CBO Scores Trumpcare II

And you can prove this how?

 

The theory that hospitals charge private insurers more because public programs pay less is known as cost shifting. What underlies this theory is that a hospital’s costs — those for staff, equipment, supplies, space and the like — are fixed. A procedure or visit simply takes a certain amount of time and requires a specific set of resources. Therefore, if Medicare, say, does not pay its full share of those costs, a hospital is forced to offset the loss with higher prices demanded of private insurers.

The cost shifting theory goes back decades. But economists have long been skeptical of it, pointing to two key weaknesses. One is that it assumes hospital costs are immutable. We should be just as suspicious of such claims in health care as we would be for any other industry.

Jeffrey Stensland, Zachary Gaumer and Mark Miller — who serve on the commission that advises Congress on Medicare payment policy — offered a different view in a 2010 article in Health Affairs. Hospital costs, they said, can change and do so in response to market forces. They found that hospitals that face little competition are less efficient and have higher costs. With few competing hospitals to turn to, private insurers have little choice but to cover those high costs. But Medicare’s prices are fixed and are therefore low relative to the high costs of these inefficient hospitals.

 

The ACA was a decent bill the issue was the individual mandate, which was created by the Republicans.

Originally, the ACA was going to use a public option, which would have expanded Medicaid to anyone who could not afford private insurance. This would have been paid for by raising the taxable income cap for FICA.

Also, Obama wanted to abolish the ban on interstate insurance sales, but the GOP shot that idea down. They wanted to protect insurance companies from competition.

 

Cost shifting has been debunked for years. The entire idea around it is that hospitals costs are fixed and never change. This is BS. Hospitals costs rise and falls with supply and demand just like all others costs.

 

And yet you whine about the one nation that spends more on medical research than the rest of the world combined and the one that creates most of the new drugs and technologies that keep everyone every where alive.

 

Assuming of course one doesn't know the history of the CBO in terms of the accuracy of it's projections.

They aren't immutable of course they go up every year usually at better than the over all rate of inflation, this is mainly driven by technological advances, and ever changing government rules and regulations most of which don't do anything but keep trial lawyers in business. Hospitals are inefficient almost entirely because of government, and most hospitals have plenty of competition.

 

Thanks for your opinion based on right wing talking points. That's all it was

 

From Factcheck.org

So, was the Congressional Budget Office really “way, way off … in every aspect” of how it predicted that Obamacare would work, as the White House claims? No, it wasn’t.

The CBO actually nailed the overall impact of the law on the uninsured pretty closely. It predicted a big drop in the percentage of people under age 65 who would lack insurance, and that turned out to be the case. CBO projected that in 2016 that nonelderly rate would fall to 11 percent, and the latest figure put the actual rate at 10.3 percent.

It’s true (as Trump administration officials have repeatedly pointed out) that CBO greatly overestimated the number who would get government-subsidized coverage through the new insurance exchanges. But at the same time, CBO underestimated the number who would get coverage through expanding Medicaid.

And whatever the failings of CBO’s predictions, they were closer to the mark than those of the Obama administration and some other prominent forecasters.

 

While it is certainly true the CBO isn't always correct yeah it is absolutely true that the CBO gave the Democrats a hammer to beat the Republicans up with

 

Not only is CBO wrong it is frequently spectacularly so. To those who have a clue it will mean nothing to those who do not it might matter. But hose mostly voted for Hillary anyway.

 

This is only true if these people do not pay for their insurance themselves.
Why should people not have to pay for their own insurance?

Sounds pretty good to me. Do you disagree?

Makes perfect sense to me -- you pose less risk, you pay a smaller premium. Do you disagree?

 

so what you are saying is its more like 400 million that will be without insurance what with them being wrong spectacularly

 

It was predictable that hardcore ideologues would be very pissy about the CBO's scoring this stinker.

It is the only detailed, objective analysis there is, and it is obvious that Repubs have failed to fashion a viable replacement for the ACA.

