you will pay for a vast expansion of government-provided insurance by taking money from the Medicare budget and using other gimmicks.

Whether this administration, or any future administration, will in fact take enough money from Medicare to pay for this new massive entitlement is a question that only the future can answer, regardless of what today’s budget projection says.

On paper, you can treat Medicare like the hypothetical rich uncle who is going to leave me enough money to buy a Rolls Royce. But only on paper. In real life, you can’t get blood from a turnip, and you can’t keep on getting money from a Medicare program that is itself running out of money.

An even more transparent gimmick is collecting money for the new Obama health care program for the first ten years but delaying the payments of its benefits for four years. By collecting money for 10 years and spending it for only 6 years, you can make the program look self-supporting, but only on paper and only in the short run.

This is a game you can play just once, during the first decade. After that, you are going to be collecting money for 10 years and paying out money for 10 years. That is when you discover that your uncle doesn’t have enough money to support himself, much less leave you an inheritance to pay for a Rolls Royce.

But a postponed revelation is not part of the official federal deficit today. And that provides a talking point, in order to soothe people who take talking points seriously.

Fraud has been at the heart of this medical care takeover plan from day one. The succession of wholly arbitrary deadlines for rushing this massive legislation through, before anyone has time to read it all, serves no other purpose than to keep its specifics from being scrutinized— or even recognized— before it becomes a fait accompli and “the law of the land.”

Would you buy a used car under these conditions, even if it was a Rolls Royce?

  • therealend

    Continuing on with my 'Health Care bill as a car' analogy, the government designed car would have several surprizing features such as a Blame gear. That is, you could shift the car into Blame when it didn't run properly. It would also have a gas tank that would suck the fuel right out of the pump (and other cars as well). And, it would have an alternative means of power known as binary magic. (In this case, that means a one with 12 zeroes following it.) I would call this vehicle the ObamaCar in honor of it's chief engineer.

  • therealend

    The ObamaCar would have trouble on the highway too. It has a very difficult time passing.

  • aliko

    The real problem with radical medical insurance is that there is no accountability and responsibility on the part of the patient.
    Take for example the one who leads the issue of radical medical insurance – Michael Moore:

    There is no doubt that obesity is one of the leading causes of serious illness and death. Health is dependent on what one consumes, regular physical activity and stress-less mental state, as much as possible.

    Why should someone who's responsible for himself pay for Moore's reckless behavior towards himself and worst, be responsible for a huge percentage of the population who are feeding and drinking themselves like pigs?

    Actually, Moore's health system idea is exactly what would drive people into behaving like him and that would destroy the health system since they have a health system to fall on.

    The motivation for such a health system is to make the government obese with obese bureaucracy that will end with an obese debt.

    If there was a taxation system that taxed products such as soft drinks, unhealthy processed foods as well as a reliable and consistent way to monitor people's fitness then a radical health system could be viable. However, the size of a system needed for responsible clients would be much leaner, like the clients themselves and what leftist would want that?!

  • michaelle

    Obama lives in a land of make believe. He is the most arrogent president in history. His administration wants to break the law and pass a bill on health care without voting on it. These people are criminals!!!! If this fascist bill passes they will have a big pile of lawsuits up their rear ends. These politicians think we are an anarchy-not a democracy or republic. This is how FAR out in deep space these morons are. This type of arrogence has never happened in american history. Those that say different are lying to you. Some nut who was interviewed on fox said,"oh, this is like social security"- NO, its not. This was a bipartian vote and this health care bill will be passed without the a bipartian influence- plus, its a outright government take over of this country. Social security isn't a goverment power take over.

    Also, these power nut politicians only care about due process when it comes to terrorist or murderers. When it comes to the american people, they don't care.

    Our federal government are a bunch of marxist-I don't even consider these people democrats. There is nothing democratic going on in DC.

  • USMCSniper

    And it gets worse. Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) is asking all female Democratic Members to attend a hastily called meeting Wednesday morning but isn’t saying what the meeting is about. Pelosi’s office sent an e-mail out Tuesday evening requesting that all female Democrats come to the female members-only meeting at 10 a.m.

    Imagine if a male speaker of the house ever called a "male" members only meeting for either party for any reason all the women would throw a beserker!

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/eerieSteve eerieSteve

    I would be all for increasing the deficit in scientifically proven ways which will generate money, such as a new Manifest Destiny to cleanup the criminal dens. I do not see healthcare being a growth sector for the federal government.

  • 080

    As I understand it the Obama health plan will save $500 billion by cutting waste and fraud. The first question is if the government knows that there is that much fraud and abuse why doesn't it do something about it? The second question: is there that much waste, fraud and abuse? If so why will there be less if the government extends coverage to some 30 million people?

    • Thunder

      gov acceptst all that fraud – it increases the amount of "needy" and "justifies" hiring more bureaucrats, Dem voters…..

  • MKS

    Assertion: We've got to have Health Care reform legislation NOW – people are dying each day for want of health insurance!

    Legislation: We're going to collect revenue for 10 years, but only provide benefits for 6 years, so it will be a while before we implement things.

    Which is it? So urgent that we can't explore options or read and debate the exact wording, or so casual that we can wait a while to provide benefits? Or is the need for the government to grab power urgent, but the need for the people to see doctors not so urgent?

    This HCR legislation now before Congress, and the legislators who support it, ought to be rejected.

  • happy infidel

    Boy oh boy, you guys elected this tosser and now he is giving you the rough end of the pineapple, without lube too I might add. It will be a glorious day when you lot toss his butt to the curb and leave him to the trashcan of sad history.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/JosephWiess JosephWiess

    People in all 50 states need to put out arrest warrants for the democrats and Obama. The charge should be "Hot check writing, and check kiting." After all, if you wrote a check for 3 trillion dollars and didn't have the money in the bank, you'd be in jail. Why shouldn't they?

    • AC7880

      According to Obama, there are 57 states. He clearly did not have his teleprompter that day. Obama without a teleprompter reveals what an idiot he truly is.

  • Thunder

    "How exactly do you add millions of people to the government-insured rolls without increasing the federal deficit?" – SIMPLY – with a lie….worse, some idiots will believe, like they believe unemployment is steady at 9.7% (under 10, of course), does not change while thousands are fired every week…..Real unemployment is at least 20-25%. Ask around, don't read official claptrap.