Don’t Miss a Post. Subscribe now.

The Republicans’ Unbelievable Proposal to Cut The Deficit to Zero

President Biden wants a clean increase in the debt ceiling while Republicans seek spending cuts. 

This will end the way it always does, Republicans will cave.

The Debt-Limit Time Machine

Please consider the The Debt-Limit Time Machine

As Congress prepares for another debt-limit standoff, a look into the past — at the 10 such deadlines lawmakers have confronted over the last 13 years — offers three shared truths.

The first: House Republicans, even with hearty majorities, have always needed votes from Democrats to act on the debt limit. Second: Any time House conservatives tried to unite around fiscal demands, they failed. And finally, when Democrats refused to negotiate upfront, Senate Republicans came to their rescue with a bipartisan fix in the end.

The president’s “no negotiations” playbook comes after more than a decade of hostile debt fights, during which Biden was often an influential dealmaker. When Democrats fired up bipartisan talks upfront, like in 2011, it ended in major spending cuts and economic fallout. When they wouldn’t engage from the beginning, like 2013, House Republicans eventually unraveled their own ultimatums.

One Known, Three Unknowns

  • The Known: Expect a replay of 2013. Republicans will cave.
  • First Unknown: Whether the House caves sooner rather than later. I suspect later. 
  • Second Unknown: Whether caving in will cost Kevin McCarthy his job as Speaker of the House.
  • Third Unknown: Whether or not Senate Republican get some trivial face-saving tidbit for McCarthy. And that answer may decide the second unknown.

Are there any unknown unknowns? 

History pretty much suggests that is it. In short, the House stance is unworkable, and it  will make Republicans look weak when they do cave.

What then? 

That’s the real question, and once again it does not look pretty for announced Republican positions.

Kevin McCarthy Targets Elimination of Budget Deficits in Debt-Ceiling Talks

The Wall Street Journal reports Kevin McCarthy Targets Elimination of Budget Deficits in Debt-Ceiling Talks

As discussed above, the headline is Fantasyland stuff. But what happens after the debt ceiling is raised?

Since they took control of the House last month, Republicans have been arguing that Congress should cut spending in exchange for GOP support for raising the debt limit, now at about $31.4 trillion. In an address Monday ahead of President Biden’s State of the Union address on Tuesday, Mr. McCarthy (R., Calif.) laid out the size of the cuts Republicans are seeking. 

A responsible debt limit increase that begins to eliminate wasteful Washington spending and puts us on a path to a balanced budget is not only the right place to start, it’s the only place to start,” said Mr. McCarthy, who spoke from a hallway near the speaker’s balcony, a formal area often used for major announcements. “Now we must return Washington to a basic truth: debt matters. The debt limit is one of the most important opportunities Congress has to change course.”

I have no disagreement with that idea. But how do we get there?

Mind the Gap

The annual gap between federal spending and federal revenue was around $1.4 trillion last fiscal year. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a nonpartisan budget group, has estimated that balancing government spending and revenue over 10 years—without any new tax increases—would require cutting 25% of government spending. 

Again, I have no problem with that idea in theory. 

But is 2.5 percent a year doable? How? Not with off the table ideas coupled with the defense spending that Republicans want.

Off the Table

Mr. McCarthy reiterated he wouldn’t support cuts to Social Security and Medicare—the largest federal spending programs—and he didn’t specify a timeline for balancing the budget. But without raising taxes or cutting Social Security, Medicare or spending on veterans and defense, CRFB estimates that Congress would need to cut 85% of spending in all other categories to balance the budget in 10 years.  

Cuts to Social Security are off the table. Cuts to Medicare are off the table. Tax hikes are off the table. Presumably,  defense cuts are off the table. 

How the hell can there be any move towards cutting the deficit if all that stuff is off the table?

It’s Impossible

McCarthy cannot do what he proposes and that is even before we discuss interest on the national debt which will soar way more than what the CBO has budgeted. 

Like it or not, there needs to be serious compromises. Instead, we have more military spending, more handouts, and more energy policy madness, which translates to more inflation and more interest on the national debt.

Will McCarthy even last the year? 

If not, it will be extreme Left vs extreme Right. 

Nothing will get done, arguably not a bad thing but it would increase the likelihood of a Republican loss in 2024.

