Post

Conversation

The ACA successfully “bent the cost curve” despite all the doubters and haters and because it worked nobody talks about this problem anymore.
Quote
Matthew Zeitlin
@MattZeitlin
health care spending as a portion of GDP has basically flatlined since 2009 or so
Image
David Watson 🥑
Post your reply

Bro you can't possibly believe that. health insurance has gone up a ton and is ridiculously expensive and every person who sees the cost (ie the self employed) talks about it.
The bend was too soon though and IIRC it came to Medicare first. I have long puzzles over this but I think most likely it was driven by wage compression that we wouldn't fully notice until the late 2010s but had already begun at the extremes of the distribution.
We estimate UK taxpayers face over £1.2B annually in hidden costs, including our estimate that 85% of subsidies that go to chicken and pig farmers are consumed by factory farms. bit.ly/3CH0ves Follow to help us end suffering of animals on factory farms
Looks like the calculation is missing a lot of $$ that hits the patients. Would be more informative if patient debt were included.
Image
Ah yes, I went from a dangerously "high deductible" plan with $5,000 deductible that was $450 per month to a plan with "low deductible" of $13,500 and $1500 per month. Totally bent.
ACA goal was to decrease healthcare utilization via high deductibles and narrow networks. With lower healthcare utilization, care is more “affordable” - for payors ie insurance companies and the government.
Well, that’s just tits, isn’t it, for folks that believe it. My family LOST our health insurance when it was implemented because the premiums went through the roof, more than our mortgage payment. Didn’t work out so well for some of us.
It would have done even better if coverage was still mandatory. Making people who could pay for their own insurance do so was supposed to be the CONSERVATIVE part of the plan, but oddly it was the part the GOP most objected to.
Hmmm. As a share of GDP? In a slowing population growth situation? Pre-ACA, my private market insurance with a PPO was $355 per month for a family of three. Private PPO’s were destroyed, replaced by narrow-network HMO-lite “EPO”s… 4x the price. Why? Mandated “coverage” of
Show more
The ACA so successfully bent the cost curve that it flatlined health as a percentage of GDP in a bunch of other countries too (countries with slower GDP growth and more rapidly aging populations than the U.S., making it a tougher feat there). What a great policy!
Image
How can we stop overall healthcare costs from tracking our GDP as it rises? The market-wide spend on kitchen utensils isn’t measured as a fraction of GDP.
Lol my mind is blown. Have you written or read any good analysis of how it worked? Preventative care? Incentivizing outcomes over service? Been a minute since those ACA debates!
I own a company and offer health care to a few hundred employees… I was scared that ACA was going to massively increase our company’s costs but actually that’s when we stopped having double digit increases year after year after year. It’s not so bad actually!
It's gonna be worth a lot of popcorn late in 2025 when the GOP tries to eliminate or substantially cut Obamacare. They'll fail again.
I would pay more for women to have full reproductive healthcare, including affordable IVF. If you care about the fertility rate, good luck with your anti-IVF rant.
Square profile picture
Why do pensions need to change? Catherine Foot, Director of Phoenix Insights & Gail Izat, Workplace Managing Director, Standard Life, discuss how pensions need to change and our plan to get there.
0:32
Why do pensions need to change?
From thephoenixgroup.com
Thanks for your statistic about GDP. Meanwhile, back in the real world, my FAMILY premium for a pre-ACA policy was less than $720 per month, and by 2015 was over $2,100 per month (with one less person being covered). Same deductible.
Just so I'm clear, what you're saying is the goal of the Affordable Care Act was not to make healthcare more affordable, just not make it more unaffordable? Also, might want to consider folks are spending less on healthcare because THEY CAN'T AFFORD IT!
The aca has been an abject disaster for anyone who doesn’t get a (heavily)subsidized plan. It’s prevented more people from having any kind of hc plan, and by extension from receiving treatment. It’s prohibitively expensive, and has destroyed almost all competitive markets.
Quote
Tom Shafron
@ShafronTom
Of course healthcare couldn't continue to rise against GDP forever, the entire economy would have become healthcare if that continued. It's growing with GDP, which means NO productivity gains and lifespans have been stagnant. x.com/mattyglesias/s…
