• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Budget Office Lowers Its Estimate on Federal Spending for Health Care

sangha said:
More doctors accept Medicare than ever before
Click to expand...

Which of course misses the point entirely and missuses the statistic entirely.

If you have 5 sandwiches you can use to feed 5 people at a party. If you then buy 10 more sandwiches and 20 people show up you can claim that you have "more [sandwiches] then ever before" but your are still 10 short of what is actually needed.

We have this huge group of baby boomers that are going to be retiring in the next 10 years and going on Medicare, somehow you missed this?
 
jmotivator said:
Which of course misses the point entirely and missuses the statistic entirely.

If you have 5 sandwiches you can use to feed 5 people at a party. If you then buy 10 more sandwiches and 20 people show up you can claim that you have "more [sandwiches] then ever before" but your are still 10 short of what is actually needed.

We have this huge group of baby boomers that are going to be retiring in the next 10 years and going on Medicare, somehow you missed this?
Click to expand...

No, somehow you missed the fact that we have a record # of Medicare doctors, which proves another of the delusional right wings predictions wrong
 
Threegoofs said:
oh yes. The mandate. That keeps getting held over our heads... because that will do.... something.

Chicken Little, mandate version. Coming to a midterm election to you soon (after the skyrocketing premium meme craps out)!
Click to expand...

Skyrocketing premiums ???? You mean like these:

Health Plan Premiums Are Skyrocketing According To New Survey Of 148 Insurance Brokers, With Delaware Up 100%, California 53%, Florida 37%, Pennsylvania 28%
Click to expand...
Forbes

Americans who face higher *insurance costs under President Obama’s health-care law are angrily complaining about “sticker shock,” threatening to become a new political force opposing the law even as the White House struggles to convince other consumers that they will benefit from it
Click to expand...
.
Washington Post

Health insurance premiums have risen more after Obamacare than the average premium increases over the eight years before it became law, according to the private health exchange eHealthInsurance.
Click to expand...
Daily Caller
 
sangha said:
No, somehow you missed the fact that we have a record # of Medicare doctors, which proves another of the delusional right wings predictions wrong
Click to expand...

Post a link to this fact. I'm fascinated to read the findings.
 
Threegoofs said:
Oh, and by the way, as we know from objective studies, premiums didnt skyrocket (despite the chicken little Conservative pronoucements) in 2014.

And despite the Chicken Little pronouncements that there was a delay in the increases (at DP, this is often done in the same thread... the skyrocket changes into next years skyrocket, mysteriously), and we will see those increases NEXT year... it looks like the CBO says thats pretty doubtful.

Smaller premium hikes forecast in 2015 for Obamacare - Jennifer Haberkorn and Brett Norman - POLITICO.com



And they also say:
Click to expand...

When did the conservatives say that the cost of Obamacare premiums would "skyrocket" in 2014?
 
sangha said:
You think surveying one insurer in 11 states is valid, and you think I don't understand statistics!! :lamo
Click to expand...

First off, way to count. I see 10 states with 1 responder.

Second, are you claiming that the responders data is in error? Because the 4 of those report are lower than 11%/12% found by Morgan Stanley. So out of the 7 states that were showing lower than the the study's derived average you would like to throw 4 out? What do you think that would do for the average?

Third, statistical analysis uses weighted data points to attempt to match the general population when the data points are unevenly distributed. So a single responder in Delaware would not be weighted the same as 8 respondents in New York, and 31 in Illinois would not be granted the same weight each as 1 in Oregon. This is statistics 101 level, Sangha. This study is an investment report for the insurance industry and I would expect that they have at least that level of statistical know how.

Also, there is another hot topic I know of where large swaths of gridded statistical data points are drawn in areas without a single real data point!
 
sangha said:
‘Skyrocketing’ Premiums
Click to expand...

Hmmm... lets see...

Another intellectually dishonest attempt to prove lower premiums by discounting subsidies. Check.

Tries to prove ACA premiums aren't skyrocketing by using 2013 data before anyone had ACA insurance. Check.

References an article written a month before Open Enrollment as evidence that ACA plan, not yet available, will be cheaper. Check.

Yeah, this is a wonderfully misleading campaign ad for the Democrats, but as a fact check it sucks. It is amazing that an organization like Factcheck can write an article about ACA insurance plans in April of 2014 and spend all of their time citing opinion pieces from before open enrollment had even begun.

Even more amazing are the endless stream of people that post it as evidence of anything.
 
Last edited:
sangha said:
And you think that makes for a valid survey!!! :lamo
Click to expand...

Yes, it is. Your ignorance of statistics is not a very compelling argument.
 
Threegoofs said:
oh yes. The mandate. That keeps getting held over our heads... because that will do.... something.

Chicken Little, mandate version. Coming to a midterm election to you soon (after the skyrocketing premium meme craps out)!
Click to expand...

What's the skyrocketing premium meme?
 
Threegoofs said:
Cost cuts? Reform of the system?

That was called the ACA.
Click to expand...

of which if you know how to read a chart it did neither. if you notice the costs are still increasing just not as much. which still means an increase. it just delays what will happen by a few years.

if it was actually ruducing anything then you would see a downward trend in the graph there is no downward trend it is all up and up and up.
there is no decrease. it is still increasing just not as much as it was.

so before commenting on other people about their ability to read a graph you should do the same. i see nothing significant or even to get excited about that.
 
Threegoofs said:
You don't need a lesson on economics.

