Wednesday, January 18, 2017

About that 20 million figure the Freedom-Haters trot out as the number who will lose coverage when the "A"CA is jettisoned

It's a crock, as Genevieve Wood of the Heritage Foundation explains:

The Obama administration claims 20 million more Americans today have health care due to Obamacare. The reality is that when you look at the actual net gains over the past two years since the program was fully implemented, the number is 14 million, and of that, 11.8 million (84 percent) were people given the “gift” of Medicaid.
And new research shows that even fewer people will be left without insurance after the repeal of Obamacare. Numbers are still being crunched, but between statistics released by the Congressional Budget Office and one of the infamous architects of Obamacare, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Jonathan Gruber, it’s estimated that anywhere from 2 to 7 million people now on Medicaid would have qualified for the program even without Obamacare.
That further discredits the administration’s claim of 20 million more Americans having health insurance because of Obamacare.
Multiple studies have also shown that even those who are uninsured often have better outcomes than those with Medicaid. A University of Virginia study found that for eight different surgical procedures, Medicaid patients were more likely to die than privately insured or uninsured patients. They were also more likely to suffer complications.
And it is important to note that this study focused on procedures done from 2003-2007, prior to the geniuses in Washington deciding it was a good idea to put even more people on the already overburdened Medicaid system.
Additionally, despite what proponents of the law promised, there is little evidence to show that the use of emergency rooms, which have a higher level of medical errors, has decreased due to Obamacare.

Another narrative busted.


8 comments:

  1. Complete repeal and treat health insurance the way we do any other product- including other kinds of insurance

    ReplyDelete
  2. You mean advertise the piss out of it and create an entire class of money peeps in suits and ties hawking it for their piece of the pie?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Sure. The competition will motivate the companies to inform the consumers as thoroughly as possible. No one knows ups have a product for sale if you don't go out and hawk it.

    ReplyDelete
  4. You mean screening for only good risks and leaving the leavings for government, unless some chump wants to pick them up? You mean crony CEOs cozying up to government for special deals, i.e., lobbiests doing what they do best, i.e, bribery?

    ReplyDelete
  5. You know damn well I don't mean cronies cozying to government for special deals. That's not a properly functioning free market.

    ReplyDelete
  6. And we all know where the risks the free market shuns go, don't we? What's your ilk's solution there? Some semblance of a Final One?

    ReplyDelete
  7. So there is some kind of desirable alternative to letting people bee free?

    ReplyDelete