Obamacare Rates Increasing, . . . no,really ! They really are.

Don't you just love liberal "proof"? They provide an argument that is neither possible to disprove or prove. PJ must have learned this when Obama and friends changed their tune from "creating jobs" to "creating or saving jobs". Without question, this was done to provide Obama and friends and "out" when job growth decreased and sucked.

Most insurance rates have gone up, many people can't keep their doctor, and the economy is weak. These are facts.


Quote

Originally posted by: pjstroh
Quote

Originally posted by: alanleroy
Quote

Originally posted by: pjstroh
AlanLeroy says one thing....fact checkers say the oppositte.
And its just another day on LVA.

Politifact: Obamacare is reducing the deficit

Does PJ ever read the articles he quotes?

AlanLeroy said "There is no evidence the ACA has reduced the US deficit" and "Most economists attribute slower growth of medical costs to the Great Recession since those costs started tapering downward well before the ACA went into effect. "

PJ's article states:

"....there is debate among health economists over how much of the downward trend is specifically attributable to the Affordable Care Act.

Mark McClellan, a former head of Medicare and Medicaid under President George W. Bush, now at Brookings, said it’s unlikely the legislation itself is the main factor, since the slowdown in health care costs began before the law was enacted, and most of the cost contractions comes from areas of health care care that aren’t directly affected by the law."

and concludes that "The CBO recently lowered its projection for long-term deficits and specifically cited health care costs as the main reason, though the Affordable Care Act is not necessarily the primary cause of that calculation."

These are the exact points AlanLeroy was making. Does PJ ever tire in being wrong and supporting AlanLeroy's position with linked articles he incorrectly titles? And it's just another day on LVA....indeed.


AlanLeroy struggles with the English language. He states there is no evidence. Yes, there most certainly is. Its manifested itself in the form of lower premium inlfation and deficit reduction. Hence the conclusion of a pulitzer prize winning fact checking source.

You can have a debate as to how much is attributable to Obamacare or an economic reovery or other factors - but to say there is no evidence is patently false - which is par for the corse on any topic non-partisan AlanLeroy weighs in on.


Quote

Originally posted by: pjstroh
Quote

Originally posted by: alanleroy



Either PJ didn't understand the article he linked or he was purposely being deceptive. He keeps digging a deeper hole.


No - PJ simply speaks and understands English. AlanLeroy struggles with the definitions of simple words like "evidence".

There is an intelligent debate as to how much Obamacare is reducing costs vs other factors. AlanLeroy is not a part of that debate. he claims there is no evidence that factors like these have done anything to curtail costs in the new healthcare system.

- Adding younger people to the insurance pool
- capping overhead of insurance companies
- giving more incentives for preventative care
- creating exchanges for competition
- creating transparency of medical costs from providers

So if you believe none of these things represent evidence of reigning in costs then Non-partisan, medical expert AlanLeroy is your man. Otherwise one might consider Pulitzer prize winning fact-checking sources.

Well when the Pulitzer prize winning fact-checking source that PJ quotes says that "The Affordable Care Act is not necessarily the primary cause of that calculation (Meaning reduction in the deficit due to lower healthcare costs)" and also notes that "the slowdown in health care costs began before the law was enacted" I think you have to believe them....regardless of how PJ tries to spin his way out of it. All it takes is a little reading comprehension.

Quote

Originally posted by: alanleroy
Quote

Originally posted by: pjstroh
Quote

Originally posted by: alanleroy



Either PJ didn't understand the article he linked or he was purposely being deceptive. He keeps digging a deeper hole.


No - PJ simply speaks and understands English. AlanLeroy struggles with the definitions of simple words like "evidence".

There is an intelligent debate as to how much Obamacare is reducing costs vs other factors. AlanLeroy is not a part of that debate. he claims there is no evidence that factors like these have done anything to curtail costs in the new healthcare system.

- Adding younger people to the insurance pool
- capping overhead of insurance companies
- giving more incentives for preventative care
- creating exchanges for competition
- creating transparency of medical costs from providers

So if you believe none of these things represent evidence of reigning in costs then Non-partisan, medical expert AlanLeroy is your man. Otherwise one might consider Pulitzer prize winning fact-checking sources.

Well when the Pulitzer prize winning fact-checking source that PJ quotes says that "The Affordable Care Act is not necessarily the primary cause of that calculation (Meaning reduction in the deficit due to lower healthcare costs)" and also notes that "the slowdown in health care costs began before the law was enacted" I think you have to believe them....regardless of how PJ tries to spin his way out of it. All it takes is a little reading comprehension.


