How accurate was the CBO in estimating the economic & healthcare impacts of the Affordable Care Act?

The 10.7 million number was not based on that sentence. If you read down it says "The Kaiser Family Foundation broke it down into about 10.7 million newly eligible and about 3.4 million who were eligible before but hadn’t enrolled." It links to the Kaiser Institute study in the sentence. And the strength of the original statement (here made by Paul) is immaterial to the strength of the facts used by Politifact to justify their rating.

Then you should have linked to that study and I would have said that it is an estimate which you shouldn't treat as an absolute truth.

You said "most." By definition, "most" means more than half.

My core point in my post doesn't hinge on the effects of the mandate being a majority. I don't want to get into a discussion about that, since even if I assume your claim is true it doesn't invalidate my main point.

"Some significant percentage" is so vague as to be meaningless. Do you have a source for a more reliable number?

I'll have to look. I remember I read this on the GOP's healthcare page.

What? How do you know they were perfectly fine?

Not all of them were perfectly fine, but 3 times fewer people were under Medicaid back then, the subsequent expansions didn't produce a proportionate reduction in say, deaths from illness.

In fact, estimates show that a lot of people die because they are unable to afford insurance. That's hugely presumptive to say they were doing just fine.

I never made the claim that no one was suffering, "a lot of people" isn't very useful here. Do you have a figure?

That wasn't the nature of the original question. If you would like to start that discussion, create another thread

I don't think you understand what this discussion is about. The OP made a moral claim about how 23 million people losing coverage is shameful. My response was simply that in order to make such a moral claim 23 million isn't the correct number to use. The moral argument presumes that these 23 million people would be significantly harmed. I am saying that's not true that a large(no I don't know the exact number) number of people would be minimally affected.

/r/NeutralPolitics Thread Parent