US uninsured rate continues to plummet, youth signing up most

[King]

No comment.

[Lief 🗽]

We are truly #blessed to have Obama as our president. 🙏

[Beet]

It should be 0%-2%, at least excluding illegal immigrants, but ideally including even them. Unfortunately that'll never happen.

[AggregateDemand]

It is illegal not to be covered. The trick is to get people covered without punishing them for living, which is an outcome completely foreign to Democrats.

[Ebsy]

It is illegal not to be covered. The trick is to get people covered without punishing them for living, which is an outcome completely foreign to Democrats.

Nice try.

[Adam Griffin]

One question: have undocumented residents always/ever been included in the former "47 million Americans" figure? If so, then of the remaining uninsured in this country, they are likely 1/3 of that number; Latinos as a whole would be approximately 45% of the uninsured, according to this poll's findings and simple math.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

Thank God for the Democratic Party.

[AggregateDemand]

Nice try.

I know. You almost learned something this time.

[Marnetmar]

Based Obama

[Ban my account ffs!]

Nice try.

I know. You almost learned something this time.

No, we already knew you're a moron.

Preferring to expand insurance coverage through positive reinforcement rather than punishment is hardly moronic.

Ultimately Obamacare is a hand up of wealth to the top from the middle with some coverage for the poor.

Its the same as doubling the cost of basic foodstuffs but not luxury food...and then giving the very poorest enough not to starve.  Oh wait...inflation has been near 0... Food is cheaper than ever...hunger riots in 2008 and 2011 were actually about political oppression...not the spikes in food and energy prices that people like dead0man explain away by showing the relative price of food from the beginning of time until 2007.

If you think Obamacare is anything but money handed from the middle to the top with scraps for the newly impoverished...then you're the real moron.

Medicare for all.

Jao

[Brittain33]

One question: have undocumented residents always/ever been included in the former "47 million Americans" figure?

I'm pretty certain they are.

[IceSpear]

#thanksobama

[Likely Voter]

note biggest change is under $36k. if every state did Medicaid expansion then the overall number would be a lot lower

[Ebsy]

note biggest change is under $36k. if every state did Medicaid expansion then the overall number would be a lot lower

I would imagine that there are several million people living in states that haven't expanded Medicaid that would received healthcare if their states were to agree to medicaid expansion. Do you think the uninsured rate would drop below 10% if that was no longer the case?

[Antonio the Sixth]

Wonderful! Thank you so much, Obama!

[Tender Branson]

Good, 30 Mio. to go !

[Adam Griffin]

One question: have undocumented residents always/ever been included in the former "47 million Americans" figure?

I'm pretty certain they are.

FYI, I looked it up, and it does. According to Kaiser, roughly 20% of the uninsured are non-citizens (my figures wrongly assumed that virtually all did not have insurance), which means that...

Starting point: 47,000,000
Undocumented, uninsured: 9,400,000
Starting point (exc. undocumented): 37,600,000

Net new enrolled: 16,400,000
Enrolled as a % of previously uninsured documented residents/citizens: 44%

Remaining uninsured (exc. undocumented): 21,200,000
Number of Americans (exc. undocumented): 308,000,000

Uninsured rate (exc. undocumented): 6.9%*

*This is of course assuming that the 16.4 million did not previously have healthcare, which likely isn't a realistic assumption

[Adam Griffin]

note biggest change is under $36k. if every state did Medicaid expansion then the overall number would be a lot lower

I would imagine that there are several million people living in states that haven't expanded Medicaid that would received healthcare if their states were to agree to medicaid expansion. Do you think the uninsured rate would drop below 10% if that was no longer the case?

Undoubtedly. According to Kaiser, there are roughly 4 million individuals in the states not expanding Medicaid that would qualify. They're really good at what they do, but like sounds like an extremely conservative estimate. Maybe it's just political talking points/inflation for benefit, but the number I've often heard for GA was twice what they have it listed as.

http://kff.org/health-reform/issue-brief/the-coverage-gap-uninsured-poor-adults-in-states-that-do-not-expand-medicaid-an-update/

Just bringing these eight states onboard would get a minimum of 3,000,000 more people covered.

950,000 - TX
670,000 - FL
360,000 - NC
280,000 - GA
180,000 - SC
180,000 - AL
170,000 - LA
170,000 - VA

[Likely Voter]

I suspect that after Obama is gone the states not expanding Medicare will slowly creep into the fold. Might take a decade or so and they might find different ways of doing it, but they will eventually find ways of taking the money

[AggregateDemand]

I suspect that after Obama is gone the states not expanding Medicare will slowly creep into the fold. Might take a decade or so and they might find different ways of doing it, but they will eventually find ways of taking the money

Since Congress and the Executive set some of the stipulations for receiving the money, which ultimately determines how much it costs to accept Medcaid expansion, the changing of the guard is important.

