In article om,
bud-- wrote:

Opay as you go programs since the mid-80s when the
Congress (by a large bipartisan majority which means it fits most any
definition of "functional") passed a tax increase that was then, by law,
placed ONLY in Treasury securities. This was specifically put in place
to help pay for the Boomers.
At that time, and every administration and every Congress since
then, the politicians have sorta forgot to find money to pay back the
securities (either interest or principle). And to this day they continue
the pretense of SS being funded for another 30 years or so when the cash
runs out much sooner and there is no way to fund the payments. I call
this our own Grecian Formula.

Are you talking about the trust fund being invested in treasury bills
which, because of the way it was reported, does not show up in the deficit?
I would settle for it not showing up in the deficit. It is viewed as
a positive that actually hides the real deficit and debt. If any company
tried to call a long-term liability (the bonds) as a short term asset,
numerous federal agencies would be standing in line to haul people off
to jail


It is a debt, just like the debt to China. I suppose the US could
default on its debt...
Which is pretty much my point. This is an unfunded liability that
nobody knows how we are going to pay for. We will be Greece within the
next 25 years (at most) if we don't do somethind today. We won't but we
should.



And the CBO underestimates the savings from medical cost control. Some
of the changes are built into the ACA. (Looking at "best practices" is
also in the ACA.)
Since when? Their projections for MCare growth and expenses have
been consistently overestimating savings since at least the mid 80s.


I suppose we could use estimates from the Heritage Foundation.
Certainly as second opinion.



It assumes that none of the various taxes will have an
effect on prices paid. It assumes that the cuts in pay to the docs and
hospitals will come about (ironically enough the day before the ACA was
passed, Congress stopped a 35% in cut in pay to the docs. The reason for
the cut was accumulated cuts that hadn't happened in the Medicare
Sustainability Act from the mid-90s.)

It is a problem that is irrelevant to ACA - if ACA disappeared the doc
pay problem would still be there.
But the ACA's cost projections and saving were based on getting
these cuts.. which they haven't stuck to since the Sustainability Act
was passed in the 97 or so. These cuts are the backbone of the
financial side of the ACA and hardly irrelevant.

But if the ACA disappeared the doc fix is still a problem. It is a
problem that is independent of the ACA.
Yeah, but the problem is made even worse because the assumptions of
the ACA are built on Congress all of a sudden doing something they
haven't done since 1997. My point is why now would they get the balls to
follow through.


The CBO is the accepted basis for estimates to congress.
And the EPA estimates are the accepted basis for cars. Doesn't mean
either one is correct.

So you reject the CBO.
No, but neither do I assume they are gospel. Too many indicators
suggest otherwise. They are one data point, that is all.
--
America is at that awkward stage. It's too late
to work within the system, but too early to shoot
the *******s."-- Claire Wolfe