Medicare Costs Down

[hcap]

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2013/08/medicare-costs-down-down-down


Last week brought some confirmation of this from the Congressional Budget Office. Michael Levine and Melinda Buntin took a look at Medicare spending per beneficiary over the past three decades and came to a very similar conclusion: "Growth in spending per beneficiary in the fee-for-service portion of Medicare has slowed substantially in recent years. The slowdown has been widespread, extending across all of the major service categories, groups of beneficiaries that receive very different amounts of medical care, and all major regions."

Their basic chart is below. It starts in 1980, but I think it's better to omit 1980-82. Inflation was very high in those years, which makes Medicare spending growth look artificially high and the subsequent decline artificially steep. However, consumer inflation has been pretty low and steady since then (at around 2 to 3 percent), so inflation doesn't muddy the picture much after 1983. I've drawn an eyeball regression line starting then and it still tells much the same story:

http://www.motherjones.com/files/blog_medicare_cost_growth_1980_2012.jpg

And

http://www.motherjones.com/files/blog_healthcare_cost_growth.jpg

[Saratoga_Mike]

If you think this is because anything Obama has done, you're incorrect.

[JustRalph]

yeah, thanks ........now, can I have my other 20 hours back on my job?

[hcap]

Obama? I did not say that, but the financial "doom is neigh" chant needs some adjustment.

We will see

[Dave Schwartz]

Do I understand that you are surprised that Medicare is SPENDING less?

They cut the coverage every year and the "recipients" spend more.

What are you pleased about here?

[hcap]

Whatever the reasons, and your point is well taken but NOT the only cause, (read the article) It sort of throws cold water on many on the right claiming ....

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2013/03/medicares-rising-costsand-the-urgent-need-for-reform

Abstract

The quickly rising costs of Medicare are a burden on all Americans.

[Clocker]

Do I understand that you are surprised that Medicare is SPENDING less?

They cut the coverage every year and the "recipients" spend more.

What are you pleased about here?

I'm not sure what the OP is trying to say or imply, but that chart does not show that Medicare is spending less. And it certainly does not say what the thread title claims, that Medicare costs are down.

The chart does not show the level of spending, it shows the growth rate of spending. Every point on that chart shows an increase in per person spending, year over year. The only fact that it shows is that the annual growth is slower than it used to be.

[hcap]

http://aspe.hhs.gov/health/reports/2013/medicarespendinggrowth/ib.cfm

Growth In Medicare Spending Per Beneficiary Continues To Hit Historic Lows

January 7, 2013

By:
Richard Kronick and Rosa Po

Summary Medicare spending per beneficiary grew just 0.4% per capita in fiscal year 2012, continuing a pattern of very low growth in 2010 and 2011. Together with historically low projections of per capita growth from both the Congressional Budget Office and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Office of the Actuary, these statistics show that the Affordable Care Act has helped to set Medicare on a more sustainable path to keep its commitment to seniors and persons with disabilities today and well into the future. The success in reducing the rate of spending growth has been achieved without any reduction in benefits for beneficiaries. To the contrary, Medicare beneficiaries have gained access to additional benefits, such as increased coverage of preventive services and lower cost-sharing for prescription drugs.

Expenditures per Medicare beneficiary increased by only 0.4% in fiscal year 2012, substantially below the 3.4% increase in per capita GDP (Exhibit 1).1 The very slow growth in Medicare spending in fiscal year 2012 follows slow growth in 2010 and 2011. In 2010, spending grew at only 1.8% per beneficiary, and in 2011 at 3.6 %. Over the three year period from 2010-2012, Medicare spending per beneficiary grew an average of 1.9% annually, or more than 1 percentage point more slowly than the average annual growth of 3.2% in per capita GDP (that is, at GDP-1.3).

http://aspe.hhs.gov/health/reports/2013/medicarespendinggrowth/images/exhib1.png

[hcap]

More from same web site....

The slow growth in spending per beneficiary from 2010 to 2012 combined with the projections of spending growth at GDP+0 for 2012-2022 is unprecedented in the history of the Medicare program. If sustained, the slower growth would improve Medicare’s ability to meet its commitments to seniors and persons with disabilities in future generations.

