Trumpcare leverages mortality to reduce costs

Discussion in 'Politics' started by billvon, Mar 14, 2017.

  1. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,646
    Trump, being the brilliant businessman that he is, has managed to leverage something that the more wimpy politicians don't want to talk about - an increasing mortality rate as a result of the reduced coverage under his plan.

    In table 3 of the Trumpcare proposal there's a chart that lists the overall budgetary effects of the proposal. One of the rows is "other effects on revenues." That's a lot of money saved. But where is that coming from?

    That row has a footnote that says "CBO also estimates that the outlays for Social Security benefits would decrease by about $3 billion over the 2017-2026 period." OK, so that's part of the savings. But why is that changing? This proposal doesn't address Social Security.

    It's coming from a different source. From a study by the ACP on the implementation of the Obamacare model in Massachusetts:

    ========
    Reform in Massachusetts was associated with a significant decrease in all-cause mortality compared with the control group (P = 0.003, or an absolute decrease of 8.2 deaths per 100 000 adults). Deaths from causes amenable to health care also significantly decreased (P < 0.001). Changes were larger in counties with lower household incomes and higher prereform uninsured rates. Secondary analyses showed significant gains in coverage, access to care, and self-reported health. The number needed to treat was approximately 830 adults gaining health insurance to prevent 1 death per year.
    http://annals.org/...i-experimental-study
    ========

    So that's an expected increase of 8.2 deaths per 100,000 adults after losing insurance. So by 2026, if the CBO’s estimate is correct, that would equate to about 28,000 additional deaths a year.

    So that's where the savings are coming from - dead people don't need Social Security. It's a win-win-win - old people die sooner and don't require expensive treatments, thus saving everyone else some money on their premiums. The dead old people don't use federal money (like Social Security) saving even more money. And the dead old people can't vote any more, so no disgruntled voters voting against the politicians that took their healthcare coverage away.

    Brilliant!
     
    iceaura likes this.

Share This Page