Whatever Trump®Care McConnell and his cronies might throw together would have full mooners in the House shrieking "ObamaCare Light!", so reconciliation is not in the cards.

I seriously doubt that the conspiracy to screw the poor and lavish tax breaks on the wealthiest folks will go anywhere either.

With rampant trumpery crapping on American values, it is a comfort that the GOP is a tribute to legislative impotence, unable to pass a single piece of major legislation.

"Shhh! Let him wail!"​

 

The 23 million fewer people without insurance currently do not have insurance anyhow and will not get it because insurer's are pulling out of Obama care.
Besides, the CBO is corrupted politics. They are not bypartisian. They are owned by beaurocrates.

 

Ideologues need to come to grips with reality.

Despite the GOP's determination to sabotage ithe ACA, they are demonstrably impotent in contriving a realistic replacement. Trump®Care is as real as Trump®Wall, Trump®MuslimBan, Trump®RedistributionOfWealth to the wealthy, Trump®ClimateChangeDenial, and Trump®Promise to voluntarily come clean with his tax returns.

Don't expect to see "something terrific" Trump®Care that covers "everybody!" anywhere but tin he fake Trump®News propaganda ministry.

 

You calling anyone else an Ideologue is one of the better examples of pot/kettle on this board. Of course the Republican establishment doesn't want to do anything about ACA right now, they plan on parlaying suffering Americans into a veto proof majority. Hopefully they also parlay it into the replacement of of a few Republican establishment swine with some actual conservatives.

 

Wow. Did you read what you wrote before you hit enter?

The CBO is headed by a Trump appointee .

23 million people will lose healthcare insurance. That could be YOU and certainly will be someone you know

 

Oh so if you are only able to afford insurance because you get subsidies...you don't "deserve" it?

There's alot of Republicans who fit that category and they're gonna get screwed by the GOP

 

Your rage at a pragmatic approach to governance is an amusing spectacle. With the groveling Trump®Cult frustrated by the scandal-ridden, legislatively impotent blight of trumpery, the paranoia that is now savaging Republicans is inevitable. It's an embarrassment for hardcore Trumpers to endure the paralysis of the GOP running the executive as well as both houses of the legislative branches of government, straining ineffectually to pass anything but wind. The cautionary meme issued to the true-believers by their ideological entertainment performers to parrot, the ubiquitous, shrill "Here Liberals Dwell!" is an absurdly silly alarm amidst the GOP's Three Stooges unseenly hat trick of self-abuse. Thus, the Republican Party now turns on its own, becoming a latter-day Donner Party.

​

Of course, Americans' dismal assessment of the Mar-a-Lago Moe and the complimentary Larry and Curly of Capitol Hill has the alt-reality zealots in a tizzy. And if the arrogant stumblebums had actually managed to enact a squalid replacement of the ACA, a budget that redistributes the nation's wealth into the coffers of the elite few, religious discrimination in immigration, or even the unsustainable erection of a teensy-weensy wall, the loathsome regard of Americans for them would be worse.

"Nyuk, nyuk, nyuk!"​

 

Exactly. If you are young and healthy your premiums go down. For everyone who is older or sicker premiums will increase assuming of course they can get insurance at all.

 

Sorry but providers charge everyone exactly the same. Appears you have no idea what you are talking about. The difference is in what the consumers of healthcare actually pay. The only people who actually pay what is charged is people who are neither on Medicare, Medicaid, or have insurance.

 

Anyone who actually read the Republican plan could figure out that hugh numbers of people would lose their healthcare.

 

Yeah only if pragmatism equals cowardice. I am greatly in favor of pragmatism, Unfortunately Excessive government interference in peoples lives is not only not pragmatic it is ultimately self defeating. The more rules and regulations you have the less meaningful enforceable all of them become, including the ones that really need to be.The more government you have the less efficient and competent it will be and the more corrupt it will become. Oh and for what it is worth the worst sort of corruption happens not because people are greedy but because they tend to be lazy and capricious.

 

your attempts to fake reality makes your post dishonest

 

I didn't fake reality sir I stated it baldly.