Obamacare saved $2.3 trillion in healthcare spending to date and saved families an average of $4000

UsualName · Mar 23, 2019

Even before the Affordable Care Act became law, about 90 percent of the conversation and criticism of it was about coverage. Little has been said about its ability to control costs.

March 23, the ninth anniversary of the ACA’s passage, presents a good opportunity to examine its legacy on cost control — a legacy that deserves to be in the foreground, not relegated to the background behind the exchanges, Medicaid expansion, and work requirements.

One month after the ACA had passed, the Office of the Actuary of the Department of Health and Human Services projected its financial impact in a report entitled “Estimated Financial Effects of the ‘Patient Protections and Affordable Care Act’, as Amended.” The government’s official record-keeper estimated that health care costs under the ACA would reach $4.14 trillion per year in 2017 and constitute 20.2 percent of the gross domestic product (GDP).

Fast forward to December 2018, when that same office released the official tabulation of health care spending in 2017. The bottom line: cumulatively from 2010 to 2017 the ACA reduced health care spending a total of $2.3 trillion.

Related:
Coverage for pre-existing conditions lives on, even though the Affordable Care Act seemed doomed
In 2017 alone, health expenditures were $650 billion lower than projected, and kept health care spending under 18 percent of GDP — basically a tad over where it was in 2010 when the ACA was passed. It did all of this while expanding health coverage to more than 20 million previously uninsured Americans.

Compared to the 2010 projections, the government’s Medicare bill in 2017 was 10 percent ($70 billion) less, and spending for Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program was a whopping $250 billion below expectations (partially — but only partially — due to the failure of some states to expand the program). The actuary had predicted in 2010 that employer-sponsored insurance would cost $1.21 trillion in 2017, but it came in at $1.04 trillion, a difference of $170 billion for that year.

Put another way, health care spending in 2017 was $2,000 less per person than it was projected to be. And for the 176 million Americans who have private employer-sponsored insurance, their lower premiums averaged just under $1,000 per person.

Barack Obama pledged on the campaign trail and as president that he would sign a health care bill that lowered family health insurance premiums by $2,500. Conservative politicians and pundits roundly mocked him. Yet the ACA has more than delivered on that promise, saving about $4,000 per family. And these lower health care premiums probably contribute to the recent rise in workers’ wages.

One reason the ACA’s enormous success in cost control goes unappreciated is that no one experiences the difference between projections and reality. What could have happened is intangible. All we feel is what actually happens.

...

https://www.statnews.com/2019/03/22/affordable-care-act-controls-costs/

TreeFrogTrader · Mar 23, 2019

Mueller report coming out, so UsualT wants to talk about Obamacare.

Freddy Foreskin has not posted about the Mueller report today but has posted under the thread on the Harvard seal being removed.

Plenty of entertainment value there.

Not to worry. They will get their usual bundles of links and talking points from the think tanks in Jonestown later and be off and running. I predicting that Here4Richter will be in link heaven on Monday. Weekends are a bitch for him. Probably cant find his way to the bathroom without instructions from media matters that morning.

Give it a few hours, then they will all be lit like Christmas trees posting their little goodies that are going to bring Trump down for sure.

gwb-trading · Mar 23, 2019

UsualName said:
Even before the Affordable Care Act became law, about 90 percent of the conversation and criticism of it was about coverage. Little has been said about its ability to control costs.

March 23, the ninth anniversary of the ACA’s passage, presents a good opportunity to examine its legacy on cost control — a legacy that deserves to be in the foreground, not relegated to the background behind the exchanges, Medicaid expansion, and work requirements.

One month after the ACA had passed, the Office of the Actuary of the Department of Health and Human Services projected its financial impact in a report entitled “Estimated Financial Effects of the ‘Patient Protections and Affordable Care Act’, as Amended.” The government’s official record-keeper estimated that health care costs under the ACA would reach $4.14 trillion per year in 2017 and constitute 20.2 percent of the gross domestic product (GDP).

Fast forward to December 2018, when that same office released the official tabulation of health care spending in 2017. The bottom line: cumulatively from 2010 to 2017 the ACA reduced health care spending a total of $2.3 trillion.

