RebKell's Junkie Boards
Board Junkies Forums
 
Log in Register FAQ Memberlist Search RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index

23 million fewer Americans insured under House GOP bill

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » Area 51
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Genero36



Joined: 24 Apr 2005
Posts: 8260



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/24/17 6:46 pm    ::: 23 million fewer Americans insured under House GOP bill Reply Reply with quote

<embed><iframe width="854" height="480" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/REVwFXenGxw" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe></embed>

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REVwFXenGxw

Quote:
The House Republican health care bill would leave 23 million fewer Americans with health insurance by 2026 than under Obamacare, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said Wednesday.

The highly anticipated CBO score is likely to trigger another round of negative headlines and more hurdles for Republicans as they look to advance a controversial piece of legislation that was passed in the House earlier this month.

The CBO also found the bill would reduce deficits by $119 billion compared with Obamacare.

Eager to notch a political win in the GOP's years-long mission to repeal Obamacare, Republican lawmakers took a gamble by voting before the CBO could analyze last-minute changes to the bill.

The new CBO report will serve as an important report card for Senate Republicans as they deliberate over their own version of the health care bill.

The report also shed some light into how the House GOP bill, titled the American Health Care Act, would change the nation's individual health insurance market.


http://money.cnn.com/2017/05/24/news/economy/obamacare-repeal-cbo/index.html



_________________
I'm all for the separation of church and hate.
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 53684
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/24/17 6:59 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Considering how badly the CBO estimates missed the mark on the ACA, I wouldn't put that much stock in what they think about the new plan.



_________________
She wants to dance, she loves to dance, she's got to dance
justintyme



Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 5865
Location: Northfield, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/24/17 7:20 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
Considering how badly the CBO estimates missed the mark on the ACA, I wouldn't put that much stock in what they think about the new plan.

It is still the best estimate that we have. As with all predictions, things can go not as expected, and can lead to different results, but this can be read as a "most likely" result.

It can also be very useful if we use it for generalities as to who it will help and who it will hurt and to what general amount (not at all, a little, a lot, or completely).

To just ignore these numbers is to ignore data for no good reason.



_________________
Woe to that land that's governed by a child.
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 53684
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/24/17 7:42 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

justintyme wrote:
pilight wrote:
Considering how badly the CBO estimates missed the mark on the ACA, I wouldn't put that much stock in what they think about the new plan.

It is still the best estimate that we have. As with all predictions, things can go not as expected, and can lead to different results, but this can be read as a "most likely" result.

It can also be very useful if we use it for generalities as to who it will help and who it will hurt and to what general amount (not at all, a little, a lot, or completely).

To just ignore these numbers is to ignore data for no good reason.


It's not data, it's speculation. Given that their last major health care estimates rested on faulty assumptions which resulted in wildly inaccurate guesses, I'm hesitant to use their numbers for anything.



_________________
She wants to dance, she loves to dance, she's got to dance
justintyme



Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 5865
Location: Northfield, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/24/17 7:57 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
justintyme wrote:
pilight wrote:
Considering how badly the CBO estimates missed the mark on the ACA, I wouldn't put that much stock in what they think about the new plan.

It is still the best estimate that we have. As with all predictions, things can go not as expected, and can lead to different results, but this can be read as a "most likely" result.

It can also be very useful if we use it for generalities as to who it will help and who it will hurt and to what general amount (not at all, a little, a lot, or completely).

To just ignore these numbers is to ignore data for no good reason.


It's not data, it's speculation. Given that their last major health care estimates rested on faulty assumptions which resulted in wildly inaccurate guesses, I'm hesitant to use their numbers for anything.

Yes, they were off. Their numbers didn't play out as they thought. Yet there are a ton of times where their numbers have been accurate. To just focus on when they were wrong is cherry picking.

To throw out their numbers we need to be able to look at their methodology and say "this is where they are making a bad assumption" and then explain why.

Yet if we look at their ACA numbers, the generalities were in fact correct. And their accuracy is hard to judge since the program was undermined from the beginning by defunding risk corridors and lack of congressional support.



_________________
Woe to that land that's governed by a child.
cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 7980
Location: In a world where a dbag like Trump is not president.


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/24/17 8:27 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

IOW, pilight is suggesting the number could be 40 million. Wink



_________________
Silly, stupid white people.
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 53684
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/24/17 10:04 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

cthskzfn wrote:
IOW, pilight is suggesting the number could be 40 million. Wink


Yes, it could be worse than what the CBO is saying



_________________
She wants to dance, she loves to dance, she's got to dance
justintyme



Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 5865
Location: Northfield, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/24/17 10:12 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
cthskzfn wrote:
IOW, pilight is suggesting the number could be 40 million. Wink


Yes, it could be worse than what the CBO is saying

I do agree that this could easily be inaccurate. This score forced the CBO to guess what each state was going to do. That creates more moving parts that are hard to predict. However, it is also likely the best predictions we are going to be able to have and it is very enlightening as to who it is going to hit and generally by how much.

Sometimes when looking at things like this we just have to make the best educated guess available and run with it until/unless new data is provided.



_________________
Woe to that land that's governed by a child.
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » Area 51 All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.17 © 2001- 2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Template by Vjacheslav Trushkin