Dear @sam_baker & @caitlinnowens: I respect both of you but your take this morning re. the CBO score of the cost of the W&M plan to expand ACA subsidies is, to put it mildly, nonsense. THREAD:
https://twitter.com/charles_gaba/status/1361877097757741061
CLAIM: "OMG!! $25,000 APIECE!!"
REALITY: $2,000 apiece.
REALITY: $2,000 apiece.
Hell, even @brian_blase has already "clarified" his "per newly enrolled person" estimate down from $26,000 to $17,000 (he's still massively off, but it's a start).
Whoops!! Even *I* forgot another factor: If you're looking ONLY at 2022 specifically, it'd actually be $14 billion in *additional* subsidies for at least 10.8 million people, or around $1,300 apiece.
To be fair, @caitlinnowens was simply collating other folks news; this is really on @sam_baker, not her.
Bottom line:
--REASONABLE: Asking "SHOULD premiums be subsidized that heavily?"
--REASONABLE: Asking "WHY are premiums so high in the first place?"
--NOT Reasonable: Dividing $34 billion by 1.3 million when it's actually $14 billion / 10.8 million.
--REASONABLE: Asking "SHOULD premiums be subsidized that heavily?"
--REASONABLE: Asking "WHY are premiums so high in the first place?"
--NOT Reasonable: Dividing $34 billion by 1.3 million when it's actually $14 billion / 10.8 million.
Gahhhhh!!
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