The 2024 election will decide the Left vs Right fate, but no matter who wins that battle, don’t expect any progress on the deficit until there is a major currency crisis.

The Annual Interest Rate Payment on Government Debt is $850 Billion and Rising Fast

Meanwhile, please note The Annual Interest Rate Payment on Government Debt is $850 Billion and Rising Fast

At the current pace, interest on US government debt will soon hit one trillion dollars. Yet, we have nonsensical talk of cutting the deficit, while everything is off the table. 

Good luck with that.

This post originated at MishTalk.Com.

Thanks for Tuning In!

Please Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

Subscribers get an email alert of each post as they happen. Read the ones you like and you can unsubscribe at any time.

If you have subscribed and do not get email alerts, please check your spam folder.

Mish

Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

Subscribers get an email alert of each post as they happen. Read the ones you like and you can unsubscribe at any time.

This post originated on MishTalk.Com

Thanks for Tuning In!

Mish

Comments to this post are now closed.

67 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
LPCONGAS99
LPCONGAS99
3 years ago

“Cuts to Social Security are off the table. Cuts to Medicare are off the table. Tax hikes are off the table. Presumably, defense cuts are off the table.”

“How the hell can there be any move towards cutting the deficit if all that stuff is off the table?”

How about tightening up the border ? So NYC , which will already have to ask the federal government for Billions of $’s to pay for the illegals, won’t ask to ask for trillion’s??????…………….and Texas…………………and Arizona……………………..and California…………no, forget California
PapaDave
PapaDave
3 years ago
Arguing about the national debt, fed deficit, debt ceiling, etc is all a waste of time. Even having a debt ceiling is a total waste of time. Its the same political crap over and over, without any form of resolution, while things continue to get progressively worse.
As an individual, it is better to ignore it all and focus your energies on improving your own life. Work hard to become healthier and wealthier and avoid the stress of worrying about things you have no say in.
Felix_Mish
Felix_Mish
3 years ago
My latest tax opinion (which will change, as such opinions do) is that if only one problem were solved, I’d vote to eliminate all national taxes and substitute printing dollars to cover federal spending. Fees would remain for some services.
The advantages of this method of taxation are simplicity (no super-complex tax code, no forms to fill out, a lot of unemployed accountants, etc. etc.) and coverage (everybody who has and/or uses dollars pays their “fair share”).
The one problem is that there is no inherent mechanism working to minimize the money printed – to balance the desire to spend more, more, more. Anybody know a solution? Perhaps using the printing press has to hurt in some way. For every ten million dollars printed, execute a random citizen, for instance. Which would be cutting off your nose to spite your face. Bad idea. So anyway, ideas? Anybody? Bueller?
Yooper
Yooper
3 years ago
Reply to  Felix_Mish
Just a thought, but for all intents and purposes, all the money whether spent by the government to companies directly or spent by citizens, ends up in the coffers of corporations and banks. Tax those two non-citizen entities to soak up the new money creation at some proportion and destroy it. (not that politicians would destroy that cash, but again, just throwing something out there).
Felix_Mish
Felix_Mish
3 years ago
Reply to  Yooper
Has a problem of, “What is a bank?” So, this would be kinda letting the camel’s head under the tent. Complexity. Coverage.
Ah. How about this: Let’s assume all “money” is crypto. So, assuming all “money” can be referenced by a number inside a limited range of numbers, the crypto system could make randomly selected money disappear. A penny here, a penny there and pretty soon it adds up to trillions of dollars. That’d be the way to keep the amount of “money” relatively stable. Except that crypto money can easily be lost. Just forget your password and it’s gone. I’d think, therefore, that the crypto system would require activity on the part of all “money” on a regular basis. No more activity? That money is whacked. Pushes the problem back a step. Anyone could have a service that keeps their money alive long after they, themselves have forgotten their password, so to speak. Yeah, just throwing something else out there. 🙂
Which brings up the question of “How much money should there be?” I’ve seen no definitive answers to that question. Presumably, “money” users want price stability. But what should have price stability? There are not very many stable things. Consider cars, homes, health care. All dissimilar to those same-named things 50 years ago. It’s the CPI definition problem. It’s a matter of opinion. Which lets the camel’s head in.
tesawyer
tesawyer
3 years ago
The debt crisis is why we are preparing for WWIII which we hope to win. It will be a war between those that believe in precious metal backed non-debt currency (think Russia, China, Brazil, India, and South Africa) and those that believe in a debt backed system which we have. In a precious metal backed system the government’s ability to spend in limited by the available funds and hopefully there is little waste, while in the debt system the country simply goes further and further into debt as the government (the currency controller) determines who wins and who fails, not the marketplace, and the easily available funds make corruption easy, and the ultra-wealthy very rich from interest. We are trapped by the debt we can eithr default or go to war and hope for another Brenton Woods agreement that sets us up for another fifity years.
vanderlyn
vanderlyn
3 years ago
there are NO conservatives in US congress, except for a rare back bencher like ron paul, who casts meaningless votes. Repugs are radicals, and Libruuuuuuls are illiberal. Ronnie Raygun scammed the Rs. tripled the debt. doubled the WAR department spending. the amerikan people are dupes. pretty dumb, but ok with the whole scam. it’s a crumbling empire. plain and simple. we’re going the way of roman empire and argentina. it will be a yawn too. the ride down is many decades and a few centuries. pack a luch.
jiminy
jiminy
3 years ago
Reply to  vanderlyn
Reagan and Trump ran on balanced budget platforms. Both set records for annual deficits. You are correct.
Zardoz
Zardoz
3 years ago
Reply to  vanderlyn
Conservatism is now about grievances against others, particularly sexual deviants. Nothing gets the blood boiling like watching someone live out the life you secretly dream of. Some weirdo prancing around in leather chaps and a feather boa somehow becomes an existential threat… especially to The Children! Omg, we mustn’t let The Children get then idea that they can dress and speak in ways that make us feel icky and ashamed!
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
3 years ago
Reply to  Zardoz
Does that include white people putting on blackface and playing the banjo?
Or are your “ideas” carefully tailored to some kind of “correctness?”
Asking for a friend.
Zardoz
Zardoz
3 years ago
Reply to  Lisa_Hooker

