Where is the evidence that medicaid expansion is making my monthly premium cheaper?

quote:

---

I was promised that medicaid expansion would cut down on hospital costs because preventative care would be more prevalent, which I would notice when I pay my monthly premium.

---

Anyone with half a brain knew it would make premiums increase. Anyone that thought that taking 14 million people out of the insurance premium pool and expect rates to decrease is a fool.

LINK

Your ignorance and inability to do basic research on a subject you claim interests you is disgusting.

quote:

---

Your ignorance and inability to do basic research on a subject you claim interests you is disgusting.

---

As is your ability to either read, comprehend or, quite possibly, both.

CLEARLY stated in the OP:

quote:

---

which I would notice when I pay my monthly premium.

---

quote:

---

A logical assumption would be he is part of the 50% insured through their employer

---

Then, logically, he would understand that Medicaid expansion has little bearing on employer-provided insurance. If your employer provides insurance, you're not going to be on Medicaid.

quote:

---

Then, logically, he would understand that Medicaid expansion has little bearing on employer-provided insurance. If your employer provides insurance, you're not going to be on Medicaid.

---

Right, so, logically, we probably shouldn't have been told that the ACA would have any kind of ability to reduce premiums for the majority of insured Americans.

Only an idiot would have believed that, which is what the OP is bitching about. IMO, a better response would have been...

quote:

---

Where is the evidence that medicaid expansion is making my monthly premium cheaper?

---

There is none. Because it doesn't.

And just leave it at that.

quote:

---

Then, logically, he would understand that Medicaid expansion has little bearing on employer-provided insurance. If your employer provides insurance, you're not going to be on Medicaid.

---

Also... well... logically... if you expand Medicaid, then presumably those people receive more preventative care. Which, in turn, reduces costs hospitals have to eat because they don't have to take care of as many folks who come into the ER who can't pay. Which, in turn, reduces overall hospital costs because they don't have to pass those costs onto the other patient population. Which, in turn, reduces contract costs with insurance companies. Which, in turn reduces premiums for everyone. Right? Did that happen?

That particular effect is not something you'd see this early into the program. Nor is it something you'll see with Republicans sabotaging the bill and throwing uncertainty into the mix.

quote:

---

That particular effect is not something you'd see this early into the program.

---

That particular effect is not something you'll ever see in the program. Why?
Because there is no personal disincentive in visiting an ED for treatment of the sniffles.

quote:

---

True, preventative care is more cost-effective than cost-saving.

---

Reporting to the ED for non-emergent care is neither. But it makes the hospital a ton of money.

quote:

---

Which is much more of a culture change than a payor change.

---

It doesn't matter. Right?
It is what it is,

It doesn't matter if it's more the astrological alignment of Jupiter with Mars. The fact is, PREDICTABLY, medicaid recipients tag taxpayers with huge ED charges for nonemergent care.

Why?
Because they are not responsible at all for the costs.
Not in the least.

A $10K Emergency Room charge to treat the flu?
Who cares?

What is chance the individual will ever be held responsible, or called to pay.
As your socialist political mentor put it, "Not A Smidgen!"