Welcome to PatsFans.com

The cost of healthcare "reform"

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by BelichickFan, Jun 13, 2009.

  1. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,088
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +37 / 2 / -3

    My Jersey:

    #24 Jersey
    With Charlie Rangel saying is would cost over $1T I thought I would get out my paystub and my trusty calculator.

    I used 50M as the number of uninsured as that's the standard number. Actually, most seem to say about 45M but I figure it's up a bit.

    I got out my paystub. My health insurance costs $1K a month, split between me and my employer.

    I got out my calculator and multiplied $12K ($1K a month for a year) times 50M. And I arrived at $600B. So why is it going to cost twice that ?

    A few notes :

    The 50M is almost certainly high as it includes illegals who all but the most extreme do not want included.

    My $1K a month is extreme because that's the "family" rate. If I were single it would be something like half that. So I used a very high number on a per person basis.

    So, seriously, what's with the $1T+ ???
  2. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,088
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +37 / 2 / -3

    My Jersey:

    #24 Jersey
    I also found a link from this year with 2005 data (so it's a little old) that says :

    "In 2005 – which is the most recent data available – these beneficiaries consumed nearly 4.5 times more per person in Medicare spending ($18,902) than those without disabilities ($4,289)."

    Of course for the normal uninsured person they wouldn't be disabled very often like the older people on medicare so the $4K number (double it to $8K if you like) would be the number for the vast majority. Well beyond the $12K I did my numbers with.

    So, again, I ask . . .
  3. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,088
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +37 / 2 / -3

    My Jersey:

    #24 Jersey
    Since no liberals want to answer my question let me ask it a different way.

    With 50M uninsured and a cost of $1T that is a cost of $20K per uninsured person. Again, most think 50M is high (based on illegals) and $1T is low. But I'll use those numbers.

    Please answer the question, why are we talking about spending $20K per uninsured person when insurance costs less than half that (when looking at individual insurance, not the "family" number I threw up before).

    WHY ???
  4. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,088
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +37 / 2 / -3

    My Jersey:

    #24 Jersey
    I'm going to make this my own blog since no-one will answer my question.

    "Average health care spending per capita was $7026 in 2006 and will grow to $7868 in 2008."

    So why do the obamans want a program that will cost at least $20K per person ?
    Last edited: Jun 13, 2009
  5. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    19,527
    Likes Received:
    41
    Ratings:
    +43 / 0 / -2

    My Jersey:

    Okay I'll bite. Where is the $1T number coming from?

    Your comparison figure is for 1 year. Is the $1T figure, $1T per year? If so, give me a source.

    PFnV
  6. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,088
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +37 / 2 / -3

    My Jersey:

    #24 Jersey
    It turns out you're right.

    Sorry (where's the "embarrassed" emoticon ?)
  7. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,088
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +37 / 2 / -3

    My Jersey:

    #24 Jersey
    My embarrasment aside, the $110B per year ($1T over 10 years) still comes to $2K per person which is close to what I pay (I pay $12K for a family of 4).

    So my thread is invalid as the cost would be about the same as the government paying for the insurance of the uninsured.

    Two points, though :

    1) That shows we don't need to throw away the baby with the bathwater. We don't need to go to a public sector, single payer system.

    2) The $2K is the BEST CASE for those arguing in favor of this. The other side says the cost is more likely to be $1.5T over 10 years and we really only have about $30M uninsured when you take out illegals and kids who get government subsidized healthcare now. Those numbers come out to $5K per person.

    My thread sucks, I didn't read carefully enough. However the numbers still come out to $2K to $5K per person which is very much on the high side. And we all know government programs are not going to come in on the low side.
  8. Patsfanin Philly

    Patsfanin Philly Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2005
    Messages:
    6,665
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +8 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    I hate to rain on your parade but a Kaiser study

    http://www.kff.org/insurance/upload/7692_02.pdf
    listed it as $8160 per person or prorated to 300 million people $2.5 trillion in annual costs.
  9. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,088
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +37 / 2 / -3

    My Jersey:

    #24 Jersey
    I already said my numbers were flawed.

    But, as I said, for the insurance part the $1T+ over 10 years comes in at the high end of what private insurance costs. We all have health care costs that aren't covered by insurance whether it's co-pays or stuff like optical and dental which often aren't covered - I know they aren't covered for me.

    Full healthcare costs for all would be INSANE.
  10. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    19,527
    Likes Received:
    41
    Ratings:
    +43 / 0 / -2

    My Jersey:

    Okay, #1, good on you for just saying oops. You caught me on an order of magnitude error a thousand posts or so ago, and I know the feeling. You were still wrong of course for some other reason.

    Now let's get back to cleaning up the math...

    You're talking about annual figures with your $2000 a head number?

    2,000 times 300 million is 600 billion, not 110 billion (the 1-year figure.)

    110 billion for 300 million people would be on the order of 366 dollars a person.

    PFnV
  11. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,088
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +37 / 2 / -3

    My Jersey:

    #24 Jersey
    That $110B is not for health coverage for everyone. That's to pay for the uninsured.

    Medicare costs about $4K for the "healthy" elderly. Multiply 4,000 * 300,000,000 for the cost of health coverage at a Medicare level for everyone.
  12. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    19,527
    Likes Received:
    41
    Ratings:
    +43 / 0 / -2

    My Jersey:

    The medicare figure applies to the notoriously unhealthy over-65 set. I think it likely that assuming your $4k/a head figure is correct for Medicare, it would still be incorrect for the general population, given service utilization for a 20, 30, or 40 year old vs. a 65, 75, or 85 year old.
  13. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,088
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +37 / 2 / -3

    My Jersey:

    #24 Jersey
    The $4K number was for healthy older people, there was a number of $14K for the more disabled group.

    If you think $100B, or less than $500 per person, will pay for health care for all then that's a program I want no part of because it will be crap.
  14. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    19,527
    Likes Received:
    41
    Ratings:
    +43 / 0 / -2

    My Jersey:

    So as I understand it, if it costs nearly as much as your current insurance, you don't want it because it's too expensive, and if it costs less, you don't want it because it's not expensive enough?

    Do you by chance have any sort of "goldilocks zone" of a price by which you do want health care reform, or is the cost, as looks increasingly evident, not really your problem with it?

    PFnV
  15. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,088
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +37 / 2 / -3

    My Jersey:

    #24 Jersey
    I'm talking solely about the cost. And I'm saying that as insurance payments for the uninsured it's at the high, but reasonable, end of what insurance costs.

    What I would want ? I don't want the public sector to take over which is what would happen if anyone could opt in - because if they don't opt in they'd have to pay for themselves (private insurance) plus others (public insurance). In the same way that those going to private schools still have to pay for public. Why don't I want that ? If I don't like the way my insurance company handles things I can change to a different one. If the government takes over what happens if I'm unhappy ? I'm stuck.

Share This Page