If you’ve got the stones to do it in front of the people you’re mocking, it’s fine with me.

TheCaptain
TheCaptain
3 years ago
In a debt Ponzi not only can you not cut the additional new debt to zero, you cannot even slow the pace of new debt. In fact, you cannot stop it from exponential growth because the second you do you will experience a deflationary collapse as everyone with any skin in the game immediately takes whatever they can out of the system (a run on the system) out of fear of losing it all.
This is a Global Debt Ponzi. Inflate or collapse, there is no plateau or soft landing. NFW. And if you cannot see this then you are going to get creamed.
Six000mileyear
Six000mileyear
3 years ago
Congress needs to pass bankruptcy laws that permit states to file for bankruptcy. This will allow the Federal government to then raise taxes to stabilize the national debt. This should force interest rates on US treasuries and bonds down and preserves the US dollar as the world’s reserve currency. States and state employees are miserable, but at least the entire financial system won’t collapse.
Rbm
Rbm
3 years ago
Republicans cut taxes ( mainly helping the wealthy) adding to the debt Then turn around and complain about the debt the tax cuts incurred.
Siliconguy
Siliconguy
3 years ago
Reply to  Rbm
True. It is also true that Democrats raise taxes X, them increase spending 2X.
SS, Medicare, interest and defense/war spending are off the table. Republicans won’t raise taxes, Democrat say they will raise taxes but put in so many social engineering loopholes they don’t actually raise any more money.
This cannot end well.
Rbm
Rbm
3 years ago
Reply to  Siliconguy

Agreed.

