Financial disaster approaches; liberals kill bills and count on GOP caving in

Take a look at the following graph:


It was produced from data released by the Congressional Budget Office, and it shows that if things continue on the current path, federal spending on all health-related costs--Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIP and Obamacare--is forecast to exceed the combined total of all other federal spending by 2053.

My liberal friends will try to dismiss this with the following "arguments:"

1. "2053 is so far in the future that the forecast isn'tt relevant to anyone trying to make policy decisions today."

Uh, Sparky? Wasn't it precisely that sort of reasoning that got us into the current fix we're in today?

2. "This chart is from the Tea Party, so it's just propaganda!"

Um...take it up with the CBO, buttercup. It's their data.

3. "We wouldn't have this problem if The Rich just paid their fair share of taxes!"

a) What does that have to do with the graph shown above? and

b) While most of us have no problems with closing tax loopholes, it's been shown many times that if the government were to seize ALL the income of people making over $300,000 per year--i.e. tax them at a 100% rate--that would seize something like $1.2 Trillion. But this year alone the govt will spend $1.6 Trillion more than it takes in. So while your Dem base loves dem class warfare slogans, raising taxes not only won't solve the problem, it literally cannot.

4. "Even if the forecast is accurate, we can't cut any medical benefits because that will hurt poor people and innocent children!"

Okay, that's a tough one, but there's an answer. You won't like it, but it exists: The government simply cannot afford to provide the current level of medical care to every poor person in the country. This is a great socialist pipe-dream. I'm not saying the govt--i.e. taxpayers-- can't afford to give some level of "free" medical care to the poor, but merely that we can't afford to do it at the level we're doing now, and are mandated to do in the future under Obamacare.

What we could afford would be to provide basic health care--free vaccinations (they are already), setting fractures, appendectomies, that sort of thing. Sort of like Cuba or Russia does today.

5. "You Tea-baggers are heartless! And raaacist! And you hate kids! And gays, 'cuz you want to do away with free drugs for uninsured people with hiv.

Plus, you have absolutely no sense of fashion! I mean, look at the motley, sweatshirted morons that show up at tea-party rallies. Must you people do all your shopping at Wal-Mart? What do you do with your money, anyway? Probably spend it all on something dumb, like college tuition or health insurance or mortgage payments.... Ah, wait...

6. "Even if the current level of medical outlays is shown to be totally unsustainable, it doesn't matter--because Barack said we didn't need to cut any benefits. Plus, his former green jobs director, Van Jones, says this country is NOT in a financial bind and that we're really awash in money. Why should we believe your stupid sources instead of Barack and Van?"

Fine. Then just give us your detailed budget and we'll see if the numbers add up.

"Our what? No no no, you don't understand: It's your job as Republicans to draw up a budget. Then we have our friends in the media blast it to win us some more votes, and then our party kills it without debate in the senate. Then repeat as needed until the deadline approaches. At which point Barack and our friends in the media will blame Republicans for pushing granny off the cliff in a wheelchair--that commercial was so great! And then we'll see to it that the switchboards light up, and your side will panic and cave, as always."

Didn't the House just pass a balanced budget plan and send it to the senate? And didn't the Dem majority kill it without debate, on a straight party-line vote?

"Well, senator Reid just did that to save time, because he knew it could never pass."

So you don't just want a budget, you want one that everyone on the Democrat side will love? Isn't that a pretty underhanded, cynical way of doing things? Plus, if you refuse to cut government spending, won't we just have to repeat this over and over again?

"And we're laughin' all the way to the bank, tea-bagger."