Updated UHC Costs from CBO

[Carmen813]

http://www.google.com/hostedne...-aGcYE_ZHW-ywD99612R00

This is the plan being put forth by Kennedy, apparently the same one that was criticized a few weeks ago for costing $1.6 trillion and only covering 1/3 of uninsured Americans.


Not sure what commentary I can add, once the plan is more fully described this could be a good option for us. It contains a public option, which I like, but Conservatives hate, and a yearly fee on employers that do not cover insurance. This yearly fee would still be much less than the cost of providing employer based insurance, and small businesses (<25) would be exempt.

The way the bill is written also prevents employers from dropping currently covered employees.

Looks like some progress is being made, though I imagine the naysayers will be out in full force in this thread soon enough.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

Originally posted by: Carmen813
http://www.google.com/hostedne...-aGcYE_ZHW-ywD99612R00

This is the plan being put forth by Kennedy, apparently the same one that was criticized a few weeks ago for costing $1.6 trillion and only covering 1/3 of uninsured Americans.


Not sure what commentary I can add, once the plan is more fully described this could be a good option for us. It contains a public option, which I like, but Conservatives hate, and a yearly fee on employers that do not cover insurance. This yearly fee would still be much less than the cost of providing employer based insurance, and small businesses (<25) would be exempt.

The way the bill is written also prevents employers from dropping currently covered employees.

Looks like some progress is being made, though I imagine the naysayers will be out in full force in this thread soon enough.

Additionally, the revised proposal calls for a $750 annual fee on employers for each full-time worker not offered coverage through their job. The fee would be set at $375 for part-time workers. Companies with fewer than 25 employees would be exempt. The fee was forecast to generate $52 billion over 10 years, money the government would use to help provide subsidies to those who cannot afford insurance.

Is that even a hefty fee? Employers are charged like $12k per employee to provide private health care. Now the alternative is a slap on the wrist of $750? I'm not exactly for mandates, but if you want to have a mandate shouldn't you put some teeth on that thing to make sure it generates some serious revenue?

Or another way to look at it is just luring the employers out of the private health sector and forcing everyone to look for alternatives... like the public plan.

Edit: My initial analysis. 1/3 of Americans were not insured. The original plan insured 1/3 of the 1/3 which means 1/9th of new Americans will get insured meaning total insured goes from 2/3 to 2/3 + 1/9 which is 7/9. Roughly 78% coverage. Now 97% coverage means that 3% arenot covered. 3% out of the 33% uninsured. So the new insurance plan covers 9/10 of the uninsured.

We moved from covering 1/3 of the uninsured to 9/10 of the uninsured. Almost 3x. So now by expanding coverage by 3x and having roughly the same price tag, what did we do? Find a slick deal? Bing cashback? Stackable coupons? Cut coverage? Cut quality? Shift the costs back to the consumer? How did we manage to cover 3x as many people all of a sudden?

 

[Carmen813]

Originally posted by: DLeRium

Originally posted by: Carmen813
http://www.google.com/hostedne...-aGcYE_ZHW-ywD99612R00

This is the plan being put forth by Kennedy, apparently the same one that was criticized a few weeks ago for costing $1.6 trillion and only covering 1/3 of uninsured Americans.


Not sure what commentary I can add, once the plan is more fully described this could be a good option for us. It contains a public option, which I like, but Conservatives hate, and a yearly fee on employers that do not cover insurance. This yearly fee would still be much less than the cost of providing employer based insurance, and small businesses (<25) would be exempt.

The way the bill is written also prevents employers from dropping currently covered employees.

Looks like some progress is being made, though I imagine the naysayers will be out in full force in this thread soon enough.

Additionally, the revised proposal calls for a $750 annual fee on employers for each full-time worker not offered coverage through their job. The fee would be set at $375 for part-time workers. Companies with fewer than 25 employees would be exempt. The fee was forecast to generate $52 billion over 10 years, money the government would use to help provide subsidies to those who cannot afford insurance.

Is that even a hefty fee? Employers are charged like $12k per employee to provide private health care. Now the alternative is a slap on the wrist of $750? I'm not exactly for mandates, but if you want to have a mandate shouldn't you put some teeth on that thing to make sure it generates some serious revenue?

Or another way to look at it is just luring the employers out of the private health sector and forcing everyone to look for alternatives... like the public plan.

That number seemed low to me too, but apparently the way the bill was changed was that employers would be prevented from dropping currently covered employees. In other words they couldn't game the system by dropping their coverage and paying the relatively small $750/worker fee. So the situation you described shouldn't be possible.

I don't believe healthcare costs $12k per employee, that sounds a bit inflated. I numbers I read the other day put the average cost of healthcare for a family of 4 at $13,000 a year.

 

[sactoking]

Originally posted by: Carmen813
That number seemed low to me too, but apparently the way the bill was changed was that employers would be prevented from dropping currently covered employees. In other words they couldn't game the system by dropping their coverage and paying the relatively small $750/worker fee. So the situation you described shouldn't be possible.

