Wow...has Forbes Changed Their Tune?

[houcoogster]

With article after article slamming the law this is huge shift.

Since Obamacare Passed 50 Months Ago, Healthcare Has Gained Almost 1 Million Jobs - Forbes

 

[Yagents]

There is no "shift", they report the facts as usual. The facts are that you are taking billions out of other industries, and plowing them into health industry. Results should be obvious. Question is, who are the losing industries?

 

[RayNY]

Correlation is not causation, and further, this is BAD news, not good.

Just because the positive employment streak happened to start around the same time as ACA was signed, doesn't mean it had any effect. Completely unrelated, and totally due to recovery from the 2008 recession.

"The healthcare sector was gaining about 25,000 jobs per month in the years before ACA"

25,000x50 months=1.25 million, but we only had a bit under a million. By my math, that means it slowed healthcare industry growth by a quarter million. Further, 2013 had the lowest growth in more than a decade.

Amazing what changing the frame of reference does for the same data, huh?

 

[AllenChicago]

There is no "shift", they report the facts as usual. The facts are that you are taking billions out of other industries, and plowing them into health industry. Results should be obvious. Question is, who are the losing industries?

I think PATIENTS LOSE because the jobs being added are not skilled physicians, needed to handle millions of new potential patients entering the system via Private plans and Medicaid..especially Medicaid.

Just heard yesterday that starting July 1, 2014 Veterans can start seeing private medical providers if the VA waiting list is too long. More demand for/on physicians. Uncle Sam will pay their bills...eventually.
ac

 

[houcoogster]

This is the piece I was talking about....

"Meanwhile, there are signs that health care's cost curve is beginning to bend, which has raised questions about the biggest paradox in health care: That even though spending is slowing, employment has been consistently growing."

 

[RayNY]

Hou,

That's just plain inaccurate, reporters aren't exempt from making errors (and notice Dan Diamond wrote both articles).

He's comparing flat-number growth in one, to percentage growth in the other. It's like saying "I made $200, that's way more than your 3% portfolio growth!"

Percentage wise, the steady (and honestly, declining) number of new jobs each year results in a lower percentage each year, as there is a bigger existing pool of jobs.

For example, 200 new jobs with 1000 existing is 20% growth. 205 jobs (that "constant growth") with 1200 existing is only 17%.

I'm sure it's easy for you to see how healthcare expenditure increases can be higher every year in flat-dollar amounts, but lower in percentage using the same logic.

(FYI, he's not Forbes staff, he wrote the article for advisory.com and it was mirrored by Forbes and quite a few others.)