- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Thomas Gallatin: Obama Doubled Your Healthcare Premium
Posted on 5/26/17 at 7:07 pm to bonhoeffer45
Posted on 5/26/17 at 7:07 pm to bonhoeffer45
quote:Correct! In light of huge deficits and a gargantuan debt, overall cost is extremely important context.
It is important context though.
quote:As disingenuous as Gruber/Obama/Pelosi/Reid were in selling the loser program at its outset?
It becomes disingenuous to say everyone on the exchanges had much higher premiums, leaving out how subsidies insulate people from those increases.
1
Posted on 5/26/17 at 7:14 pm to texashorn
quote:
I wonder why. Please don't be so dense.
Because they lack the leverage the government has in negotiations. They also have lower administration costs.
You can try and argue we should be paying what the private reimbursement rate over the Medicaid rates in all areas, but to do so intrinsically admits that private insurance is going to be more expensive.
This is the catch-22 I was speaking about. You can't simultaneously argue the private market delivers a cheaper consumer product when they pay more in administration and pay more for all the goods and services in it. The math just doesn't add up.
Posted on 5/26/17 at 7:15 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
Correct! In light of huge deficits and a gargantuan debt, overall cost is extremely important context.
I don't see you screaming about Trump's budget proposal and grotesque math error, anywhere if debt is such an imminent concern of yours?
This post was edited on 5/26/17 at 7:19 pm
Posted on 5/26/17 at 7:16 pm to beerJeep
quote:
im currently uninsured..
by choice.
just doing my part to bring the shite system down.
I remember you, you were the one telling me about how you commit tax fraud
Posted on 5/26/17 at 7:18 pm to beerJeep
quote:
wrong. its disingenuous to include the subsidies in the prices. because its a lie. if the price before a subsidy is 100 a month, the price isnt 60 because 40 of it was paid by someone else. the price is still 100. by saying anything but the FULL price is, in itself, willful deception.
It's not an either or argument. Just presenting one side and not the other is providing incomplete context in both situations.
Posted on 5/26/17 at 7:21 pm to bonhoeffer45
quote:
e the one telling me about how you commit tax fraud
que? our families CPA does my taxes.... soooooo
This post was edited on 5/26/17 at 7:23 pm
Posted on 5/26/17 at 7:34 pm to bonhoeffer45
quote:Do tell.
grotesque math error
Just please no reference to the recent Pocahontas/Summers' embarrassment
Posted on 5/26/17 at 7:53 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
Do tell.
Just please no reference to the recent Pocahontas/Summers' embarrassment
Don't know what you are referring to, but you don't need any of that. Just simple addition and subtraction skills, basic accounting knowledge, and some logic.
They used their farcical 2 trillion dollar revenue projection twice, once to pay for tax cuts, and then again to help balance the budget.
It doesn't work that way.
Within that framework they do things that don't add up, like claim to end estate taxation completely in the tax plan.....Yet gain 300 billion in estate tax revenue in their budget projection???? Huh?
I don't care how drunk the Laffer wine got you, a 0% tax rate on a certain item can not generate any tax revenue from that item. Just not possible. Pick whatever number you want and times it by 0 and the result is, your guessed it, zero.
And despite that the budget STILL couldn't get the thing to balance over a decade.
Which is in part why it is DOA even with Republican control of the legislature.
This post was edited on 5/26/17 at 8:05 pm
Posted on 5/26/17 at 7:56 pm to BaylorTiger
quote:
Also, dont forget, it was a gross overstep of the US government to force people to buy a private product.
AARP really did a sales job on their members on this one. POS organization.
Posted on 5/26/17 at 7:57 pm to beerJeep
quote:
que? our families CPA does my taxes.... soooooo
I actually apologize on this one.
I confused you with a different poster on this.
Posted on 5/26/17 at 8:27 pm to bonhoeffer45
quote:
actually apologize on this one. I confused you with a different poster on this.
all good. How far back in my post history did you go to realize that though? I haven't done my own taxes a single time in my life. I couldn't even begin to tell you how. I just drop off what my grandpa tells me to and he gives it to our guy. So I knew instantly you weren't talking about me
Posted on 5/26/17 at 8:31 pm to beerJeep
quote:
all good. How far back in my post history did you go to realize that though?
Not really at all lol.
I had barely started posting and bookmarked the conversation because it was so outlandish and crazy.
Actually it is the only bookmark I even have.
Posted on 5/26/17 at 8:37 pm to KCT
Wait so to get the Obama doubled it figure he simply compared the 2013 and 2017 costs?
As in, he expected no inflation in that time? He didn't use a baseline of expected price rise without the ACA?
I need the rolling on the floor emoji.
As in, he expected no inflation in that time? He didn't use a baseline of expected price rise without the ACA?
I need the rolling on the floor emoji.
Posted on 5/26/17 at 8:52 pm to KCT
Oh, how I wish mine had only doubled. 
Posted on 5/26/17 at 8:58 pm to bonhoeffer45
quote:It's even more disingenuous to count those subsidies as "savings" on medical care costs. You're leaving out how subsidies are paid for by other people.
It becomes disingenuous to say everyone on the exchanges had much higher premiums, leaving out how subsidies insulate people from those increases.
Posted on 5/26/17 at 9:04 pm to Taxing Authority
quote:
It's even more disingenuous to count those subsidies as "savings" on medical care costs. You're leaving out how subsidies are paid for by other people.
Quit being intentionally dumb.
The point made twice now is that the full context of exchange premiums is important. What a person's out-of-pocket costs actually are pre and post-subsidy, and the total unsubsidized premium costs. Ignoring one or the other easily lends itself misinformation without prior knowledge.
My point even earlier has been that the ACA did very little to address ever increasing prices in the system. It attempted to change the way Medicare reimburses people. Put more emphasis on qualitative measures. But it has not been nearly enough to make a big dent. The AHCA does nothing to improve this though.
Posted on 5/26/17 at 9:08 pm to bonhoeffer45
How much more tax money do you need to make your version of hc reform work?
Posted on 5/26/17 at 9:23 pm to bonhoeffer45
quote:
No, not at all. I remember posting several links that showed through empirical data and a Supreme Court ruling that caps often do not lead to a meaningful reduction in tort insurance. In fact in Florida, the insurers held onto the savings and turned it into 4300% profit over the time period studied while tort insurance remained sky high.
You may want to go back to that thread. I posted actual rates for Missouri docs, pre and post reform.
Posted on 5/26/17 at 9:42 pm to bonhoeffer45
quote:
Quit being intentionally dumb.
is that what you think that was? quote:Nope. One is a portion of the price. The other is the entirety of the cost. If were measuring cost, measuring a portion of it isn't "context".
The point made twice now is that the full context of exchange premiums is important. What a person's out-of-pocket costs actually are pre and post-subsidy, and the total unsubsidized premium costs. Ignoring one or the other easily lends itself misinformation without prior knowledge.
quote:No disagreement from me on that.
My point even earlier has been that the ACA did very little to address ever increasing prices in the system.
quote:Nothing will. You can't give away massive amounts of a product or service and simultaneously make it "cheap" for those that pay for it.
The AHCA does nothing to improve this though.
Posted on 5/26/17 at 9:45 pm to the808bass
quote:
You may want to go back to that thread. I posted actual rates for Missouri docs, pre and post reform.
Key part of my sentence there.
quote:
often do not lead to a meaningful reduction
Feel free to post them again, but it isn't really going to change the the discussion much.
Page 4 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News