If Coronavirus Were Ebola, How Many Would Trump Have Killed?

Would You Trust Trump To Handle Ebola?

Why Trust SOCIAL SECURITY To Him?

“I just dropped in to see what condition my condition was in.”

So sang Kenny Rogers, in “Just Dropped In (To See What Condition My Condition Was In)” in 1968 when he was part of the group Kenny Rogers and The First Edition.

It’s good to occasionally get a check up on oneself, or to perform – as much as possible – a self-checkup, or as some call it, “a check-up from the neck up.”

Today, the Congressional Budget Office released a report entitled “The Outlook for Major Federal Trust Funds: 2020 to 2030.”

The report may be downloaded free from this site, or from the CBO website.
On this site here:
Congressional Budget Office Report September 2020 – Major Federal Trust Funds Outlook 2020-2030

Or, from the CBO website here:
https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2020-09/56523-Trust-Funds.pdf

The picture they paint is concerning.

Yet, it’s not as if we didn’t know it was coming… sooner, or later.

Kind of like the COVID-19 pandemic.

We’d been warned for years about the very real, and distinct possibilities of an outbreak of disease, and this POS45 President and his henchmen administration unwisely decided to heed bad advice given to them (most likely, issued at his heavy-handed, micromanaging god-like “expert-in-all-things” direction) and dismantled the offices and organizations, and their budgets, that were designed specifically to effectively mange such problems.

Remember: Unlike the novel coronavirus pademic, the SARS-CoV-2 which causes COVID-19, Ebola was NOT a problem in this nation, nor in the world at large, and its outbreak was contained to the immediate area precisely because of the wise actions of the previous administration. That’d be the Obama administration, in case you’ve developed amnesia, early-onset Alzheimer’s, or old-age dementia in the last 4 years… take your pick.

Just imagine if the coronavirus had been Ebola.

On second thought, don’t.

Be thankful it’s not worse… though it will likely get worse before it gets better.

The CBO report first methodically laid out an explanation about Federal Trust Funds, and then, began to discuss them one-by-one.

Fortunately, the report is easy to read, and to understand.

The report states that

Today Mitt Romney spoke out of the _?_ side of his mouth, and said:

“And you know what he did with it? He’s used it to pay for Obamacare, a risky, unproven, federal takeover of health care.” –Mitt Romney

Government estimates say that more than 6,000 jobs statewide and 20 percent of Iowa‘s electricity needs come from wind power, and the state’s senior GOP leaders all support renewing an extension of a wind tax credit that Romney opposes.

Romney’s campaign did not respond to repeated quests for his position on the other portions of the bill, which includes items such as a tax break for developers of NASCAR facilities and purchasers of electric motorcycles.

—
http://www.businessweek.com/ap/2012-08-14/gop-ticket-faces-growing-pains-as-dems-attack
—

FACT: The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has determined that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is fully paid for,

A: 1.4% Q: What is the annualized spending growth rate under Obama & lowest rate of any president since Reagan?

Who’s the Biggest Spender? Obama or Bush?

By BRUCE BARTLETT, The Fiscal Times June 1, 2012

Lately, there has been some controversy about the growth of spending under Barack Obama. It began on May 22 with a column by Rex Nutting of MarketWatch, which concluded that the rate of growth of federal spending under Obama has actually been trivial compared to the last 4 presidents.

According to Nutting’s calculations, spending has grown only 1.4 percent per year under Obama – one-fifth the rate under Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush. Following is a chart accompanying the article.

There has been a considerable amount of debate about Nutting’s calculations, which fly in the face of Republican dogma. Much involves technical accounting issues, such as how to allocate spending during fiscal year 2009. This is important because fiscal year 2009 began on September 1, 2008 during Bush’s administration, reflecting his priorities. By the time Obama took office on January 20, 2009 the fiscal year was almost half over; he didn’t submit his first budget until February 26, 2009 and the fiscal year 2010 budget is really the first one that reflected his priorities.

Nutting assigned the bulk of fiscal year 2009 spending to Bush, an assumption that other analysts have questioned. Glenn Kessler of the Washington Post found that Nutting overstated his argument in various ways. But the PoliFact site of the Tampa Bay Times concluded that the Nutting column was essentially correct.

Aside from the political implications, the reason this debate is important is because there is a tendency for people to conflate spending, deficits and debt, as well as confusing rates of change with absolute levels.

The difference between

Congressional Budget Office: Food Assistance Rate to Grow

While not totally bright, the CBO report is not totally grim, either.

Here’s why.

The method by which unemployment figures are calculated does NOT take into account people whom have STOPPED looking for work. Many – if not most – of those people would accept work, were suitable work offered to them. They have stopped looking for work for many reasons, not the least of which is that they have become despondent from their unfruitful job search.

Now, when the unemployment rate begins to rise again, we will actually see an INCREASE in the rate.

Why?

Because many of the people whom had previously stopped looking for work, will again resume their job search. Thus, they will be counted among the unemployed, whereas previously, they were not counted among the unemployed.

How does the methodology of counting the unemployed relate to this report about rising participation in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program?

In many cases, the rates of unemployment, in conjunction with the expiration of unemployment compensation benefits, correlates strongly with want and poverty.

Thus, if the CBO says the rates will grow, we can make a reasonable estimate that the strength of economic recovery will have taken hold, and be in full swing.

As an observation aside, examine the larger infographic, and look at the states with the highest rates of SNAP utilization. Most of them are in the Southeast: Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, Tennessee, West Virginia. Those states were formerly Democratic strongholds, and have now swung strongly toward Republican politics. Three other states – Maine, Michigan, and Oregon – also have SNAP utilization rates above 18% of their population.

What would happen politically if Republicans were allowed to eliminate the SNAP program?

—

Food Stamp Rolls to Grow Through 2014, CBO Says

• April 19, 2012, 1:58 PM ET

The Congressional Budget Office said Thursday that 45 million people in 2011 received Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits, a 70% increase from 2007. It  said the number of people receiving the benefits, commonly known as food stamps, would continue growing until 2014.

Click for larger CBO infographic.

SNAP infographic - Click for much LARGER image.

Spending for the program, not including administrative costs, rose to

American Income Disparity and the ideal of Equality

The report by the Congressional Budget Office  is based upon data provided by the Internal Revenue Service and the Census Bureau, and was requested several years ago. The official report may be downloaded from the CBO via the link provided in the story in the first sentence of the first paragraph in the words “new report.”

It is my opinion that Republicans – which party has been hijacked by the radical element commonly known as the “TEA Party” – are Hell-bent on destroying this nation by eliminating – bit by bit, piece by piece – every vestige of rule, regulation and protective service that benefits the American people.

Their ideology is “tear down,” rather than “repair, rebuild.” It’s like tearing down the house just to replace the toilet.

Their political philosophy is disguised as “small government, less regulation” which on it’s face, sounds nice – which is almost like asking “if you could satisfy your hunger by eating