A Health Care System I Won't Miss

oops..double post

DonDiego, dontcha hate it when people actually click on your links? From your source:

"The CBO did an admirable job of projecting the cost of this legislation as written."

You could have saved yourself a lot of typing by just saying that forky is telling the truth and that hoops is...fantasizing.

Wait a minute, . . . the nanny state won't have to pay for the uninsured? This'll be great.

DonDiego wants to make sure he understands, . . . 'cause he suspects there may still be "uninsured" folks runnin' around. Ahhh, . . . like, . . . those who choose not to purchase Obamacare insurance and instead pay the penalty - as little as $95 or 1% of income. So from now on the nanny state won't pay for their medical treatment? If this is so, DonDiego endorses at least this part of the program.

But who will pay for their care if not the nanny state? Or will they just die? Hey, everybody dies anyway, right? No skin off pjstroh's nose, eh?

But anyway, since these same folks aren't paying for the mandated insurance, and especially if they are the young and healthy, . . . won't the health insurance premiums for everyone else still have to go up, . . . or will the Government pay for the unexpected excess costs anyway and just raise taxes or borrow money to pay for it?

DonDiego would really, really like to see the something for nothing on the horizon, . . . but he just cannot.

Not at all, . . . DonDiego posts links so that interested people can learn something.

Unfortunately some folks just skim through things to come up with something to reinforce their own propaganda. F'rinstance, forkushV does not quote the entire paragraph:
"When Congress inevitably fails to implement the Obama plan’s spending cuts, and expands its subsidies to more and more people, the cost of this legislation will grow beyond $3 trillion. The CBO did an admirable job of projecting the cost of this legislation as written. But the text of the legislation does not reflect the reality it would create."

The second paragraph of the paper presents the conclusion plainly:
"Democrats have so thoroughly gamed the budget process and the Congressional Budget Office’s scoring rules that the official cost estimates of the Obama health plan reveal but a sliver of the legislation’s full cost. The Obama plan would vastly increase the size and scope of the federal government, and increase our already record federal deficit."

As DonDiego has suggested in his earlier posts, the primary reasons Obamacare will exceed CBO cost projections are:
i. The CBO is directed to employ a faulty analysis, like the fact that an estimated $208-million payment to physicians was simply placed into a separate bill.
ii. History suggests Congress is unlikely to enact cost savings specified in the program,
iii. The penalty [tax] for those failing to enroll is insufficient to cover the loss of the premium payments; this is especially so if the young and healthy fail to enroll as is now expected.

So you are saying saying the CBO forecast is bad because some future Congress and president may decide to modify it. Seriously?

That's unlikely to be true.

Yesterday, the Kaiser Family Foundation said that health insurance premiums for a family of four rose just 4% in 2013. For individual policies purchased through an employer, premiums increased just 5%.

According to KFF, that is far slower than the 10% annual increases we were seeing a decade ago.

NY Times:

The data also suggest that the new health care law is not leading, at least so far, to a rapid escalation of insurance costs.

“The critics will have a much harder time blaming big premium increases in employer insurance on Obamacare this year, because there aren’t any big premium increases,” Drew Altman, chief executive of the Kaiser foundation, said in a telephone news conference Tuesday.

If rdwoodpecker's premiums are about to go up 60-85% as he claims, come October 1 he really should use one of the new marketplaces to find a better insurer, because he's getting screwed.

Why you answered your own question, Don Diego. The cumulative penalty for the uninsured pays for the subset of those people who require emergency care. This is in direct contrast to the system Don Diego favors we go back to where the uninsured's costs were eaten up by (other people) - a combination of tax dollars, health insurance premiums, and general cost of care from providers.

The math only fails to work if all the penalty payers break their arm at the same time. Lets cross our fingers and hope that doesn't happen..

The only difference in care for the uninsured in the new system vs the old is who pays for it. I thought it was a conservative principal for people to pay their own way. So did the Heritage Foundation and the last guy DD voted for president....but Don Diego surprises me with a few liberal stripes from time to time.

Its a completely legitimate point. If you keep all of the costs of Obamacare and get rid of the funding then Obamacare will create a deficit. same is true for the military, and the FDA, and The SEC, ....an the million other functions of government.

thank you, Cato Institute, for teaching us how math works. And the ironic thing about it is the only people in Congress that want to defund the health care system are th ones who posture themselves as fiscal hawks...enter Ted Cruz.

DonDiego becomes more confused every time he reads pjstroh's posts.

First pjstroh wrote:

If all the costs of paying for the uninsured disappear why would a single break of an uninsured arm, . . . let alone breaks in an equal distribution of 50% of uninsured arms, . . . affect the costs at all?

In any case, even if pjstroh is wrong, DonDiego is really, really impressed by his faith.
That anyone would actually believe that the math would prove that nothing less than 100% of single broken arms of the uninsured would impact the system demonstrates 100% allegiance to the plan and its Maker.
Or he just made up that 100% thing.

I didnt make up the 100% thingy. i presumed thats the scenario you described when saying the only money to pay for an uninsured perons care is the individual $95 penalty that individual paid into the system. That outrageous scenario only occurs if 100% of the uninsured are injured in the same year.

Effectively the uninsured penalty is insurance for emergency care. So did Don Diego make up the 100% thingy? Or is he just confused how insurance works? more importantly, if Don Diego thinks its immoral to require people to pay for their emergency care then who should that burden fall upon?