Not in the short-term, but that scenario could be perfectly viable in the long-term. We're an aging society and as the Boomers get older more and more people will be leaving the workforce. Gen X and Gen Y are much more transient than the Boomers were. They're not concerned about job-hopping, and in fact look to it for upward mobility.

How long will the average Gen X/Gen Y staffer stay at a job? 3 years? 5? If the program prevents companies from pulling the rug out from underneath current employees that's fine, but what's to stop them from offering benefits to new hires? That could push all employees into the government program within 10 years if employers wanted to.

 

[Mursilis]

My only response would be that the gov't has a very poor history regarding predicting future costs. $60B/yr my arse.

 

[Specop 007]

Yay for being forced into a system that offers worse performance then what we currently have.
When did healthcare become a right that the middle class have to pay for so everyone can have it? Jesus........

 

[Slew Foot]

Id like to know how they think they can cover more people with less money. "efficiency"? Cutting payments? But wait, cutting payments means less staff to take care of more patients. Hmmm...

 

[brencat]

No way that math works. And yes, the govt does have a history of lowballing its financial estimates. Going to be more like $150 billion/year at least.

 

[SammyJr]

Originally posted by: Slew Foot
Id like to know how they think they can cover more people with less money. "efficiency"? Cutting payments? But wait, cutting payments means less staff to take care of more patients. Hmmm...

Well, the public option would cut unnecessary staff - namely the CEO and other worthless high earners.

 

[Jeffg010]

Ok so employers can't drop coverage for employees but what happens to the $750 per person genus? You know damn well my employer will take it right out of my paycheck and call increase health expense. Please leave me the fuck out of UHC. The government needs to find anther way to pay for this. Obama promise UHC for everyone but always failed to show how to pay for it. Towards the end of the campaign someone call him out at one of the debates. His solution was to pull the troops out of Iraq and all that money that was going there would be put into UHC. What ever happen to that? Oh ya that right it were never a solution to begin with. It was a big fat lie that sounded good at the time. This is FAIL and all I will get is a big pay cut. FUCK UHC!

 

[senseamp]

LOL, $750 per year is a big pay cut for you? You must be scraping the bottom of the barrel pretty hard.

 

[Jeffg010]

Originally posted by: senseamp
LOL, $750 per year is a big pay cut for you? You must be scraping the bottom of the barrel pretty hard.

Laugh it off fool I'd rather keep my money then give it away.

 

[Carmen813]

Originally posted by: Jeffg010
Ok so employers can't drop coverage for employees but what happens to the $750 per person genus? You know damn well my employer will take it right out of my paycheck and call increase health expense. Please leave me the fuck out of UHC. The government needs to find anther way to pay for this. Obama promise UHC for everyone but always failed to show how to pay for it. Towards the end of the campaign someone call him out at one of the debates. His solution was to pull the troops out of Iraq and all that money that was going there would be put into UHC. What ever happen to that? Oh ya that right it were never a solution to begin with. It was a big fat lie that sounded good at the time. This is FAIL and all I will get is a big pay cut. FUCK UHC!

You should see the pay cut you'd get if you were diagnosed with cancer without coverage.

 

[senseamp]

Originally posted by: Jeffg010

Originally posted by: senseamp
LOL, $750 per year is a big pay cut for you? You must be scraping the bottom of the barrel pretty hard.

Laugh it off fool I'd rather keep my money then give it away.

You give it away anyways. The uninsured are a burden on the overall economy, especially when they get treatment at the ER.

 

[Carmen813]

Originally posted by: brencat
No way that math works. And yes, the govt does have a history of lowballing its financial estimates. Going to be more like $150 billion/year at least.

I think the $150 billion was the number floated around if the government paid for all insurance and ended private coverage.

The reason this is cheaper is because it leaves the existing system in tact.

My concern would be how this would affect new companies. This law doesn't prevent them from offering health insurance to their employees (as someone suggested), but it doesn't seem fiscally smart to offer private insurance when you can just pay the fine and not worry about it. Perhaps making the fine scale in some way instead of being a fixed rate would be the most intelligent way to prevent this from happening.

 

[senseamp]

Originally posted by: Carmen813

Originally posted by: brencat
No way that math works. And yes, the govt does have a history of lowballing its financial estimates. Going to be more like $150 billion/year at least.

I think the $150 billion was the number floated around if the government paid for all insurance and ended private coverage.

The reason this is cheaper is because it leaves the existing system in tact.

My concern would be how this would affect new companies. This law doesn't prevent them from offering health insurance to their employees (as someone suggested), but it doesn't seem fiscally smart to offer private insurance when you can just pay the fine and not worry about it. Perhaps making the fine scale in some way instead of being a fixed rate would be the most intelligent way to prevent this from happening.

Well, now you they can drop private coverage, not pay fine, and not worry about it.

 

[StageLeft]

Surely none of you believe this figure, do you? Wasn't the Iraq war supposed to cost $60B? Why, yes it was.

Not letting existing employers drop is braindead. It would make a new company far more competitive.

The reason this is cheaper is because it leaves the existing system in tact.