Rene_FPV
Rene_FPV
3 years ago
Its probably an impossible problem until the system is changed. It might require a change in the constitution. A psychological shift would help put people into agreement. Most people can agree that we spend too much, so this is where the budget planning should start. Start with the dollar value of what is to be spent in the budget and lock it in and make it hard to change after the fact. Once there’s a number then allocate the funds. Also if agreement cant be made then just carry over the previous year’s budget with no increases.
TheWindowCleaner
TheWindowCleaner
3 years ago
Government bonds are investment and the interest paid on themis a minimal or non-existent cause of inflation. If you implemented a 50% Discount to the consumer at retail sale all of which discount was rebated back to the merchant granting it to the consumer you would implement macro-economic beneficial deflation. Try thinking anew so you can see a paradigm change when you look at it.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
3 years ago
A 120% discount would get people what they need and a little extra change in their pocket for incidentals.
You must think bigger.
misemeout
misemeout
3 years ago
Healthcare, including medicare and medicade, represents over 30% of federal spending and more than the entire federal defecit. There is no way to fix the defecit without dealing with that monster. Expect nothing to be done.
MarkraD
MarkraD
3 years ago
Reply to  misemeout
And there’s no way to deal with those costs without invoking price/profit scrutiny & regulation in the healthcare sector, which won’t happen as long as the industry continues buying elections.
That said, recently the Senate took heroic actions when Taylor Swift and Beyonce tickets got too expensive.
I betcha Ticketmaster starts making bigger campaign donations from here….
.
Dr Funkenstein
Dr Funkenstein
3 years ago
Reply to  MarkraD
I remember when Ticketmaster and Teletron merged, we we promised lower handling fees…which were something like $1.20 on a $20 ticket.
But it sure is nice to see Bruce Springsteen gouge his fans with high ticket prices after selling his catalog for nine figures.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
3 years ago
Reply to  misemeout
An acquaintance said that we need a virus with a very high mortality rate for old people and no vaccine.
I told her that that would probably be politically unacceptable, if revealed.
Zardoz
Zardoz
3 years ago
When they cave, they’ll play it for all the drama they can… it’s rigged! It’s a conspiracy! Lizard people took control of my mind with 5G and made me capitulate! Don’t let it happen to you, protect your family with Mike’s Magic Pillows!
It’s always the same: the drama then the grift. Soap operas to tug at the rage strings.
MarkraD
MarkraD
3 years ago
Reply to  Zardoz
Enough of these whacko conspiracies, get back to focusing on real problems Congress should confront, like Jewish space lasers.
Zardoz
Zardoz
3 years ago
Reply to  MarkraD
The base DEMANDS whacko conspiracies, and without them there’s no party.
This is why they’re trying to outlaw opposition in Florida. The stats don’t lie, and some republicans still have some connection to reality.
8dots
8dots
3 years ago
1) Collect student loans, in any shape or form. Blame the R and the supreme court. 2) No SS to Pareto top. 3) Increase medical deductions from SS. 4) Send the Dow to a higher low. Next year zero COLA. 5) Dump RRP, but keep rates at 4%/ 5%. 6) Biden is an Anti Martingale gambler. He can flip instantly. 7) Ukraine ceasefire. 8) The buck stop at Biden desk, not McC desk
hmk
hmk
3 years ago
Nothing productive in eliminating the deficit will ever happen as long as the parasites are allowed to keep feeding off the electorate. Every politicians sole purpose is to stay in power and get rich. Any polictically painful legislation, but necessary, will never get passed as long as they have to worry about getting reelected. Its easier to do the bidding of their money masters ie special interests, and act like they are doing something for the peons. Limiting them to one term only would be a good start
HippyDippy
HippyDippy
3 years ago
Reply to  hmk
Why give them any terms? They’re parasites; always get rid of parasites.
WTFUSA
WTFUSA
3 years ago
Reply to  hmk
“Limiting them to one term only would be a good start”
Agreed, then follow with making lobbying federally elected officials a felony for which there is no parole, reinstatement of Sarbanes-Oxley, removing suspension for FASB 157 and reinstating the gold standard that Nixon removed in 1971.
If I am going to dream, might as well go large…
CRZYHUN
CRZYHUN
3 years ago
Seriously, we need to de-regulate to spur growth and increase revs. That simple.
Zardoz
Zardoz
3 years ago
Reply to  CRZYHUN
Agreed… pimpin’ is hard when the po po be baggin’ my hos.
Billy
Billy
3 years ago
A flat tax where the 1%ers would pay more in taxes is off the table. I wonder why.
TexasTim65
TexasTim65
3 years ago
Reply to  Billy
People always think that would make them pay more but the reality is I bet they wouldn’t.
They’d just buy their yachts, planes, cars etc in Europe or some other place with a super low sales tax and register it outside the US even though they’d use it in the US. Heck, even people at the border could easily jump to Canada / Mexico for the day, buy what they want avoiding the tax and returning. You can claim you will search everyone at the border but that costs lots more money (and hiring) and is that really what we want to be doing job creation wise?
None of that even address business owners who’d just buy everything in corporate name (company car etc) to avoid personal flat tax.
threeblindmice
threeblindmice
3 years ago
Reply to  Billy
Err….
“flat tax”… vs. [someone] “would pay more”.
How does that work exactly? Unless you think 1%ers pay less than secretaries. In which case, you’ve accepted disinformation.
HippyDippy
HippyDippy
3 years ago
Reply to  threeblindmice
Economic illiteracy is encouraged by the state.
HippyDippy
HippyDippy
3 years ago
As long as the FED exists, any talk of eliminating the deficit is just that; talk. It’s impossible. The deficit is just going to keep rising until the dollar collapses. Plenty of historical precedents to make this whole thing a no-brainer.
JeffD
JeffD
3 years ago
If payroll taxes were raised by 1.6% (0.8% employee/0.8% employer), Social Security would be funded, and thus become a non-issue.
MikeC711
MikeC711
3 years ago
Reply to  JeffD
Do we really want to see ourselves increasing taxes in a way that will not decrease the deficit?
Siliconguy
Siliconguy
3 years ago
Reply to  JeffD
True, but that 1.6% would fall on the low wage people the hardest. Leaving the rates alone and removing the income cap would tax the “rich.”
JeffD
JeffD
3 years ago
Reply to  Siliconguy
0.8% of $30000 is $240/yr. I think they can handle that $20/month payment for lifetime income security.
davidyjack
davidyjack
3 years ago
Reply to  JeffD
I’d like to see a 2% tax ((1% employee/1% employer)) on all income above the current Social Security cap. That should shore up Social Security for many more years.
Ultracrepidarian
Ultracrepidarian
3 years ago
At this point almost 3/4 of the federal budget is made up of entitlements, namely Social Security, Medicare, and the interest on the federal debt. The interest has risen from $155 B to $555B in the past 18 months due to the rate increases by the Federal Reserve. Social Security and Medicare outlays both increased due to cost of living increases, not acts of Congress. There is nothing Congress can do to stop further increases. The deficit can only be brought to zero with major changes to Social Security and Medicare. The only common sense solution to fix them is to shift the age limit for retirement to be higher, so you dont either add to the social security taxes or reduce any benefits to the elderly receiving them.
If Social Security and Medicare are not fixed, very soon, the entire applecart will collapse and all the apples will roll out into the gutters…..
JeffD
JeffD
3 years ago
Medicare can’t be fixed.
MikeC711
MikeC711
3 years ago
While I agree in concept, back in 2000, I was looking for the apple cart to tip w/in a few years. Here we are almost a quarter of a century later and the apple cart has increased in size by an order of magnitude, but has not yet tipped. I still call our income vs outflows unsustainable … but they just keep adding 0s to our national debt and go on as if nothing is happening.
threeblindmice
threeblindmice
3 years ago
Reply to  MikeC711
I thought I was going to die at 50. But then, I lived to my late 50s (today). Therefore, I will continue to age without limit. The statistics back me up too. I have over 20,000 daily data points each of which shows I lived another day. That’s 100% accuracy. Therefore, I am immortal.
TexasTim65
TexasTim65
3 years ago
Reply to  threeblindmice
It’s like the old saying ‘markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent’.
At some point the apple cart definitely will tip over and it could be tomorrow or it may not be in your lifetime.
Siliconguy
Siliconguy
3 years ago
Reply to  TexasTim65
See also Fingers of Instability.
Three people died in avalanche near here a couple weeks ago. Two of the bodies won’t be recovered until the snow melts. They didn’t see it coming either.
threeblindmice
threeblindmice
3 years ago
Correct. The math is unassailable. Eventually you will be right. I expect this to be ‘resolved’ through intentional or unintentional inflation.
radar
radar
3 years ago
They could lower the rmd age to 62 to force folks who sign up for SS to pull money from their tax deferred accounts and pay taxes on it.
Felix_Mish
Felix_Mish
3 years ago
Reply to  radar
Whether that’s a good or bad idea, it’s the sort of thing we’ll probably see more of. Complexity will be maximized to baffle the innocent.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
3 years ago
Reply to  radar
And eventually they will begin to tax Roth IRA withdrawals, just as they did with Social Security income.
