Posted on 12/01/2012 9:45:21 AM PST by ksen
Laura D’Andrea Tyson:
... The single most important factor behind the projected growth in federal spending is the growth in health care spending, driven primarily by the growth in Medicare spending per beneficiary.
The outlook has already improved as a result of significant changes in the delivery and payment of health care services in the Affordable Care Act. As a result of these changes, growth in Medicare spending per enrollee is projected to slow to 3.1 percent a year during the next decade, about the same as the annual growth of nominal G.D.P. per capita and about two percentage points slower than the annual growth of private insurance premiums per beneficiary.
Speeding up the pace of the Affordable Care Act changes along with others, such as reducing subsidies for high-income beneficiaries and drug benefits and introducing small co-pays on home health-care services, would mean even larger Medicare savings.
A “structural reform” popular among Republican deficit hawks like Representative Paul Ryan of Wisconsin to convert Medicare to a premium-support or voucher system would be counterproductive and would drive up both spending per beneficiary and overall costs in the health care system.
The goal of a “go big” plan for deficit reduction should be to ensure the economy’s long-term growth and competitiveness. Yet the debate over spending in Washington is fixated on cutting entitlement spending. Very little is heard about the need to increase federal spending in education and training, research and development and infrastructure, three areas with proven track records in rate of return, job creation, opportunity and growth. ...
Wow! Now there's a name from the grooveyard of forgotten Slick Willie bimbos! A real "blast from the past!"
Yeah, an annual GDP growth rate of 30%+ oughta' fix things right up. /s
So medicare spending slows to 3.1% a year. What will probably happen is that government spending for non-medicare health care will increase by 10% a year (or more). Exactly how this is supposed to help government deficits is beyond me.
Thanks for posting
This article seems to favor the administration . Anybody know Who Laura Tyson is, and what kind of publication is the The Economist Review ?
“Very little is heard about the need to increase federal spending in education and training, research and development and infrastructure, three areas with proven track records in rate of return, job creation, opportunity and growth. ...”
The rate a return has proven to be abysmal....
Her answer is administrative efficiency! She ignores the fact that Congress dials down the reimbursement rates for Medicare and Medicaid services, which simply means health care providers have to raise the rates for private pay covered patients. And she sees that as an advantage in administrative efficiency for Medicare/Medicaid! Ugh.
Laura D’Andrea Tyson is a professor at the Haas School of Business at the University of California, Berkeley, and served as chairwoman of the Council of Economic Advisers under President Clinton.
Berkeley.....says it all....
Laura Tyson was one of Clinton’s economic advisors. Touts the Democrat line of economic thought. Unicorns and skittles, if you catch my drift.
As an economist, using the term in its narrow, Stalinist sense, Tyson was always and remains a top down idiot savant who used to speak and write lovingly about the joys and efficiencies of the Romanian economy - yes indeed - until the architect and dear leader of that commie sh*thole slave state - yes, the selfsame Nicky Ceausescu, had an extremely bad day at the office. It seems a lot of Tyson’s encomia abut the wonders of the Romanian economy were, um, at odds with the views of Romanians, who offed Nicky when their misery became untenable. Tyson doesn’t know bugger all about the free market, so it is impossible for her and her fascist ilk to see the divide between the free market and all of the fascist thuggery which is the very essence of Obamacare. Always remember, Obamacare can only be imposed at the point of a gun. For fascists like Tyson, at the point of a gun isn’t coercion, its just a little attitude adjustment for the unenlightened among us.
She is basically saying that a new government program will solve the problems created by an old government program. In a few years we will need a newer government program to solve the problems created by THIS government program. Rinse. Repeat.
Oh yeah, the “genius” socialist economist from Smith College, whose doctoral thesis extolled the former Yugoslavia and the Ceaucescu-era Romania for their “activist” economic policy.
That worked out well for the Romanian people, who lived in a feudal society, starving. They eventually revolted, tried mr and mrs. Ceaucescu and shot them on the spot. There is an incredible video on Romania of that day eerily reminiscent of the “showbiz” marxist dictator in waiting we have:
“The King of Communism” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lkm1g82XwTM
And this short one, very moving, from Virginia Prodan:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFHlc-06f8A
Tyson’s view is that the free market is imperfect and supports increased minimum wage. All of this is in a “centrally managed” economy. This woman is at the height of laughable ridiculousness. A clinton re-tread, teeing up the next ceaucescu in a dress— hillary clinton.
We must resist every ONE of these lying socialist/marxist bastards, with force if neccessary. They are re-selling to a naive stupid populace the same destruction for their own profit and our slavery to the state. History has proven them wrong every time.
Tyson is a moron. The money that is flushed down the black hole of the Dept. of Ed should be returned to the states where it may do some real good. This shouldn’t even be that too hard of a sell. All one has to do is convince the teachers’ unions they would be better off if we eliminated that big parasite in DC and the states kept their money—more money in the teachers’ pockets.
Nothing?
Thats what I thought.
The burden is eliminated! We can thank Pelosi for the savings!
Palliative end of life optimum serenity initiative (PELOSI).
"Just give 'em a pill. Don't waste resources." Obamacare.
Also, I did a cursory search and cannot find a source but I do remember clearly that Ms Tyson as Clinton's top economic adviser pushed for a "one time" expropriation of 15 percent of all private retirement funds, the money would be used to help the inner cities among other things.
Now the Rat Party wants 100 percent.
Dr, Laura whatever is on drugs
Of course! Can't everyone see that competition drives up costs in the free market?
Only State-imposed monopolies are efficient. Look at the DMV, the Post Office, or the VA. It's hard to imagine anything better.
Man, are Rethuglicans stupid!
/s
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.