Your quote is perfect. The only problem is it is written in English instead of Alan-speak. There is no debate that Obamacare is contributing to lower costs....there is only a debate as to how much. Your quote says as much.

I cant help it if you insist on translating that quote to: "There is no evidence Obamacare is reducing costs." Must be some form of non-partisan dyslexia you suffer from.



Quote

Originally posted by: pjstroh
Quote

Originally posted by: alanleroy
Quote

Originally posted by: pjstroh
Quote

Originally posted by: alanleroy



Either PJ didn't understand the article he linked or he was purposely being deceptive. He keeps digging a deeper hole.


No - PJ simply speaks and understands English. AlanLeroy struggles with the definitions of simple words like "evidence".

There is an intelligent debate as to how much Obamacare is reducing costs vs other factors. AlanLeroy is not a part of that debate. he claims there is no evidence that factors like these have done anything to curtail costs in the new healthcare system.

- Adding younger people to the insurance pool
- capping overhead of insurance companies
- giving more incentives for preventative care
- creating exchanges for competition
- creating transparency of medical costs from providers

So if you believe none of these things represent evidence of reigning in costs then Non-partisan, medical expert AlanLeroy is your man. Otherwise one might consider Pulitzer prize winning fact-checking sources.

Well when the Pulitzer prize winning fact-checking source that PJ quotes says that "The Affordable Care Act is not necessarily the primary cause of that calculation (Meaning reduction in the deficit due to lower healthcare costs)" and also notes that "the slowdown in health care costs began before the law was enacted" I think you have to believe them....regardless of how PJ tries to spin his way out of it. All it takes is a little reading comprehension.


Your quote is perfect. The only problem is it is written in English instead of Alan-speak. There is no debate that Obamacare is contributing to lower costs....there is only a debate as to how much. Your quote says as much.

I cant help it if you insist on translating that quote to: "There is no evidence Obamacare is reducing costs." Must be some form of non-partisan dyslexia you suffer from.

PJ knows the ACA is reducing the deficit. He doesn't know if it's a penny or a billion dollars, but he knows it's reducing the deficit...because....because 'There is no debate on that'. Show me the money....and prove where it came from. Oh no. Can't do that.

The article he links to was about lowered medical costs and the deficit and they specifically point out that the ACA may have had little to no impact on that since medical costs were declining before the ACA. But PJ knows the ACA is reducing the deficit. He just doesn't know by how much. He uses an article that points out they don't really know the impact of the ACA on the deficit to claim 'Obamacare cuts the deficit'...You can't make this shit up.

And he still has not answered my question about how the ACA accounts for the billions of extra dollars businesses and the IRS will spend managing a new process and new form that most every working American will receive at the end of the year. Or is that free too? Or maybe there goes all our cost savings up in a big new wad of paperwork hell.

You are asking me to assign a dollar value to the line-items I mentioned before? Really? And if I cant then it means they have no effect?
OK - Can you assign a dollar value to the contributing line-items that were lowering costs before Obamacare? And if not - then that means they weren't having any effect, right?
Or are you just desperate to defend the ignorant position that none of these things have a positive effect on costs (and for the record, you wont find an analyst on either side of the aisle that would deny the one at the top of the list...except for ...you):

- Adding younger people to the insurance pool
- capping overhead of insurance companies
- giving more incentives for preventative care
- creating exchanges for competition
- creating transparency of medical costs from providers

And the CBO does believe Obamacare is a deficit reducer because Republicans wanted to hide their cost of repealing Obamacare when they passed their budget earlier this year.


CBO's analysis of Obamacare on the deficit

Estimated Budgetary Effects from 2012 to 2021: Direct Spending and Revenues
The legislation will have a number of effects on the federal budget—including added
spending to subsidize the purchase of health insurance and increased outlays for Med-
icaid, as well as reductions in outlays for Medicare and added revenues from taxes,
fees, and penalties. On net, CBO and JCT’s latest comprehensive estimate is that the
effects of the two laws on direct spending and revenues related to health care will
reduce federal deficits by $210 billion over the 2012–2021 period



Quote

Originally posted by: pjstroh
Estimated Budgetary Effects from 2012 to 2021: Direct Spending and Revenues
The legislation will have a number of effects on the federal budget—including added
spending to subsidize the purchase of health insurance and increased outlays for Med-
icaid, as well as reductions in outlays for Medicare and added revenues from taxes,
fees, and penalties. On net, CBO and JCT’s latest comprehensive estimate is that the
effects of the two laws on direct spending and revenues related to health care will
reduce federal deficits by $210 billion over the 2012–2021 period
The CBO/JCT estimates cited were made before The Obamacare went into effect.