The Affordable Care Act is an important factor contributing to slow growth in spending per beneficiary in 2011 and 2012, and is the primary cause of the projections of continued slow growth over the next decade. The Affordable Care Act restrains the rate of growth of payments to Medicare Advantage plans, restrains the rate of growth in unit payments to hospitals and other providers, promotes value-based payment systems, and makes major investments to reduce fraud and abuse. The CBO estimated that these provisions of the Affordable Care Act would reduce Medicare spending by $3 billion in 2011, and $10 billion in 2012, with comparable OACT estimates of $6.5 billion in 2011 and $13.5 billion in 2012, or approximately a 1% reduction in spending per beneficiary in 2011, and more than a 2% reduction in 2012. Both the CBO and OACT estimate that the Affordable Care Act will reduce the rate of growth of spending per beneficiary by approximately 1 percentage point per year over the ten year budget window.4,5

[Clocker]

Growth In Medicare Spending Per Beneficiary Continues To Hit Historic Lows

More pretty pictures confirming that Medicare spending per beneficiary is going up every year, in complete contradiction of the thread title: "Medicare Costs Down".

And complete omission of the critical fact that when spending per beneficiary grows every year, no matter the rate, and when the number of beneficiaries grows every year, you have a spending problem.

http://www.liberatehealthcare.com/images/ff_medicare_growing_number_of_beneficiaries.png

[hcap]

Why is it no source is cited? What exactly does your chart refer to? Population groth?

Provide a link.

[Saratoga_Mike]

Why is it no source is cited? What exactly does your chart refer to? Population groth?

Provide a link.

It's from CMS. If you don't know what CMS is, you shouldn't attempt to debate hc costs.

[Clocker]

It's from CMS. If you don't know what CMS is, you shouldn't attempt to debate hc costs.

And the source is cited under the graph. Right after the word "Source".

[hcap]

Yeah I know. But it would be appropriate to provise a link to the graph. I also know that it is difficfult for the graph to be copied easily from a pdf, which is how CMS generally publishes graphs, (other than or an Excel or CVS raw data download) this had to be graphed by a third party, not CMS. Indeed that that third party is................................ http://www.liberatehealthcare.com a conservative group that must have made the chart, not the CMS itself. Thai's okay, but I certainly would like to see the article that accompanied it. To verify what is obvious.

The difference in what I was saying was in slowing growth in costs per beneficiary. You are talking increase in population of beneficiaries. We all know baby boomers are retiring. Big deal. Other than limiting who is eligible, a reasonable concern is controlling health care costs themselves.

http://aspe.hhs.gov/health/reports/...nggrowth/ib.cfm

The slow growth in spending per beneficiary from 2010 to 2012 combined with the projections of spending growth at GDP+0 for 2012-2022 is unprecedented in the history of the Medicare program. If sustained, the slower growth would improve Medicare’s ability to meet its commitments to seniors and persons with disabilities in future generations.

[HUSKER55]

there is a large number of people who are able to "get fixed" before it gets worse. Preventive care is less expensive than surgeries.

For example, how many of you have said I wish I knew then what I know now coming from the doctors office?

I didn't age worth a damn but I say that all the time. If I had known then what I know now.

My contention is that now the baby boomers are getting up there and guess who they are shoving the info down to?

It matters and it makes a difference.

[Tom]

And the source is cited under the graph. Right after the word "Source".

Just choked on my beer! :lol: :lol:

[hcap]

Just choked on my beer! :lol: :lol:Read ppst #14

Btw, remember not to eat any pretzels along with the beer :)

/khTS0cU2IgQ?

[hcap]

there is a large number of people who are able to "get fixed" before it gets worse. Preventive care is less expensive than surgeries.

For example, how many of you have said I wish I knew then what I know now coming from the doctors office?

I didn't age worth a damn but I say that all the time. If I had known then what I know now.

My contention is that now the baby boomers are getting up there and guess who they are shoving the info down to?

It matters and it makes a difference.

http://obamacarefacts.com/obamacare-facts.php

ObamaCare requires that all insurance plans cover preventive services and stops insurance companies from dropping you when you are sick, as well as offering a number of other reforms and protections.