“Despite what it got wrong” + “it was closer in its estimates than many other estimators”. What does that actually mean in the real world? That they were/are less wrong than other organizations? I’m not sure that actually instills much confidence in their findings. Of course they’re wrong, but they’re the best we have.
CBO projected 30 million uninsured in 2016. The number was 27 million. Is that wildly off?
I’m perfectly happy to consult a better source of economic predictions. What source do you recommend? And how did they score the Republican bill?
You mean Medicaid and I did include that. CBO was off by 33%. That’s “way off”, not “pretty close”.
“They were wildly off, but that’s the best we got” is not much of a recommendation.
The CBO was much, much closer in their predictions than the Republicans. Republican predictions were off by much, much more than the CBO.
Both the Democrats and the Republicans attack the CBO when it goes against them and praise the CBO when it goes for them. If someone questions actual methodology, they might be worth listening to. General bomb throwing is irrelevant.
Let’s see your sources for better predictions.
(post shortened, underline added)
Are you saying that this bill has already been passed into law? I’m pretty sure that both houses of Congress have to pass their version of the bill (and maybe survive a conciliation effort, if required) and a President has to sign it.
“They were off by 10% where it counted, and I’m looking for someone who was accurate to 9% or better,” is my actual argument. But it sure seems like you’re all talk, seeing as how you can’t tell me anyone who did better.
That’s the way the system works. 435 elected members, proportionally representing the population of the 50 states, attempting to best represent their constituents and still reach a workable compromise.
The House has passed a Republican bill. That’s step one.
The Senate has a Republican majority. Any bill they pass will be a Republican bill.
Once both houses are done, it will be a Republican bill which will go to a Republican President.
Once he signs it, it will be a Republican healthcare plan.
At which point, you’re fucked.
Gerrymandering makes that a lie.
Didn’t you used to troll about how ACA was terrible because it didn’t get a single Republican vote? (In spite of the bill contains Republican authored amendments, of course.) Where’s your interest in bipartisanship now, troll?
[Moderating]
Let’s try and cool it on the whole, “calling for mob violence against elected officials” thing, okay?
No warning issued.
[/Moderating]
It isn’t that he doesn’t know (about this or ANYything else) because he doesn’t know shit, as bad as that would be.
It’s that he just doesn’t give a fuck.
“You guys” voted for him. I didn’t. Now “you” get to “reap the rewards”.
Meme making the rounds…
“Now the mentally ill still can’t get treatment, but they can buy guns.”
Whatever version comes out of Congress won’t have a single Democratic vote. The GOP owns health care 100%. And each member of Congress who voted in favor of the bill yesterday is on record as supporting whatever numbers the CBO puts out next week, whether this version of the bill passes or not.
Hell, if the GOP fails to come up with a new bill, they STILL own health care 100% since they control Congress. But since yesterday’s great fanfare was that the House passed a bill, most people are going to just assume we’re working under a GOP framework anyway. And let’s not forget the president’s promise of beautiful healthcare that everyone is really happy with.
I mean, you can sit around and try to educate people about Congress or the arcana of getting stuff passed or how the GOP received no assistance, etc. That worked wonders for the Democrats after 2010.
Hahahaha, that’s exactly why the Democrats are responsible for ACA/Obamacare. Perhaps you could explain the process to Jophiel. Or not.
I have no idea if Congress will be able to pass this latest bill. There are still lots of things that can go wrong (or go right depending on an individuals point of view).
It still appears as if the yellow dog Democrats desperately need to “share” the credit for ACA/Obamacare, or at least share the blame. 2018 isn’t that far away.
because FRREEEEEEDDDUUUUMBBBBB!!!
Doesn’t Luis Gutiérrez (D–Chicago) still represent Illinois 4th congressional district? It’s a shame that Chicago politicians created such a bizarre, gerrymandered district in order to help their own political party. Tsk, tsk.