Related:
Coverage for pre-existing conditions lives on, even though the Affordable Care Act seemed doomed
In 2017 alone, health expenditures were $650 billion lower than projected, and kept health care spending under 18 percent of GDP — basically a tad over where it was in 2010 when the ACA was passed. It did all of this while expanding health coverage to more than 20 million previously uninsured Americans.

Compared to the 2010 projections, the government’s Medicare bill in 2017 was 10 percent ($70 billion) less, and spending for Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program was a whopping $250 billion below expectations (partially — but only partially — due to the failure of some states to expand the program). The actuary had predicted in 2010 that employer-sponsored insurance would cost $1.21 trillion in 2017, but it came in at $1.04 trillion, a difference of $170 billion for that year.

Put another way, health care spending in 2017 was $2,000 less per person than it was projected to be. And for the 176 million Americans who have private employer-sponsored insurance, their lower premiums averaged just under $1,000 per person.

Barack Obama pledged on the campaign trail and as president that he would sign a health care bill that lowered family health insurance premiums by $2,500. Conservative politicians and pundits roundly mocked him. Yet the ACA has more than delivered on that promise, saving about $4,000 per family. And these lower health care premiums probably contribute to the recent rise in workers’ wages.

One reason the ACA’s enormous success in cost control goes unappreciated is that no one experiences the difference between projections and reality. What could have happened is intangible. All we feel is what actually happens.

...

https://www.statnews.com/2019/03/22/affordable-care-act-controls-costs/
More...

Is this article a parody joke. Let’s go ask some families with corporate plans if their premiums, co-pays, and medical costs dropped under Obamacare. Nearly every family would laugh in you face if you proclaimed that Obamacare reduced their medical costs.

peilthetraveler · Mar 23, 2019

UsualName said:
Even before the Affordable Care Act became law, about 90 percent of the conversation and criticism of it was about coverage. Little has been said about its ability to control costs.

March 23, the ninth anniversary of the ACA’s passage, presents a good opportunity to examine its legacy on cost control — a legacy that deserves to be in the foreground, not relegated to the background behind the exchanges, Medicaid expansion, and work requirements.

One month after the ACA had passed, the Office of the Actuary of the Department of Health and Human Services projected its financial impact in a report entitled “Estimated Financial Effects of the ‘Patient Protections and Affordable Care Act’, as Amended.” The government’s official record-keeper estimated that health care costs under the ACA would reach $4.14 trillion per year in 2017 and constitute 20.2 percent of the gross domestic product (GDP).

Fast forward to December 2018, when that same office released the official tabulation of health care spending in 2017. The bottom line: cumulatively from 2010 to 2017 the ACA reduced health care spending a total of $2.3 trillion.

Related:
Coverage for pre-existing conditions lives on, even though the Affordable Care Act seemed doomed
In 2017 alone, health expenditures were $650 billion lower than projected, and kept health care spending under 18 percent of GDP — basically a tad over where it was in 2010 when the ACA was passed. It did all of this while expanding health coverage to more than 20 million previously uninsured Americans.

Compared to the 2010 projections, the government’s Medicare bill in 2017 was 10 percent ($70 billion) less, and spending for Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program was a whopping $250 billion below expectations (partially — but only partially — due to the failure of some states to expand the program). The actuary had predicted in 2010 that employer-sponsored insurance would cost $1.21 trillion in 2017, but it came in at $1.04 trillion, a difference of $170 billion for that year.

Put another way, health care spending in 2017 was $2,000 less per person than it was projected to be. And for the 176 million Americans who have private employer-sponsored insurance, their lower premiums averaged just under $1,000 per person.

Barack Obama pledged on the campaign trail and as president that he would sign a health care bill that lowered family health insurance premiums by $2,500. Conservative politicians and pundits roundly mocked him. Yet the ACA has more than delivered on that promise, saving about $4,000 per family. And these lower health care premiums probably contribute to the recent rise in workers’ wages.