KidHorn
KidHorn
3 years ago
The best solution is for health care costs to come way down. That will never happen since health care is the biggest political contributor. To both sides of the aisle. Instead we focus on how to pay for exorbitant prices. I’m convinced the ACA was never meant to solve anything. Rather it was meant to make sure the problem would never be solved.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
3 years ago
Reply to  KidHorn
The best solution is to obtain higher elderly mortality rates faster.
You don’t have to pay for what you don’t have.
Very, very, sad, but effective.
I have not seen any stats on how it’s working in Ukraine.
KidHorn
KidHorn
3 years ago
I agree that a balanced budget without a huge increase in tax rates will never happen. And it would only work for a few years at most since high tax rates would kill the economy and jobs so the total taxes collected wouldn’t be enough in short order.
The thing that really bugs me is we have these enormous deficits and we’re spending on non essentials. Like supporting Ukraine, forgiving student loans, and forcing renewables. These are luxury items that you splurge on when you have a surplus.
Wonder how popular forgiving student loans would be if every household got a $1000 bill to cover the cost.
MikeC711
MikeC711
3 years ago
Reply to  KidHorn
That would be a great idea … vote w/your wallet. If you are FOR forgiving student loans (ie: extorting the bill from the taxpayers) then add $1000 to your federal tax return (there is a place on the 1040 for that) and if you are not for it, then do not do this. People will scream that they can’t be hypocrites anymore, but I’ll bet < 1% of folks put in that extra $1000.
Business Man
Business Man
3 years ago
Reply to  MikeC711
I like the tax return as referendum idea. It accomplishes many things at once, actually.
Lisa_Hooker
Lisa_Hooker
3 years ago
Reply to  KidHorn
You might approve my improved short-form tax return.
Line 1, enter your total gross income.
Send in a check in that amount.
The US Treasury thanks you and will send you what we think you need.
Have a nice day.
MarkraD
MarkraD
3 years ago
I remember Paul Ryan, in the aftermath of the Great Recession and the healthcare debates (death panels!… government takeovers!), standing at his chart promoting his “Path to prosperity” and explaining, with a smile, how middle class Americans would have to endure 75 years of austerity in order to preserve “job creating tax rates” for high net worth individuals and corporations.
This is when I completely shut down the notion that the GOP was in any way interested in serving the people.
Seeing the look on Karl Roves face in 2012, having bet the farm with near $50 million of that “job creating” tax money on Romney, as he learned he’d lost – priceless.
.
Business Man
Business Man
3 years ago
Reply to  MarkraD
Did the Affordable Care Act make healthcare cheaper and more efficient and accessible?
Zardoz
Zardoz
3 years ago
Reply to  Business Man
For poor people it did… not for me though.
TexasTim65
TexasTim65
3 years ago
Reply to  Zardoz
How poor are we talking? The really poor just showed up at hospitals and got free care anyway because the hospital can’t turn you away and they had no money to pay.
All the happened was that instead of hospitals eating the cost, the rest of the taxpayers had to end up eating the cost via ObamaCare.
Zardoz
Zardoz
3 years ago
Reply to  TexasTim65
Can barely make rent poor. They can go to a doctor that isn’t in the emergency room now, which prevents health problems that require the emergency room.
vanderlyn
vanderlyn
3 years ago
Reply to  Zardoz
we have medicaide for all in many states. it works nice for the patients. they pay for aspirin even. zero cost. it’s a nice deal.
TexasTim65
TexasTim65
3 years ago
Reply to  Zardoz
Sort of. They still have to find a doctor that takes that insurance.
Father in law is a podiatrist and his wife works in the office doing billing. They told me they don’t take Obamacare etc because it takes too long to pay and they don’t pay enough. So even though those people technically can go to a doctor, in reality it’s very hard for them to find one who takes that insurance.
radar
radar
3 years ago
Reply to  TexasTim65
I thought the hospitals just passed the cost on to the prices of everything that would then be paid by someone else filing insurance. The only point I saw for Obamacare was the preventive care that the poor didn’t have that has now raised everyone’s healthcare cost.
Felix_Mish
Felix_Mish
3 years ago
Reply to  radar
My understanding is that Obamacare was a mechanism to get 20-somethings to pay for unneeded (by them) health insurance. Their money went to pay for others who need health care and insurance.

Decorate Your Walls with Mish Fine Art Images

Click each image to view details or purchase in the store.

Stay Informed

Subscribe to MishTalk

You will receive all messages from this feed and they will be delivered by email.