Things change.

******quote***
The CBO has consistently projected that President Obama's overhaul will reduce the deficit, and the agency estimated that the Republicans’ 2011 effort to repeal the legislation would increase deficits by $210 billion from 2010 to 2021.

In April [2014], the agency quietly signaled that it can no longer make that projection; that the law had been changed and delayed so much that there is no longer a credible way to estimate the long-term effects on the deficit of all elements of the program taken together.

“CBO and JCT can no longer determine exactly how the provisions of the ACA that are not related to the expansion of health insurance coverage have affected their projections of direct spending and revenues,” the CBO wrote. “The provisions that expanded coverage established entirely new programs or components of programs that can be isolated and reassessed. Isolating the incremental effects of those provisions on previously existing programs and revenues four years after enactment of the ACP is not possible.”
***endquote***
[boldface added - DD]
Ref: The Fiscal Times - June2014

In 2011 the CBO/JCT knew the deficit would be reduced; as of 2014 the CBO/JCT cannot calculate if The Obamacare will/will not decrease the deficit.
Who knows what the CBO/JCT will know in the next 3 years ?
Quote

Originally posted by: DonDiego
Quote

Originally posted by: pjstroh
Estimated Budgetary Effects from 2012 to 2021: Direct Spending and Revenues
The legislation will have a number of effects on the federal budget—including added
spending to subsidize the purchase of health insurance and increased outlays for Med-
icaid, as well as reductions in outlays for Medicare and added revenues from taxes,
fees, and penalties. On net, CBO and JCT’s latest comprehensive estimate is that the
effects of the two laws on direct spending and revenues related to health care will
reduce federal deficits by $210 billion over the 2012–2021 period
The CBO/JCT estimates cited were made before The Obamacare went into effect.

Things change.

******quote***
The CBO has consistently projected that President Obama's overhaul will reduce the deficit, and the agency estimated that the Republicans’ 2011 effort to repeal the legislation would increase deficits by $210 billion from 2010 to 2021.

In April [2014], the agency quietly signaled that it can no longer make that projection; that the law had been changed and delayed so much that there is no longer a credible way to estimate the long-term effects on the deficit of all elements of the program taken together.

“CBO and JCT can no longer determine exactly how the provisions of the ACA that are not related to the expansion of health insurance coverage have affected their projections of direct spending and revenues,” the CBO wrote. “The provisions that expanded coverage established entirely new programs or components of programs that can be isolated and reassessed. Isolating the incremental effects of those provisions on previously existing programs and revenues four years after enactment of the ACP is not possible.”
***endquote***
[boldface added - DD]
Ref: The Fiscal Times - June2014

In 2011 the CBO/JCT knew the deficit would be reduced; as of 2014 the CBO/JCT cannot calculate if The Obamacare will/will not decrease the deficit.
Who knows what the CBO/JCT will know in the next 3 years ?

Why yes. The CBO rescinded their 2011 Budget Deficit Reduction Projection so quietly that PJ could not hear it. Yet still he knows...even if there really is no evidence as AlanLeroy originally stated and PJ's Pulitzer Prize winning organization confirmed and the CBO now admits. Perhaps PJ really believes that 2011 is "earlier this year" as he claimed. Maybe he'll catch up with the rest of us before too long. We can only hope.

I'm a visual person.

Quote

Originally posted by: forkushV
I'm a visual person.


Right. So are you claiming (like PJ) that the ACA is driving down the deficit...but maybe a dollar maybe a billion?

....because....visualize this: The article actually says "the slowdown in health care costs began before the law was enacted, and most of the cost contractions come from areas of health care that aren’t directly affected by the law"

I call it the "Pre Hoc Ergo Proctor Hoc" fallacy.



Quote

Originally posted by: alanleroy
I call it the "Pre Hoc Ergo Proctor Hoc" fallacy.

Indeed, . . . a well established logical truth, epitomized in the following brief story:

"The bartender says 'We don't serve neutrinos'. A neutrino walks into a bar."
Already a LVA subscriber?
To continue reading, choose an option below:
Diamond Membership
$3 per month
Unlimited access to LVA website
Exclusive subscriber-only content
Limited Member Rewards Online
Join Now
or
Platinum Membership
$50 per year
Unlimited access to LVA website
Exclusive subscriber-only content
Exclusive Member Rewards Book
Join Now