|
Phydeaux -> RE: Obama Care (4/1/2014 5:42:57 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: frunandsins.
quote:
We are still under, by at least a million people, and probably more, the number of people that had insurance before Obamacare. .
Because the US census says so.
Income, Poverty, and
Health Insurance Coverage in
the United States: 2009
Says that 45.3 million people didn't have insurance in 2009. At the very best, you might say that we have broken even in insurance, except that we've had a 10% drop in the percentage of people that have employer provided health care. And a concomitant increase in the % of people that have government provided health care.
That number had ballooned to 48.3 + million, prior to the 4.7 million insurance cancellations. Or roughly 53.0 million.
The CBO 2014 project is for a 12.5% reduction in uninsurance. As far as I know, these are the most definitive statistics available. The LA times was using an unpublished RAND study. Might as just well admit you're inventing stuff. 12.5% gets you a reduction of call it 6.6 million. Roughly down to 46million.
Ie., still higher before Obama started caring.
Now just attacking your figures for a minute.
Fewer than a million people who had health plans in 2013 are now uninsured because their plans were canceled for not meeting new standards set by the law, the Rand survey indicates.”[1]This means we have to subtract this ~1 million newly uninsured group from the 9.5 million to arrive at the net reduction in uninsured of 8.5 million.
It was announced nearly 2 years ago that 3.1 million previously uninsured young adults age 19-25 had gained coverage as a consequence of the Obamacare mandate that parental plans cover such dependent “children.” This was based on an analysis of data from the National Health Interview Survey. However, there’s two other much larger surveys that both show much smaller declines: 1.8 million according to the American Community Survey (ACS)[2] and 1.4 million using the Current Population Survey (CPS).[3]
And again, the LA times figures are ignoring the 2-5% of people who paid the January premium but did not pay february.
Finally, an eyepopping statistic.
In reporting their enrollments in February, the administration said that 82% of the exchange enrollments were getting a subsidy.
With the CBO projecting the insurance costs to be $7000 per person, there is no way 18% of us can afford to provide subsidies for 82%.
Simple math.
quote:
quote:
And there is the quite likely result that the supremes will rule against subsidies for healthcare.gov signups which will completely gut that.
Likely, according to whom?
Me. Caveat emptor.
quote:
quote:
If the point was to expand medicaid, the government could have done that at any time. And didn't need a 1.8 trillion dollar bill, and to wreck the coverage of everyone else to do it.
You answered your own argument - the point of PPACA is not to just expand MedicAid. It was done as a part of a larger group of actions taken to oprovide affordable care to American citizens.
It is also manifestedly false that the PPACA "wreck(ed) the coverage of everyone else," since there are millions of people now being able to afford health care that they were not before. So these people's coverage just went up from 0. Perhaps you'd wish to re-state your point?
Median premiums to people that actually bought insurance, according to eInsurance were up 56%. Average deductibles up 86%.
So certainly I will restate my point. Obamacare is a disaster. Hope and change indeed. Only it turns out the hope is very expensive, and the only things americans are left with is pocket change.
How about we keep our insurance - and you keep the change.
|
|
|
|
