I used the CBO estimate of $1.3 trillion. You linked to their revised estimate of $1.38 trillion. Yes, you're right, it'll be 6% more expensive than the estimate I used. :rolleyes:

My numbers don't work. Now I'm not sure how I got that number. Perhaps I should use paper and pencil when calculating Obama-sized costs.
I'm going to show my work like this is fourth grade, so if I blew it again someone can easily point it out.

Direct federal cost: 1 300 000 000 000
people covered: 12 000 000
(roughly double the cost once you include premium increases, but let's start with just the cost we'll pay as federal taxes).

Cost:

1 300 000 000 000
_______________
                            12 000 000

Start dropping zeroes from both to get reasonable sized numbers for numerator and denominator:

1 300 000 000 000 dollars to cover
_______________
                          12 000 000 people

1 300 000 000 dollars to cover
___________
                          12 000

1 300 000 dollars to cover
________
                          12 people

108 333 dollars to cover
______
                          1 person

With premium increases, maybe $200,000 per person. So that's expensive, but not nearly as expensive as I had first calculated.

You forgot to include the "...but" in boldface. So, you actually missed the fallacy.

[dailycaller.com]

Tee hee.

Next time you want tot ake a dick pic, imagine that the pic ened up being posted on a gay porn web site.

Gosh, I'd be honored.

> Your math doesn't work out. Care to show your work?

$1.3 trillion (US) federal tax cost / 12 million people = $11.3 million per person covered.
Does that look right so far, or did I fat-finger the calculation? That's US trillion, which is different from UK trillion, I believe.

In addition to the $11.3 million indirect cost to the taxpayers, we have the the significant increase in premium costs since insurance companies now have to cover people who wait until something happens before they buy insurance, and the cost of generally moving away from INSURANCE (protection from catastrophic loss) to having a third- party payer for massage therapy. That cost increase could be anywhere from 25%-140%, depending on where you live and which study you use. One person could make a reasonable argument that the total premium increases minus out-of-pocket reductions is half a trillion, and someone else could make an argument just as strong that it's two trillion. My previous post guesstimated around a trillion. That number isn't solid, of course, but we can certainly say "$11.3 million per patient federal tax cost, plus a lot more in increased premiums".

> I can't help but noticing you left the duration out

That's the ten year cost, per the administration plan. So around $2 million per person per year, assuming cost reductions later as per the Obama administration's plan.
The short term cost is much higher per year, of course. If we recognize that kicking the can down the road doesn't actually work - that a future Congress will kick it again, the actual costs are likely to be higher, but I wanted to give Obama the benefit of the doubt. It's bad enough based on accepting his numbers - we needn't bother trying to be more accurate and figure whether it'll actually be $30 million or $40 million per person.

n a similar way, around here they are trying to promote the annual flu shot.
You get a free Klondike Bar with your flu shot.

I hear they're bringing them shots right out to the trailer park now. The whole Cuyler clan got them shots, except Early, who said it was all a plot and no goddamn body's gonna give him any flu shot because he don't wanna catch the autism.

Damn Obama...

BUT I will say with a company a person can quit or stop purchasing the companies products.

Unless you happen to want to connect to the Internet and you hate the one company in your location that offers broadband connectivity. Oligopolies are the order of the day.

I understand the Ronald Legacy Project has preserved every pair of Depends that Ronald Reagan crapped in during his final two years in office. They'll never forget Reagan (which is more than Ronald Reagan could have said during his last two years in the White House, which, according to testimony to the commitUtee investigating Iran-Contra, he didn't remember a bit. I tended to believe him.).

I just want to point out that all of your citations are from before the enrollment deadline. I think your latest post was from April.

How about something a little more recent?

In fact, if you follow the website attacks on Obamacare based on the number of people enrolled, you will find a deluge of articles leading up to April of 2014 and then...silence. You'll still find other attacks, but none based on the number of newly enrolled. Then, in May, you see a lot of articles saying, "Well, OK, a lot of people enrolled, but how many actually paid?". And then, based on insurance company data, it turned out that the people signing up for exchanges actually paid at a higher rate than the general population signing up for health insurance.

There are good reasons to criticize the ACA, but the number of people who have gotten coverage for the first time because of the law is not one of them.

Why do your figures leave out the increases before the ACA was passed?

. I merely pointed out that as someone who works in the field I might be qualified as a person making an informed choice and not just one of the sheep buying what they're told.

A show of hands here: How many of you know someone who "works in the field" who doesn't really know his ass from an RS 232 connector?

Or maybe the view from inside the brotherhood of computer techs is somewhat different from the view from outside. You might want to make note.

Not you, Marlin. You're probably a fine person and an excellent computer tech. But beware of making appeals to authority. They are a logical trap.

If someone calls themselves a chef or a foodie, it may not make them right when they say how long you should boil pasta, but it means their opinion about it IS based on care, thought, and knowledge

Wow, is that ever a crock. So, a person calling themselves a foodie means they've have exercised "care, thought and knowledge"? If I call myself a world champion surfer, does that mean I've ever waxed a board? Appeals to authority are one of the most dishonest forms of fallacy:

http://www.nizkor.org/features...

An Appeal to Authority is a fallacy with the following form:

Person A is (claimed to be) an authority on subject S.
Person A makes claim C about subject S.
Therefore, C is true.

But maybe you're just not familiar with logical fallacies. Well, that's something about which I know a thing or two to snatch a phrase from esteemed computer tech Marlin Schwanke. And you will not find an "ad hominem" anywhere in my post. If you think you also know a thing or two about fallacies, I invite you to point mine out. The purpose of my post was to point out the fallacy via sarcasm. There was no ad hominem. I didn't say Marlin Schwanke was stupid, or that all computer techs are stupid or that he's somehow a bad person or a Republican. I just pointed out the absurdity of claiming this authority as if it meant something.

I'll just bet you're a computer tech, too. And that, my friend, you can take as an ad hominem.

Let's assume that 12 million estimate is correct, that due to Obamacare, 12 million people who weren't insured before are now insured. Of course, other people give different estimates, but let's give Obama the benefit of the doubt.

The net cost of Obamacare to the federal taxpayers is $1.3 trillion (CBO). $1.3 trillion / 12 million people covered = $11.3 million per person.
I don't think we got a good deal.

The $11 million per person covered is of course just the direct cost to the federal government. In 2013, we saw the following rate increases due to Obamacare:
Connecticut: 37% average rate increase
Florida: 42% average rate increase
Illinois: 33% average rate increase
Michigan: 39% average rate increase
Minnesota: 35% average rate increase

The trend accelerates in 2014:
Delaware 100%
New Hampshire 90%
Indiana 54%
California 53%
Connecticut 45%
Michigan 36%
Florida 37%
Georgia 29%
Kentucky 29%
Pennsylvania 28%

So there's another trillion dollars it cost average Americans, in the form of much higher premiums. A couple TRILLION dollars to (maybe) cover $12 million people. At a cost of around $20 million per person covered, I don't think I'd trumpet that as a victory if I were a Democrat. (And in fact Democrat most candidates are distancing themselves from the mess.)