<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: CBO scores the GOP health plan.</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.redstate.com/moe_lane/2009/11/05/cbo-scores-the-gop-health-plan/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.redstate.com/moe_lane/2009/11/05/cbo-scores-the-gop-health-plan/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2012 05:42:30 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: mikerazar</title>
		<link>http://www.redstate.com/moe_lane/2009/11/05/cbo-scores-the-gop-health-plan/comment-page-1/#comment-24983</link>
		<dc:creator>mikerazar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 01:34:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.redstate.com/moe_lane/?p=5402#comment-24983</guid>
		<description>believes these estimates. Read all the caveats and disclaimers in the CBO analysis. Do nor read what assumptions they made because they DON&#039;T TELL YOU!

These ten year projections are worse than useless. The facts are suspect, the asumptions are questionable,  the projections are not statistically sound. No margins for error are gven. 

As long as the CBO is given credibility, we will be debating in fantasyland. Does anyone care to project the economy in 2017? How about prostate cancer cases? They don&#039;t know. They can&#039;t know.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>believes these estimates. Read all the caveats and disclaimers in the CBO analysis. Do nor read what assumptions they made because they DON&#8217;T TELL YOU!</p>
<p>These ten year projections are worse than useless. The facts are suspect, the asumptions are questionable,  the projections are not statistically sound. No margins for error are gven. </p>
<p>As long as the CBO is given credibility, we will be debating in fantasyland. Does anyone care to project the economy in 2017? How about prostate cancer cases? They don&#8217;t know. They can&#8217;t know.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: itdiehard</title>
		<link>http://www.redstate.com/moe_lane/2009/11/05/cbo-scores-the-gop-health-plan/comment-page-1/#comment-24979</link>
		<dc:creator>itdiehard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 18:10:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.redstate.com/moe_lane/?p=5402#comment-24979</guid>
		<description>Bill should save  439 billion = 500 billion - 61 billion  in savings according to bambi...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bill should save  439 billion = 500 billion &#8211; 61 billion  in savings according to bambi&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Flagstaff</title>
		<link>http://www.redstate.com/moe_lane/2009/11/05/cbo-scores-the-gop-health-plan/comment-page-1/#comment-24978</link>
		<dc:creator>Flagstaff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 18:04:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.redstate.com/moe_lane/?p=5402#comment-24978</guid>
		<description>that catastrophic care insurance, perhaps called major medical insurance, is prohibited by law in some states.  It isn&#039;t available to the public because of that.

Does the GOP plan do anything to remove those restrictions, maybe even through its &quot;any state&quot; provisions?  That would probably increase coverage in a meaningful, market-oriented way.  If there is a demand, and I think there would be, the market would fill it without government intervention.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>that catastrophic care insurance, perhaps called major medical insurance, is prohibited by law in some states.  It isn&#8217;t available to the public because of that.</p>
<p>Does the GOP plan do anything to remove those restrictions, maybe even through its &#8220;any state&#8221; provisions?  That would probably increase coverage in a meaningful, market-oriented way.  If there is a demand, and I think there would be, the market would fill it without government intervention.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

