Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
23. You argued that the ACA merely redistributes costs rather than having any negative
Tue Dec 3, 2013, 11:17 AM
Dec 2013

effect on them.

That is an indication of either (a) dishonesty or (b) innumeracy.

Here's a helpful hint: when they talk about the AC "bending the cost curve" that means it's reducing costs.

Just ask noted rightwinger, Paul Krugman:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/29/opinion/krugman-obamacares-secret-success.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20131129&_r=1&

So, how’s it going? The health exchanges are off to a famously rocky start, but many, though by no means all, of the cost-control measures have already kicked in. Has the curve been bent?

The answer, amazingly, is yes. In fact, the slowdown in health costs has been dramatic.
...

So what aspects of Obamacare might be causing health costs to slow? One clear answer is the act’s reduction in Medicare “overpayments” — mainly a reduction in the subsidies to private insurers offering Medicare Advantage Plans, but also cuts in some provider payments. A less certain but likely source of savings involves changes in the way Medicare pays for services. The program now penalizes hospitals if many of their patients end up being readmitted soon after being released — an indicator of poor care — and readmission rates have, in fact, fallen substantially. Medicare is also encouraging a shift from fee-for-service, in which doctors and hospitals get paid by the procedure, to “accountable care,” in which health organizations get rewarded for overall success in improving care while controlling costs.

Furthermore, there’s evidence that Medicare savings “spill over” to the rest of the health care system — that when Medicare manages to slow cost growth, private insurance gets cheaper, too.

And the biggest savings may be yet to come. The Independent Payment Advisory Board, a panel with the power to impose cost-saving measures (subject to Congressional overrides) if Medicare spending grows above target, hasn’t yet been established, in part because of the near-certainty that any appointments to the board would be filibustered by Republicans yelling about “death panels.” Now that the filibuster has been reformed, the board can come into being.

The news on health costs is, in short, remarkably good. You won’t hear much about this good news until and unless the Obamacare website gets fixed. But under the surface, health reform is starting to look like a bigger success than even its most ardent advocates expected.



http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/09/opinion/krugman-the-wonk-gap.html

My guess, in other words, was that Mr. Barrasso was inadvertently illustrating the widening “wonk gap” — the G.O.P.’s near-complete lack of expertise on anything substantive. Health care is the most prominent example, but the dumbing down extends across the spectrum, from budget issues to national security to poll analysis. Remember, Mitt Romney and much of his party went into Election Day expecting victory.

About health reform: Mr. Barrasso was wrong about everything, even the “unpopular” bit, as I’ll explain in a minute. Mainly, however, he was completely missing the story on affordability.

For the truth is that the good news on costs just keeps coming in. There has been a striking slowdown in overall health costs since the Affordable Care Act was enacted, with many experts giving the law at least partial credit. And we now have a good idea what insurance premiums will be once the law goes fully into effect; a comprehensive survey by the Kaiser Family Foundation finds that on average premiums will be significantly lower than those predicted by the Congressional Budget Office when the law was passed.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Can you imagine the relief that small businesses and other employers will enjoy? NYC_SKP Dec 2013 #1
The ACA doesn't actually reduce the cost of healthcare. DesMoinesDem Dec 2013 #2
Subsidies will shift cost burden NoOneMan Dec 2013 #4
Yep. DesMoinesDem Dec 2013 #11
To those who are wealthier, and have the ability to pay. backscatter712 Dec 2013 #26
Math is hard. geek tragedy Dec 2013 #9
OK, so math is hard for you. You also seem to have trouble with the English language. DesMoinesDem Dec 2013 #10
By your peculiar 'logic' Chained CPI wouldn't be a benefit cut. geek tragedy Dec 2013 #12
Jeez, you really do have trouble with the english language. DesMoinesDem Dec 2013 #13
His point is correct quaker bill Dec 2013 #16
Exercise reduces weight. But, if you eat 5000 calories a day you're still going to gain weight. geek tragedy Dec 2013 #20
I can't explain it any simplier. DesMoinesDem Dec 2013 #22
You argued that the ACA merely redistributes costs rather than having any negative geek tragedy Dec 2013 #23
No, I said ACA didn't reduce the cost of healthcare. DesMoinesDem Dec 2013 #24
Here's what you said. geek tragedy Dec 2013 #25
Wow, you finally moved on from the first sentence! DesMoinesDem Dec 2013 #27
No, you were wrong on substance. Dishonestly so to the point where you lied and said geek tragedy Dec 2013 #30
Nope, you are wrong. So sorry you don't understand semantics. DesMoinesDem Dec 2013 #31
Pretty eager to change the subject. Yes or no: geek tragedy Dec 2013 #32
LOL. I'm eager to change the subject??? You're talking about Chained CPI on a discussion about ACA DesMoinesDem Dec 2013 #33
I have my answer: you think Chained CPI is NOT a reduction in benefits. nt geek tragedy Dec 2013 #34
I have an answer: you are desperate to change the subject. DesMoinesDem Dec 2013 #35
No, I'm applying your peculiar logic to another issue to see if you really believe geek tragedy Dec 2013 #36
Nope, your trying to change the subject. DesMoinesDem Dec 2013 #37
I think your sophistry and agenda has been pretty well revealed here. geek tragedy Dec 2013 #38
Whatever you say. Now go back to regurgitating Cheney, Fleischer, and Rove's NSA talking points. DesMoinesDem Dec 2013 #39
As a stimulus? I dunno about that argument in the near term. TheKentuckian Dec 2013 #14
I agree with you. I'm not certain that the economic benefits of the ACA are geek tragedy Dec 2013 #21
The ACA doesn't reduce healthcare costs because Keefer Dec 2013 #15
There's also a lot of under-the-hood reforms that already are reducing costs... backscatter712 Dec 2013 #28
If You Read My Inquiry Carefully In My OP - I'm Not Talking About Healthcare Costs .... global1 Dec 2013 #29
Increasing disposable income, no strings attached, is rather a weaker form of stimulus NoOneMan Dec 2013 #3
i hope so! Liberal_in_LA Dec 2013 #5
Trickle up instead of trickling down on someone Lifelong Dem Dec 2013 #6
The idea was to fix, finally, the US healthcare system bhikkhu Dec 2013 #7
Proves that the NHS rocks. n/t Laelth Dec 2013 #18
A lot of them (myself included) were paying nothing before subterranean Dec 2013 #8
Of course, global.. another reason for republicons to Cha Dec 2013 #17
Like for food and rent? WinkyDink Dec 2013 #19
Yes. Orsino Dec 2013 #40
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The Money People Will Sav...»Reply #23