Edward Conard

Top Ten New York Times Bestselling Author

  • “A full-throated defense of economic dynamism.” - The Wall Street Journal
  • “…challenges misconceptions that distort our economic debates.” - Arthur Brooks, President of the American Enterprise Institute
  • “…a very valuable contribution.” - Larry Summers, former Secretary of the Treasury and director of the National Economic Council, president emeritus, Harvard University
  • “…a comprehensive explanation of the modern economy.” - Julian Robertson, Founder, Tiger Management
  • “…reminds us that inequality sends a signal of what society lacks most, in America’s case, entrepreneurship and risk taking.” - Lawrence Lindsey, CEO, The Lindsey Group, former Director of the National Economic Council
  • “Unintended Consequences is full of substance, it is one of the must-read books of the year, and once I finish it I will be giving it a second read through right away.” - Tyler Cowen, Professor, George Mason University
  • “…a must-read for serious students of economic policy.” - Glenn Hubbard, Dean, Columbia Business School, and former Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers
  • “…a very valuable contribution.” - Larry Summers, former Secretary of the Treasury and director of the National Economic Council, president emeritus, Harvard University
  • “…reminds us that inequality sends a signal of what society lacks most, in America’s case, entrepreneurship and risk taking.” - Lawrence Lindsey, CEO, The Lindsey Group, former Director of the National Economic Council
  • “…a must-read for serious students of economic policy.” - Glenn Hubbard, Dean, Columbia Business School, and former Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers
  • “Unintended Consequences should be read by anyone who takes for granted the superiority of progressive taxation and has not thought carefully about the trade-offs involved.” - The New Republic
  • “…challenges misconceptions that distort our economic debates.” - Arthur Brooks, President of the American Enterprise Institute
Upside of Inequality Oxford Unintended Consequences

AI Summary. Spending per Medicare beneficiary in the US has nearly leveled off over more than a decade, though total enrollment has grown as baby boomers age. Policy changes including cuts to hospital and private plan payments explain some savings, but the Congressional Budget Office attributes most of its lowered forecasts to "technical adjustments" in public health and medical practice.

Margot Sanger-Katz, Alicia Parlapiano and Josh Katz New York Times
Date Posted:
Is Database:
Database

The growth in Medicare spending per beneficiary leveled off nearly a decade ago. If spending had grown at the prior rate, spending since 2011 would have been at least $3.9 trillion higher.

Why has Medicare spending per beneficiary stopped growing?

Core argument: Medicare spending per beneficiary has nearly leveled off over more than a decade, a slowdown obscured by the growing number of enrollees as baby boomers age.

Spending per Medicare beneficiary has nearly leveled off over more than a decade. The trend can be a little hard to see because, as baby boomers have aged, the number of people using Medicare has grown. The reason for the per-person slowdown is a bit of a mystery. Some of the reductions are easy to explain. The Affordable Care Act in 2010 reduced Medicare’s payments to hospitals and to health insurers that offered private Medicare Advantage plans. Congress also cut Medicare payments as part of a budget deal in 2011. But most of the savings can’t be attributed to any obvious policy shift. Economists at the Congressional Budget Office described the huge reductions in its Medicare forecasts between 2010 and 2020. Most of those reductions came from a category the budget office calls “technical adjustments,” which it uses to describe changes to public health and the practice of medicine itself.

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. Medicare spending per beneficiary has nearly leveled off over more than a decade, a slowdown obscured by the growing number of enrollees as baby boomers age.
  2. The Affordable Care Act's 2010 cuts to Medicare payments to hospitals and Medicare Advantage insurers, plus payment cuts in a 2011 budget deal, explain only part of the per-person slowdown.
  3. Congressional Budget Office economists attributed most of the large reductions in its Medicare forecasts between 2010 and 2020 to "technical adjustments," the category it uses for changes in public health and the practice of medicine.

Related Articles:

  • America’s Entitlement Programmes Are Rapidly Approaching Insolvency — The trust fund for Medicare hospital insurance for the elderly is projected to be exhausted by 2031 and the Social Security old-age benefits fund by 2033. These mandatory programs cost $2.2tn, or 8.6% of GDP, exceeding total discretionary federal spending including housing, education, and defense.
  • Why Medicare and Social Security Are Sustainable — Growth in U.S. health spending above GDP growth has slowed considerably, and the Congressional Budget Office projects social insurance spending will eventually rise by about 5 percentage points of GDP, half of that from assumed health cost increases. The author argues better incentives for medically effective care could hold cost growth well below those projections.
  • Interest Costs Will Grow the Fastest Over the Next 30 Years — The Congressional Budget Office projects federal spending will reach 29.1% of GDP over three decades, with net interest on the national debt rising from 1.9% of GDP to 6.7%, or $5.4tn. Under that projection, interest becomes the largest single federal budget line item, surpassing Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.
Showing 103 database articles primarily about Fiscal Deficits