Health Care Bill: Double Counting Doubles the Crisis



imagine I gave you $1 and asked you to buy me a soda with that dollar then later on I asked for you to buy me a candy bar with that dollar that you've already spent this is an impossible scenario right well apparently it isn't if you're the government you see the health care bill of 2010 was said to provide two major benefits first the bill promised to find savings of the government's biggest health insurance program Medicare and use those savings to reduce our deficit second the bill promised to expand health care coverage to uninsured Americans sounds pretty good right but how does the government propose to pay for both benefits here's where the math becomes fuzzy in our paychecks we each pay taxes that go to the Medicare trust fund what is the Medicare trust fund it is similar to a savings account you'd have at the bank but instead only one person contributing to the account all of us taxpayers do the savings or taxpayer dollars in this account are then used to pay out benefits to other Americans enrolled in Medicare but this trust fund has been nearly sucked dry and was scheduled to be empty by 2016 leaving millions of Americans down and out when it came to their health benefits so the health care bill of 2010 promised to use the bill savings to extend the lifeline to Medicare ensuring it can pay full benefits to beneficiaries until 2024 if our taxes only went to shoring up Medicare that'd be one thing but remember that other promise from the health care bill expanding health care coverage to more Americans here's where the real problem comes into play the government also promised to finance new health care benefits with these exact same savings so which is it making Medicare whole again or financing new health care benefits the law doesn't produce enough money to pay for both according to the government it is in fact both in short the government is counting these tax dollars twice to finance both benefits but this simply doesn't add up it doesn't take a mathematician to know that one dollar doesn't magically turn into two dollars when it passes through government hands what does this mean for you and me it means we're gonna have to borrow more money to pay for some of the key promises of the health care bill with our deficit already soaring out of control this doesn't seem like a good idea and our greatest generation and the baby boomers Medicare benefits aren't looking so secure anymore those Medicare savings will be tapped to pay new beneficiaries creative government accounting will catch up with us and you and I will pay more in taxes to finance these programs in the end double counting only doubles the crisis

18 comments

  1. Hmm…a university site that isn't even an edu domain…which doesn't prove to me that it's a reliable source. While we're at it, neither the video nor the link in the description actually lists any sources for this 'study'. So…I'm not believing any of this to be accurate just yet. Additionally, much of the benefit from this act (e.g. covering more people) is not intended to be coming from additional funding, but rather regulations that force insurance companies to make things more affordable.

  2. I've got my own group of doctors that say otherwise…

    2010 Health Care Law: 2 years of false promises, worse to come
    watch?v=bqqO4GHNFZ0

  3. So if someone doesnt have family or has a poor family they have less of a right to life than someone else? I think the main difference in our opinions is that on one side life is sacred and the eventual culmination of this is that health insurance coverage should be global so everyone is protected. The only way I have heard that you can justify lack of coverage is by denying coverage to those not paying and that can be a death sentence.

  4. Having trouble posting it, but search for npallainces expanding-health-insurance-coverage-should-reduce-costs article

  5. "What about someone who has cancer or fibromyalgia a and is unable to work? "
    friends, family, charity…..

    " If someone is healthy but not responsible and does not pay…"

    Then they pay the consequence. Why does the person that WAS responsible and paid into health savings account and DID sacrifice and plan ahead get the shaft and have to be responsible for the person that wasn't? You don't reward the bad by punishing the good.

  6. What about someone who has cancer or fibromyalgia a and is unable to work? They would be disqualified from private health insurance due to a pre-existing condition and health insurance through employment only lasts for so long. How are they expected to pay for their life saving treatments? If someone is healthy but not responsible and does not pay into a savings account for healthcare but then falls sick and cannot pay for healthcare are we saying they should be left to die?

  7. Is everyone forgetting that by getting more people insured more people receive preventative care and that reduces health care costs in the long run?

  8. "Health care costs are skyrocketing because there are far too many children screaming they want mommy and daddy to pay so they have to raise prices for pay for your temper tantrums."
    ????? You MUST be a republican to believe that incompetent BS!

    Health care is skyrocketing because of greed, pure and simple. The AHA isn't about handouts, it's about stopping people from freeloading. When someone who can't afford to go to the doctor walks into an emergency room, who do you think pays for it?

  9. I've got an alternative. Stop stealing from other people and pay your own damn healthcare bills. I swear, you're like a 5 year old in a candy store throwing a temper tantrum. Grow up and start acting like an adult and take some responsibility for your own life.

    Health care costs are skyrocketing because there are far too many children screaming they want mommy and daddy to pay so they have to raise prices for pay for your temper tantrums.

  10. More republican spew. Not surprising considering the source.
    Let's pretend just for a minute that everything you said was true. Current health care costs have been skyrocketing for years and medicare is being drained at an alarming rate. The republicans never came up with a plan (oh – they did – it was called Romneycare and it is the foundation of the AHA) so what do you propose? I'm sick and tired about whiners with no alternative.

  11. If you give me $1 for a Coke and I negotiate/drive the cost of a Coke down below $1, that is money that could be used to go toward that chocolate bar you want, despite the fact you only paid me for a Coke.

    Since I spent less than I took in, you could say I had a reduction in spending (deficit reduction), while also providing you additional services by using that money towards getting you a chocolate bar.

    Feels like a circular argument to me. Where's the (pink slime free) beef?

  12. No, they're not. The government was obviously assuming in its scoring of Obamacare that the Trust Fund would not run out, and Mercatus is talking about how the government scored Obamacare. So he has to use the government's assumption about the Trust Fund, which presumably assumes that the Trust Fund will never run out due to the many new taxes imposed by Obamacare.

Leave a Reply

(*) Required, Your email will not be published