One reason the ACA’s enormous success in cost control goes unappreciated is that no one experiences the difference between projections and reality. What could have happened is intangible. All we feel is what actually happens.

...

https://www.statnews.com/2019/03/22/affordable-care-act-controls-costs/
More...

Yes...it's amazing what you can accomplish by spending less on healthcare. Don't let those elderly people receive the quality healthcare they've been getting and they just die off so we don't have to spend as much on them keeping them alive. Good job democrats.

Cuddles · Mar 23, 2019

thanks Obama

exGOPer · Mar 23, 2019

gwb-trading said:
Is this article a parody joke. Let’s go ask some families with corporate plans if their premiums, co-pays, and medical costs dropped under Obamacare. Nearly every family would laugh in you face if you proclaimed that Obamacare reduced their medical costs.
More...

Exactly, why bother about statistics and surveys when you can collect anecdotal bullshit stories from Trump University graduates.

TJustice · Mar 23, 2019

how the hell would you know which stats are indicative of reality here... you don't live here... you are a foreign bot getting paid pennies a post to lie your ass off about collusion.

Obamacare is a 10,000 dollar a year tax on many families in San Diego. The costs of living here are high so incomes are high. So they they get destroyed by obamacare.

But what the hell would you know about that living in a basement posting at an internet cafe somewhere overseas?

exGOPer said:
Exactly, why bother about statistics and surveys when you can collect anecdotal bullshit stories from Trump University graduates.
More...

Cuddles · Mar 23, 2019

TJustice said:
how the hell would you know which stats are indicative of reality here... you don't live here... you are a foreign bot getting paid pennies a post to lie your ass off about collusion.

Obamacare is a 10,000 dollar a year tax on many families in San Diego. The costs of living here are high so incomes are high. So they they get destroyed by obamacare.

But what the hell would you know about that living in a basement posting at an internet cafe somewhere overseas?
More...

how the hell would you know which stats are indicative of reality here... you don't live here... you are a foreign bot getting paid pennies a post to lie your ass off about Trump.

But what the hell would you know about that living in a basement posting at an internet cafe somewhere in Russia?

gwb-trading · Mar 23, 2019

exGOPer said:
Exactly, why bother about statistics and surveys when you can collect anecdotal bullshit stories from Trump University graduates.
More...

STAT NEWS --- the official propaganda arm supporting Big Pharma and preserving the profits they obtained via ACA.

STAT News Officially Has a Credibility Problem
https://www.classaction.com/news/stat-news-credibility-problem/

Big Pharma’s influence can be found everywhere. There are the in-your-face drug advertisements, like the ones you see on television. Then there are the crafty PR pieces that are so subtle, only the most trained eyes can spot them for what they are: ploys to get doctors to prescribe the next big drug, and marketing pitches to get patients to ask for them.

Ghostwriters and Pharma-backed writers fall into this latter category. These authors try to come off as just another concerned doctor, patient, or advocate, but in reality their opinions are heavily influenced by their relationships with pharmaceutical companies.

In the last year alone, Forbes, USA Today, Newsweek, and the Los Angeles Times have published opinion pieces by authors with known conflicts of interest. Some of these articles have since been retracted once the editors realized their editorial policies were violated, but many still stand in their original forms.

STAT News, an independent medical publication associated with The Boston Globe, is the latest publication to be haunted by pharmaceutical ghostwriting and undisclosed industry ties.

(more at above url with examples of how every single STAT NEWS article is ghost written by Pharma companies and ACA lobbyists -- along with their absurd conflict of interests).

-------------------

Of course --- STAT NEWS political bias merely follows that of their Boston Globe owners.

'Boston Globe' Owner Launches 'Stat News' Site Covering Life Sciences
PBS url - https://tinyurl.com/yykues4g

UsualName · Mar 23, 2019

gwb-trading said:
Is this article a parody joke. Let’s go ask some families with corporate plans if their premiums, co-pays, and medical costs dropped under Obamacare. Nearly every family would laugh in you face if you proclaimed that Obamacare reduced their medical costs.
More...

I’m sorry, when was the last time healthcare cost dropped at all?