[Mr. Illini]

"Everything is plummeting under Obama!" - Fox News

[AggregateDemand]

Now that tax season has concluded, and I have more time to reflect on the data generated by my office, the uninsured rate can only be construed as the silver lining in a dark cloud.

This "achievement" has been won by taking the middle class to the woodshed and by threatening them with further financial drubbing, if they refuse to comply. The individual mandate is a diabolical new form of authoritarian government and forced capitalism. People have lost the tax benefit of their dependents, which is a clear violation of ability to pay, but no one seems bothered with the rights of taxpayers.

Proponents rebut by claiming that, for every bad uninsured person who is horsewhipped by the regulation, a good person enjoys a better quality of life with subsidized healthcare. Compliance by everyone makes the nation a better place.

In reality, this is a blatant disregards for the economic rights of American citizens, and the malevolence of this administration is compounded by its decision not to "spread the wealth around", but to hammer down dissent with onerous taxation.

[Torie]

Now that tax season has concluded, and I have more time to reflect on the data generated by my office, the uninsured rate can only be construed as the silver lining in a dark cloud.

This "achievement" has been won by taking the middle class to the woodshed and by threatening them with further financial drubbing, if they refuse to comply. The individual mandate is a diabolical new form of authoritarian government and forced capitalism. People have lost the tax benefit of their dependents, which is a clear violation of ability to pay, but no one seems bothered with the rights of taxpayers.

Proponents rebut by claiming that, for every bad uninsured person who is horsewhipped by the regulation, a good person enjoys a better quality of life with subsidized healthcare. Compliance by everyone makes the nation a better place.

In reality, this is a blatant disregards for the economic rights of American citizens, and the malevolence of this administration is compounded by its decision not to "spread the wealth around", but to hammer down dissent with onerous taxation.

The above is quite a mouthful, and you lost me with the loss of dependents thing, but moving right along, do you believe any form of taxation, the proceeds of which are used for redistributive purposes, is immoral?

[AggregateDemand]

The above is quite a mouthful, and you lost me with the loss of dependents thing, but moving right along, do you believe any form of taxation, the proceeds of which are used for redistributive purposes, is immoral?

Why would you retreat to an obscure political talking point?

The middle class just got hammered with a 1% of AGI or $95 per month (whichever is higher) surtax for non-coverage. Rather than pay the tax, they removed dependents from their tax return. Those dependency exemptions were granted according to the ability to pay concept. Other taxpayers, who aren't covered by their employers, thus, don't receive the same tax benefits for healthcare, were forced to eat the higher tax bill.

Meanwhile the upper middle and upper classes are left to their own devices because they receive tax-free healthcare compensation from their employers.

Wealth is being distributed from the middle fifth to the bottom fifth. Does that seem like an effective method of spreading the wealth around? Only the brain-dead American electorate could cheerlead something so patently stupid. Only clueless Americans could allow elected officials to plea federal poverty, when we have more than enough money to solve the problem, if only we'll stop binge spending of counter-productive programs that make us less filthy-rich.

Obamacare is surely one of the greatest failures in our history. We could buy healthcare for everyone, but we don't. We could easily empower everyone to buy their own healthcare, but we don't. Instead, we vote for civic malfeasance and moral debauchery on an increasingly grand scale. 

[Torie]

The above is quite a mouthful, and you lost me with the loss of dependents thing, but moving right along, do you believe any form of taxation, the proceeds of which are used for redistributive purposes, is immoral?

Why would you retreat to an obscure political talking point?

The middle class just got hammered with a 1% of AGI or $95 per month (whichever is higher) surtax for non-coverage. Rather than pay the tax, they removed dependents from their tax return. Those dependency exemptions were granted according to the ability to pay concept. Other taxpayers, who aren't covered by their employers, thus, don't receive the same tax benefits for healthcare, were forced to eat the higher tax bill.

Meanwhile the upper middle and upper classes are left to their own devices because they receive tax-free healthcare compensation from their employers.

Wealth is being distributed from the middle fifth to the bottom fifth. Does that seem like an effective method of spreading the wealth around? Only the brain-dead American electorate could cheerlead something so patently stupid. Only clueless Americans could allow elected officials to plea federal poverty, when we have more than enough money to solve the problem, if only we'll stop binge spending of counter-productive programs that make us less filthy-rich.

Obamacare is surely one of the greatest failures in our history. We could buy healthcare for everyone, but we don't. We could easily empower everyone to buy their own healthcare, but we don't. Instead, we vote for civic malfeasance and moral debauchery on an increasingly grand scale. 

Well you have a point about employee based plans, and the system should certainly be more means tested, but I think you missed the moral hazard aspect - that those who are not insured, when they have a real need, burden the system typically as freeloaders, at taxpayer and the expense of those who have insurance, because some of the premiums are then diverted to offset some of the free loader expense that the care giver organizations are saddled with. What is conservative or moral about that, in anyone's universe?