According to Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS.gov), U.S. healthcare spending (2022) reached $4.5 Trillion (!!!) or $13,493 per person! Healthcare spending accounted for 17.3% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Because healthcare is such a large part
Show more
Square profile picture
11 months since my family banned football shirts at Christmas lunch. Adapt, improvise, overcome. Home and away knits have dropped.
Now put other countries on that graph to see how efficient our system is. The only people arguing that healthcare is good are those that don’t actually cover the bill. Your employer pays it for you.
You have company-provided healthcare, don't you? The rest of us are paying $30,000 per year for a family of 3 for crappy insurance with a $7000 deductible. We quit getting healthcare because we can't afford to go to the doctor.
What's the evidence that this is the ACA vs. just the % of GDP becoming so huge that it reached a natural limit? We are way more than other countries as % of GDP and the number can't go up forever.
Middle class families are getting destroyed by health insurance costs and democrats are touting the ACA as a triumph. So out of touch. The ACA is a failure.
15 years later, no reduced cost except for from a 2020 COVID bump, still paying 33% more for healthcare than the next highest OECD country and 2x the average… and you’re calling it a W?! 🤯
Fuck your narrative. Currently have health insurance and cannot go to any doctor right away for my back because no one takes my plan and I am not allowed to go into any doctors office and pay cash to get treated because that is considered medical insurance fraud, but fucking
Show more
This is a dumb take . What really happened is during that same time period government deficit spending went through the roof, so when you do it as as a percent of GDP it’s hidden. Without massive debt spending GDP would be negative. Do the same thing in inflation
Show more
Probably because people realized getting yourself involved in the US healthcare system is a first class ticket to illness and death. If you get in a car accident go see a doctor. Other than that steer clear.
I think this is less costs decelerated and more the economy grow pretty well that costs stayed manageable. Still need lots to be done to actually control costs.
What do you think can be done to help zero out the number of uninsured not to mention the underinsured? Additionally could we do more to help increase the number of providers such as doctors? As well as dea with chronic health issues driving up health care costs
They talk about it all the time. Just not in a policy setting because there's no easy way out. Small business owners and nonprofits can't afford to buy health insurance policies. Off marketplace it costs as much to buy health insurance for one employee as to hire a secretary.
Exciting news! 's 2024 Next Big Things in Tech list has been announced & received the Enduring Impact: 15+ Years in Business award. This new category focuses on tech breakthroughs from organizations that have been in business for over 15 years. Read
Show more
Image
HMM --- that's not my read of the data. 1. Bush 43 HSAs bent the cost-curve. I was working in medical insurance then, and it was amazing. 2. ACA broke most individual value of HSAs, but expense of other even higher. So HSAs stayed as primary insurance. Which is a win.
It's obvious that the percentage couldn't keep going up forever, whether the ACA existed or not. You can't just extrapolate growth trends like that. Post hoc ergo propter hoc and all that.
Medicare spending is 3.9 trillion a year lower than projected given historic growth rates. That’s trillion with a T and NO ONE talks about it. If anyone was table to cut a trillion dollars out of the budget today they’d be erecting statues of them at the Hereitage Institute.
In the counterfactual where the ACA doesn't happen, do we similarly flatline? How do we know it was this, vs just 17% being the highest percentage of GDP HC was reasonably going to get? Seriously asking?
The paradox of competence. You fix a problem and everyone forgets it was a problem or even believes it was never a problem in the first place.
% of GDP Is a meaningless metric if you're really trying to measure the success of the ACA and you should know that
Measuring health care spending as a portion of GDP is a relatively useless metric. The ACA was a disaster. It led to rapid increases in costs for Americans that pay for health insurance.
It bent the cost curve by pushing all of the costs entirely into high premiums with high deductibles Look at the 15 year stock chart of a major health insurance company, total payday