Obama and the Democrat controlled Congress Oh yes the Healthcare law that we needed to pass first so we could find whats in it told us how much money it would save the taxpayer
Wellllllllllll guess what another Obama Lie. Oh yes this will be so good for a growing economy! Is this Bush's fault?
Business owners will pay $4 billion more in taxes under President Obama’s Affordable Care Act (ACA) than the Congressional Budget Office had previously expected.
According to the updated estimates, the amount of deficit reduction from penalty payments and other effects on tax revenues under the ACA will be $5 billion more than previously estimated, the CBO reported today. That change primarily effects a $4 billion increase in collections from such payments by employers, a $1 billion increase in such payments by individuals, and an increase of less than $500 million in tax revenues stemming from a small reduction in employment-based coverage, which will lead to a larger share of total compensation taking the form of taxable wages and salaries and a smaller share taking the form of nontaxable health benefits.”
Bottom line, CBO revised the Obamacare tax burden upward by $4 billion for businesses and $1 billion to $1.5 billion for individual workers.
CBO couldn’t help but bump into Chief Justice John Roberts controversial decision uphold the individual mandate as a constitutional exercise of Congress’s taxing power. The report dubs the individual mandate a “penalty tax” — that is, a penalty paid to the Treasury by taxpayers when they file their tax returns and enforced by the Internal Revenue Service.
Henry Hazlitt, a free market economist, and who wrote the great book Economics In One Lesson, about the economic costs and benefits of a broken shop window.
To sum things up, most economics miscalculations happen by looking at a benefit, but not the cost, or looking at the cost, but not the benefit.
In regards to the ACA, one can look at the cost of the ACA and grumble, or you can COMPARE it's cost to what health care costs would be if the ACA didn't exist.
When you make that comparison, the ACA reduces the deficit, and it gives more people health care coverage.
..........delivering lectures on the virtues of chastity. According to the Medicare trustees, Bush's Part D boondoggle created a $9.4 trillion unfunded liability over the next 75 years. Projected net expenditures from 2009 through 2018 are estimated to be $727.3 billion. That’s a huge number, even for an economy as big as ours.
As usual, Nuguy blathers on and can't support the sweeping generalizations he makes:
Romney-Ryan extension and increase of tax breaks for rich screwing poor spends $540 billion nevermentioned by Right Wingnuts here. What is going to cost more in ACA is the states that are too stupid to plan exchanges and have HHS do that for them as well as the states who are stupid enough to opt out of Medicaid expansion funds.
How the Affordable Care Act Ruling Affected Its Price.
http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2012/07/25/how-the-health-care-ruling-affected-the-affordable-care-acts-price-tag/
Court’s Ruling May Blunt Reach of the Health Law
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/25/health/policy/3-million-more-may-lack-insurance-due-to-ruling-study-says.html
From the WSJ the Conservative Wingnuts Don't Read because they don't read anything--they make up sweeping generalizations and never link them:
"The new report is the first federal assessment to show how the court’s decision to strike down part of the Medicaid expansion will change the contours of the law. The law is now expected to cost $84 billion less over a decade, for a total cost of $1.168 trillion during that time.
The nonpartisan office estimated that overall, repealing the law would increase the deficit by $109 billion over the next decade because voiding it would eliminate new taxes and cuts to Medicare expenditure that are greater than the law’s spending to expand insurance coverage."