Posted on 11/30/2016 8:08:49 AM PST by Mikey_1962
A new study by Jonathan Gruber, one of the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) chief economic architects, suggests that roughly two-thirds of new Medicaid enrollees in 2014 were eligible for the program under previous state eligibility criteria—meaning that they were not made eligible by the ACA. If accurate, then a much smaller share of new Medicaid enrollees were made eligible for the program by the ACA than Washington experts commonly believe. For example, the Congressional Budget Office’s (CBO) most recent projection is that only one of six new Medicaid enrollees were eligible for the program before the ACA. Gruber’s results, combined with much higher than expected Medicaid enrollment and spending over the past three years, has profound implications for the distribution of program costs and the effect of a repeal of the ACA. First, Gruber’s results suggest that people who were already eligible for Medicaid before the ACA have been inappropriately categorized as though they are newly eligible because of the ACA. This is important because the ACA requires the federal government to pay a lot more of the cost of covering newly eligible enrollees than it does for those eligible for Medicaid before the ACA. Thus, it appears the federal government is paying a lot more than it should be and that states are paying far less. Second, Gruber’s results suggest that if the ACA were repealed, a lot fewer people would likely lose coverage than previously thought.
(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...
True.
Ok you have forced me to look at the census numbers again. Basically my numbers are gradually going away. When the last census was taken, those over 50 had much lower college achievement than those under 50. And that group is dying off. Additionally the census has noticed the trend and even though they have not taken a new census they are gradually updating their numbers according to the trend. So taking a 4 year college education which is what many consider to be finished college, the trend looks like its going to 36%. At which point it is plateauing. Even though several people now-a-days are considering programming camps and other non-college alternatives, it seems that we have a steady 15 year trend of 36% graduation rate. But until the old die off we are still around 31% according to the census. All things staying the same, that 31% will move to 36% over the next 20 years. Your numbers don’t include those over 65 so yours are higher.
When you quote those people who say they are enrolled in college, that is a notoriously overstated number. Many people say they are in college when they are taking just a class, or thinking about taking a class. People lie in surveys and this question is one they lie about most. They lie about it to the survey, to their mother, and to themselves.
OK, well you may not like my numbers (many came from Govt), but at least I sourced them. You keep referring to older population, yet our debate centered on the millennial to age 26. You state my numbers are inflated, but you have no source...just opinion. I suspect the numbers are being compiled not from phone surveys with individuals but from institutions and/or census data. Someone taking one class is in college..they are in college. NOt all can go full-time and many don’t as they are trying to work at the same time. So you could have a summer school student, a full-time worker taking one class, or a student unable to snag a full time load for a given semester...not necessarily lying.
As I posted before, I think the coverage to 26 is well received, reasonable, and not being abused by vast numbers of slackers—and I stated many stats and reasons why...
Your family is personally taking advantage of the ruling with four post high school children, so I really don’t understand your position, but again, we just are going to disagree.
Good day.
No my numbers are from the US census I said it each time. The US census is that thing they do every ten years. You must have heard of it. Ask your mother. You can try this one...
https://www.census.gov/hhes/socdemo/education/
But there are others. You chose the University of Chicago survey. I prefer a survey of every single person in the country. I think mine is a little more scientific. Or at least my surveys standard error is smaller.
And I am saying that regardless of whether my kids could take advantage of the law. They should not be able to. We always had coverage for kids over 18 in college. Obama added kids over 18 not in high school or college. Those kids should pay for medical insurance because they are not kids. They are adults. I do not allow my kids to be on my plan after college. I force them to get their own plan by getting a job.
You must have heard of it. Ask your mother. You can try this one...
Oh and yes I ahve heard of the census, dated information.
BTW Thanks so much for the snark...nice going.
my mother is dead—just what I needed to read. :(
Post away, but I am done.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.