Town Square

Post a New Topic

Talking Points vs. Reality - by Thomas Sowell

Original post made by Pleasanton Mom, Birdland, on Mar 16, 2010

"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?"

Web Link

Comments (5)

 +   Like this comment
Posted by TheSkyIsFalling
a resident of Mission Park
on Mar 16, 2010 at 8:57 am

Wow another copy and paste job. Where is your opinion? If I wanted the opinion of the conservative media apparatus I would have ventured there in the first place.

Do you have a opinion or just cut and pastie?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Wayne
a resident of Dublin
on Mar 16, 2010 at 9:18 am

[Post removed due to same poster using multiple names]


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Republican Dublin resident
a resident of Dublin
on Mar 16, 2010 at 9:38 am

You have added more useless talking points, nice job.

Reality is that Obama is trying to provide Health care to as many people as possible. It may cost more money, but there are many people that are getting old and sick.

What else should we do, provide aid to others for catastrophic events, but not our own people in their time of need?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by SteveP
a resident of Parkside
on Mar 16, 2010 at 9:55 am

SteveP is a registered user.

'Republican' dublin resident (you can't be an R):
To take your generousity with my tax dollars to the next step:

"Reality is that Obama is trying to provide 'free' houses to as many people as possible. It may cost more money, but there are many people that are getting old and homeless."


"Reality is that Obama is trying to provide 'free' cars to as many people as possible. It may cost more money, but there are many people that are getting old and immobile."

You get the idea....where does it stop and why is an emergency, such that we can't examine the proposals details before signing it?


"What else should we do, provide aid to others for catastrophic events, but not our own people in their time of need?" We should take care of our own, first and foremost. Help them help themselves, don't create more members of the dependent class.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Republican Dublin resident
a resident of Dublin
on Mar 16, 2010 at 2:19 pm

When it comes to regulation of infrastructure and other core services, ie. health care, if the competition does not exist, the government should have a hand in it. No government will be perfect nor will the open market, both will have waste.

I am not a Republican that believes deregulation is the answer to every issue. It is for everything outside of core infrastructure and services. In other words, lets not deregulate our national highway system as commerce will obviously slow way down.

By the by, I was totally against bailing out the auto industry, however, the banks needed to be bailed out. Draw your own conclusions from that statement.


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Email:


Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: *

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Vote YES on Measures 45, 46, & 47, NO on 48
By Roz Rogoff | 30 comments | 1,975 views

Prop 47: not perfect, just preferable.
By Tom Cushing | 2 comments | 619 views