Report Finds AHCA Could Cost 2.7 Million Jobs By 2025

[KILL KILL]

A new report by the Commonwealth Fund and George Washington University was published the other day and it didn't have many good things to say regarding the Affordable Health Care Act.

http://www.commonwealthfund.org/~/m...rief/2017/jun/ku_economic_effects_ahca_ib.pdf

The Atlantic published a piece about it.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politic...ahca-recession-report/530322/?utm_source=fbia

Apparently, for the first two years, there may actually be a stimulus, which is good, but the health care industry would take a hit from the get go.

The structure of the House bill that passed in May would lead to an interesting whirlwind of economic effects, according to this report. The AHCA repeals most of the taxes that supported the Affordable Care Act just about immediately, which might even act as a short-term stimulus. Between 2018 and 2020, authors predict the economy would actually grow by over 800,000 jobs, which notably would buoy jobs reports for two straight elections. The health-care industry, however, would begin sloughing jobs immediately.

From there, things go downhill quickly.

Reductions in federal funding for coverage through massive cuts to Medicaid and reduction of private-insurance subsidies all but reverse those gains by 2021, and begin what the researchers call “a period of economic and medical hardship in the U.S.” after that. Federal Medicaid funds and under the ACA themselves currently act as a stimulus to state governments, and the AHCA would cut those funds even below pre-ACA levels, and cap them.

In New York alone, the Commonwealth Fund report indicates the state gross domestic product would decrease by $10.5 billion by 2026 over current projections, and total business output by $16 billion. And similar losses would come across every state in every sector.

Of course the most dramatic effects would be in the health-care industry. Per the Congressional Budget Office estimates, 23 million fewer people are expected to be insured under the House’s draft of the AHCA. The industry will simply have to contract in the face of such losses of eligible patients, and in the face of increases in uncompensated care. This report suggests a net loss of about 700,000 jobs in the health-care sector alone. And while the president and his allies have worked hard to ensure the job security of rather small numbers of factory and coal-mining jobs in the Midwest and Appalachia, losses in the health-care industry (which employs millions of blue-collar workers) would hit those areas hard too. Kentucky and West Virginia would lose 16,000 combined jobs in the health-care sector alone.

This is probably the most important quote of the article;

Through their amendments, House Republicans have pulled off a rare policy feat: Their version of the AHCA invests much more federal money than the pre-Obamacare government ever did to insure fewer people and cuts taxes for small business owners and the wealthy while also killing jobs and economic activity. Their program is neither entirely austere nor a big-government boondoggle, yet manages to incorporate the pitfalls of each approach.

How is it possible to have complained about Obamacare for so long, only to try and push through something far worse? What were these people doing for the last several years?

EDIT: It's important to also note that we don't know what the final product for the AHCA is going to be. For all we know, they could add amendments that mitigate some of the economic distress. However, the Republicans are not making that information public at this time (which is pretty damn shady).

 

[chardog]

this is actually fantastic

the health care industry is way too bloated and needs to slim down big time. This pretty much proves that AHCA is going to work to some degree.

this is like saying big pharm taking a hit.... that would be fantastic as well.

 

[KILL KILL]

this is actually fantastic

the health care industry is way too bloated and needs to slim down big time. This pretty much proves that AHCA is going to work to some degree.

this is like saying big pharm taking a hit.... that would be fantastic as well.

I tend to think losing millions of jobs is a bad thing, but I like your optimism!

 

[gigantalor]

Funny how liberals only care about transparency NOW, but when the ACA was rolled out, transparency didn't matter.

 

[panamaican]

That was an interesting read. A healthcare plan that insures fewer people but reduces jobs to do it.

So not only do we have more uninsured people but we'll also get more unemployed people!!

 

[KILL KILL]

Funny how liberals only care about transparency NOW, but when the ACA was rolled out, transparency didn't matter.

This is a weird talking point that I keep seeing conservatives talk about in this forum, but simply isn't true.

Here is the other health care thread. TheStruggle tried making the same argument and it went very very poorly.

http://forums.sherdog.com/threads/gop-healthcare-bill-in-senate.3553943/

 

[KILL KILL]

That was an interesting read. A healthcare plan that insures fewer people but reduces jobs to do it.

So not only do we have more uninsured people but we'll also get more unemployed people!!

That's the gist of it.

Again, they are making changes to it (behind closed doors), so who knows what the end result will be? I tend to believe that if they're making serious positive changes, then they would want the media to know...or at least the rest of the Republicans.

 

[chardog]

I tend to think losing millions of jobs is a bad thing, but I like your optimism!

in general, it would be, but lets look at it this way:

if we spend 17% of GDP on health care, and then suddenly drop down to 15% of GDP or 10% of GDP, what would realistically happen to many people in the field? Guaranteed, loss of jobs. You cannot sustain the same amount of jobs without the same amount of funding.

For many years, the construction industry was the biggest industry in california. That means, stuff was actually produced. HC is a service and it surpassed construction. THat means we started paying more to fix ourselves than produce stuff, and in reality, we're still no better at fixing ourselves, just paying more! It seems to me that trumpcare is indeed going to unravel some of our health care coverage, so we'll HAVE to rely on self payment and HSA's. It's not the end of the world, singapore has a system like that and they pay far less as part of their GDP. They also mandate it.

 

[ripskater]

The best thing for Trump is to let Obamacare fail for longer.

There is no legislation that can make everyone healthy without someone getting hit hard. Plus the American diet and lifestyle is unhealthy and legislation cannot overcome that anyway.

If you change it now, liberals will claim that it doesn't take care of everyone enough.

It's better politically to give Obamacare time to get worse, so that people see it was an unsustainable plan.


I've said for years that Obamacare was bad for jobs. I'm glad people are saying that now.

 

[chardog]

The best thing for Trump is to let Obamacare fail for longer.

There is no legislation that can make everyone healthy without someone getting hit hard.

If you change it now, liberals will claim that it doesn't take care of everyone enough.

It's better politically to give Obamacare time to get worse, so that people see it was an unsustainable plan.


I've said for years that Obamacare was bad for jobs. I'm glad people are saying that now.

if obamacare was done right, there would be a loss of jobs!

Any Bernie sanders supporters? Medicare for all would have destroyed big insurers far worse than this, and there would be millions out of work. Pros however, outweigh the cons!

 

[Pale Man In Black]

So, Obama's signature act is a big flop?
Who knew?

 

[KILL KILL]

So, Obama's signature act is a big flop?
Who knew?

To be fair, the alternative isn't looking so hot so far either.

 

[Pale Man In Black]

To be fair, the alternative isn't looking so hot so far either.

Agreed.
I have a hard time believing that a country that was the first to walk on the moon, land on Mars, etc cannot figure out a reasonable HC approach.

 

[Diamond Jim]

I tend to think losing millions of jobs is a bad thing, but I like your optimism!

Those 50k coal jobs though.

 

[gigantalor]

This is a weird talking point that I keep seeing conservatives talk about in this forum, but simply isn't true.

Here is the other health care thread. TheStruggle tried making the same argument and it went very very poorly.

http://forums.sherdog.com/threads/gop-healthcare-bill-in-senate.3553943/

Nope.

The thing was HUGE, and nobody had time to read it before voting on it.

Pelosi promised 72 hours (which is absurd).

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2009/oct/07/speed-reading-health-care-reform-bill/

And then there's this gem...

 

[TheFirstEMP]

Funny how liberals only care about transparency NOW, but when the ACA was rolled out, transparency didn't matter.

 

[luckyshot]

This is a weird talking point that I keep seeing conservatives talk about in this forum, but simply isn't true.

Here is the other health care thread. TheStruggle tried making the same argument and it went very very poorly.

http://forums.sherdog.com/threads/gop-healthcare-bill-in-senate.3553943/

Like every "argument" he makes.

 

[nostradumbass]

It's kind of hard to predict the long-term effects of a bill that isn't even finished yet. It sounds like there is some stuff they need to fix, but if the initial stimulus of the plan would lead to 800,000 new jobs by 2020, then losing 700,000 jobs in the healthcare field, isn't that still a gain of 100,000?

I don't know why they don't just offer catastrophic insurance to everyone, then people can just pay out of pocket for routine stuff so prices drop.

 

[KILL KILL]

Nope.

The thing was HUGE, and nobody had time to read it before voting on it.

Pelosi promised 72 hours (which is absurd).

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2009/oct/07/speed-reading-health-care-reform-bill/

And then there's this gem...

People knew what was in Obamacare LONG before it was passed. They were allowed to sift through it thoroughly.

That quote you posted is taken out of context, which is disingenuous. She was saying that when it is passed, people will see it for what it's worth, away from the fog of the media that was trying to sway the public one way or the other.

 

[panamaican]

if obamacare was done right, there would be a loss of jobs!

Any Bernie sanders supporters? Medicare for all would have destroyed big insurers far worse than this, and there would be millions out of work. Pros however, outweigh the cons!

The loss of jobs in the health insurance field is less concerning if it comes with more people covered. But a bill that hurts the health insurance industry without actually providing coverage for people is inadequate all the way around.