And, unlike the original figure which was an outright shameful lie, this one is a disgusting despicable outright shameful lie.

I hope somebody can bump this in a few years so that we can lol at the people who think it will come anywhere close to $60B.

 

[Jeffg010]

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: Jeffg010

Originally posted by: senseamp
LOL, $750 per year is a big pay cut for you? You must be scraping the bottom of the barrel pretty hard.

Laugh it off fool I'd rather keep my money then give it away.

You give it away anyways. The uninsured are a burden on the overall economy, especially when they get treatment at the ER.

Tell what exactly I'm paying for genus? I don't see a direct amount of money coming out of my pay check but I will if this gets past. I have insurance that pay for everything even if the cost of "treatment at the ER" goes up my insurance still pays for it.

 

[senseamp]

Originally posted by: Jeffg010

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: Jeffg010

Originally posted by: senseamp
LOL, $750 per year is a big pay cut for you? You must be scraping the bottom of the barrel pretty hard.

Laugh it off fool I'd rather keep my money then give it away.

You give it away anyways. The uninsured are a burden on the overall economy, especially when they get treatment at the ER.

Tell what exactly I'm paying for genus? I don't see a direct amount of money coming out of my pay check but I will if this gets past. I have insurance that pay for everything even if the cost of "treatment at the ER" goes up my insurance still pays for it.

Who pays for your insurance?
Actually, never mind. I am not even sure why I am debating with a man who can't even spell "genius."

 

[Specop 007]

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: Jeffg010

Originally posted by: senseamp
LOL, $750 per year is a big pay cut for you? You must be scraping the bottom of the barrel pretty hard.

Laugh it off fool I'd rather keep my money then give it away.

You give it away anyways. The uninsured are a burden on the overall economy, especially when they get treatment at the ER.

I think you found the solution!

No insurance, hit the bricks pal. Like it is currently in many parts of the world. Cash on the barrelhead or bleed dry for all the hospital cares.

 

[Jeffg010]

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: Jeffg010

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: Jeffg010

Originally posted by: senseamp
LOL, $750 per year is a big pay cut for you? You must be scraping the bottom of the barrel pretty hard.

Laugh it off fool I'd rather keep my money then give it away.

You give it away anyways. The uninsured are a burden on the overall economy, especially when they get treatment at the ER.

Tell what exactly I'm paying for genus? I don't see a direct amount of money coming out of my pay check but I will if this gets past. I have insurance that pay for everything even if the cost of "treatment at the ER" goes up my insurance still pays for it.

Who pays for your insurance?
Actually, never mind. I am not even sure why I am debating with a man who can't even spell "genius."

Are you that dumb? My employer pays form most of my insurance you know the place I work for. Damn your dumb.

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: SammyJr

Originally posted by: Slew Foot
Id like to know how they think they can cover more people with less money. "efficiency"? Cutting payments? But wait, cutting payments means less staff to take care of more patients. Hmmm...

Well, the public option would cut unnecessary staff - namely the CEO and other worthless high earners.

And replace them with worthless bureaucrats and their staff x100 times more inefficiency.


lol $750 fee? If i were an employer I would stop offering insurance and just pay the $750/worker.

 

[Carmen813]

It's interesting to me that most of you were so willing to treat the $1.6 trillion over 10 years as a solid, well founded number, and then treating this number as if it is horribly inaccurate. Especially when the first number was created using a partially written plan.

My own feeling is that this number is probably on the low side where as the other was probably wayyyyyyyyyyyyy to high. $80-110 billion a year is probably where we will end up.

lol $750 fee? If i were an employer I would stop offering insurance and just pay the $750/worker.

Which is why this bill has been written to specifically make that illegal. Do you guys even read the articles people link, or are you so busy wearing partisan blinders that you jump onto the first thing you view without actually engaging any cognitive processes?

 

[Carmen813]

Originally posted by: Jeffg010

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: Jeffg010

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: Jeffg010

Originally posted by: senseamp
LOL, $750 per year is a big pay cut for you? You must be scraping the bottom of the barrel pretty hard.

Laugh it off fool I'd rather keep my money then give it away.

You give it away anyways. The uninsured are a burden on the overall economy, especially when they get treatment at the ER.

Tell what exactly I'm paying for genus? I don't see a direct amount of money coming out of my pay check but I will if this gets past. I have insurance that pay for everything even if the cost of "treatment at the ER" goes up my insurance still pays for it.

Who pays for your insurance?
Actually, never mind. I am not even sure why I am debating with a man who can't even spell "genius."

Are you that dumb? My employer pays form most of my insurance you know the place I work for. Damn your dumb.

If you do not see a direct amount coming out of your paycheck, than I would suspect you do not actually have insurance.

You split the cost of your insurance with your employer. When people who do not have insurance use emergency room services (which hospitals are required to provide) they seek compensation from those who can pay. That means they charge your insurance company more, which the insurance company passes on to you. This amounts to about $40 billion a year.

 

[Woofmeister]

Well, the public option would cut unnecessary staff . . .

Thank you. I so needed that today :laugh: