these are numbers for JUST the next 10 years, from the Congressional Budget Office.
Anyone know how we can pay for this?
And am I the only person who thinks these numbers are nuts?
1,000,000,000,000 / 10 years =
100,000,000,000 / year to provide coverage for a net gain of 16,000,000 more people
= $ 6,250 in cost /insured person /per year for adding 16 million into the coverage
(by the way - if you think 1 trillion is correct - coverage for a 52 yo male at the levels planned is close to 1,500 per month, or 18,000 per year )
and that still leaves somewhere around 30 million to go (46 million uninsured - 16 million)
these numbers could go higher, given that coverage will extend to people making up to 500% of the poverty level
|Family Size||Gross Annual Income||Gross Monthly Income|
Bill to reduce uninsured by 16M carries $1T price tag
|By Dan Bowman|
Is reducing the number of uninsured people in the United States by 16 million worth $1 trillion over a 10-year time span? That's what the Congressional Budget Office estimates a bill to reform healthcare in the United States will accomplish should it pass as is, according to the Washington Post.
A letter to Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-MA) points out that "based on major provisions" in "an incomplete draft of the bill," 23 million individuals would wind up without insurance--15 million who were formerly covered through employers, and another 8 million covered by "other sources." However, 39 million people overall would become covered through other exchanges, creating a net of 16 million individuals covered.
CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf did write that the $1 trillion price tag could rise, considering the organization did not account for "proposals" offering federal subsidies to individuals making between 150 and 500 percent of the federal poverty level, according to Modern Healthcare. "Taking all of its provisions into account could change our assessment of the proposal's effects on the budget and insurance coverage rates though probably not by substantial amounts relative to the net costs already identified," wrote Elmendorf.