You need a simple review on reading graphs!

It's a LOWER share of GDP!
Click to expand...

So the question is a lower share of what GDP? If the GDP goes up and the percentage is less of a higher GDP does that mean we are spending less? Didn't think so, guess that is similar logic to those claiming that taking the debt from 900 billion to 2.6 trillion is worse than taking it from 10.6 trillion to 17.6 trillion because the percentage change is less. That is liberal logic.
 
jmotivator said:
Hmmm... lets see...

Another intellectually dishonest attempt to prove lower premiums by discounting subsidies. Check.

Tries to prove ACA premiums aren't skyrocketing by using 2013 data before anyone had ACA insurance. Check.

References an article written a month before Open Enrollment as evidence that ACA plan, not yet available, will be cheaper. Check.

Yeah, this is a wonderfully misleading campaign ad for the Democrats, but as a fact check it sucks. It is amazing that an organization like Factcheck can write an article about ACA insurance plans in April of 2014 and spend all of their time citing opinion pieces from before open enrollment had even begun.

Even more amazing are the endless stream of people that post it as evidence of anything.
Click to expand...

there is a new lawsuit in the mix that could kill obamacare if the court rules the way it should.

It says that the only people that should get subsidies are the ones that had the states setup their own exchange. that is the wording in the bill.
needless to say million of people on the federal website get subsidies which is not written into the law.

now if the SCOTUS overturns that then millions of people will see a 300-400 increase in their healthcare plan premium. basically what they would be paying before the subsidy.

you can't count the subsidy in as a premium reduction. it is dishonest.
what you have to compare are plan rates before the ACA and plan rates after the ACA without subsidies. if they are lower then the bill did it's job.
if they are higher then the bill didn't do it's job and utterly failed.
 
Threegoofs said:
Because you just go with your gut.

I know lots of people like that. They all fail in math and science.
Click to expand...

You just can't help yourself from your little BS shots.

The problem is I know math to well and until I can see what has gone into the numbers I don't trust them. The CBO is asked to score something given garbage in garbage will come out. But to give a cheap shot back, you being a liberal you'll believe anything.
 
tres borrachos said:
When did the conservatives say that the cost of Obamacare premiums would "skyrocket" in 2014?
Click to expand...

LOL. Youve got two just above you that not only probably claimed they would, but insist (despite all evidence) that THEY DID!

And you'll see it next year, and the year after, and after they lose the Presidential election, you might even hear it a few years after that.
 
Threegoofs said:
LOL. Youve got two just above you that not only probably claimed they would, but insist (despite all evidence) that THEY DID!

And you'll see it next year, and the year after, and after they lose the Presidential election, you might even hear it a few years after that.
Click to expand...

I got 2 above me what?

Which conservatives claimed that Obamacare premiums would skyrocket in 2014? Can you post some links of conservative politicians making this claim?
 
Threegoofs said:
LOL. Youve got two just above you that not only probably claimed they would, but insist (despite all evidence) that THEY DID!

And you'll see it next year, and the year after, and after they lose the Presidential election, you might even hear it a few years after that.
Click to expand...

You mean despite all the evidence I posted from reputable sources ?????

Nothing sadder than a blind partisan.
 
tres borrachos said:
I got 2 above me what?

Which conservatives claimed that Obamacare premiums would skyrocket in 2014? Can you post some links of conservative politicians making this claim?
Click to expand...

I probably could if I put a little time into it.

But when I produce the quotes, you'd just pirouette off as usual.
 
Threegoofs said:
I probably could if I put a little time into it.

But when I produce the quotes, you'd just pirouette off as usual.
Click to expand...

So no quotes of conservative politicians making the claim that Obamacare premiums would "skyrocket in 2014"? Can't name a few off the top of your head? That's interesting, because you repeat that over and over and over and over. If I repeated something that often, it would be because I knew it to be so.

You're just repeating talking points spoon fed to you.
 
Gill said:
You mean despite all the evidence I posted from reputable sources ?????

Nothing sadder than a blind partisan.
Click to expand...

Evidence from predictably biased sources, you mean?

Read these for your edification:


http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2013/10/17/308500.htm

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/08/2...t-rise-in-health-insurance-premiums.html?_r=0

http://www.nationaljournal.com/heal...-living-up-to-doomsayers-predictions-20140721


Blind partisan, indeed. I mean....the Daily Caller?

You present the debunked study earlier discussed in the thread, a story of someone with crap health insurance being forced to get conforming insurance and not liking the price, and some nutty story about a 39% premium rise (absurd on its face, even though it clearly says it didn't bother to include subsidies in the calculation).

You have to understand the issue before you criticize it, man.
 
Last edited:
tres borrachos said:
So no quotes of conservative politicians making the claim that Obamacare premiums would "skyrocket in 2014"? Can't name a few off the top of your head? That's interesting, because you repeat that over and over and over and over. If I repeated something that often, it would be because I knew it to be so.

You're just repeating talking points spoon fed to you.
Click to expand...

he still hasn't acknowledged the fact that nothing is going down and everything is going up.
anyone looking at the chart can see that costs continue to rise. while they might not rise as much they thought they are still rising.
there is no down trend in that chart at all.
 
ludin said:
he still hasn't acknowledged the fact that nothing is going down and everything is going up.
anyone looking at the chart can see that costs continue to rise. while they might not rise as much they thought they are still rising.
there is no down trend in that chart at all.
Click to expand...

Goalposts moved.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom