Obamacare cost...

[Surfah]

Yep, it's like that Freakonomics example where a day care starts charging $5 to people who don't pick their kids up on time assuming that late pick-ups would decrease. Instead the late pick-ups skyrocket.

For smart people the risk of having a medical catastrophe and then being broke and uninsurable disappears in 2014, so healthy people might even be less likely to get insurance than before. Crazy.

That Freakonomics example is a good one that I hadn't remembered until you reminded me of it here.

[Pelado]

In an April 17 candor attack, Senator Max Baucus (D., Mont.), a key Obamacare engineer, notoriously said, “I just see a huge train wreck coming.”

In an April 29 candidates’ debate against her ultimately victorious opponent, Mark Sanford (R., S.C.), Democratic nominee Elizabeth Colbert Busch slammed Obamacare. Said the real-life sister of TV comedian Stephen Colbert: “Obamacare is extremely problematic. It is expensive. It is a $500 billion cost [more] than we originally anticipated. It’s cutting into Medicare benefits, and it’s having companies lay off their employees because they are worried about the cost of it. That is extremely problematic. It needs an enormous fix.”

WHEC-TV Rochester asked Senator Charles Schumer (D., N.Y.) to explain rising Empire State health premiums. “It’s in part because of Obamacare,” he conceded May 3.

Representative John Larson (D., Conn.) complained that congressional staffers would be thrown into the Obamacare health exchanges. “‘Listen,” he said June 13 in Politico, “this is simply not fair to these employees.”

Obamacare’s Independent Payment Advisory Board “is essentially a health-care rationing body,” former Democratic National chairman Howard Dean, M.D., opined in July 29’s Wall Street Journal. “The IPAB will cause frustration to providers and patients alike, and it will fail to control costs.” The Hill reports that Senator Mark Pryor of Arkansas and Representatives Elizabeth Esty of Connecticut and Ron Barber, Ann Kirkpatrick, and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona — Democrats all — have co-sponsored legislation to padlock IPAB. At least 22 House Democrats favor its abolition.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...-deroy-murdock

[All-American]

Looks like they are intent to shut it down.

[Maximus]

That Freakonomics example is a good one that I hadn't remembered until you reminded me of it here.

I keep on seeing the example but not the explanation on why it happened that way.

[CardiacCoug]

I keep on seeing the example but not the explanation on why it happened that way.

The way they explain it is that life is about incentives, and not all incentives are financial. There are psychological incentives that are much more powerful than small financial incentives. Feeling guilty about picking your kid up late and taking advantage of the day care is the psychological incentive to get your kid on time. When the day care starts charging a fee for coming late, parents feel that it's OK to come late because after all they are paying for it. No more guilt. The late fee gives parents psychological "permission" to pick their kids up late and so if it's inconvenient to come on time, they just come late and don't have to feel bad about it.

The late fee eliminates the guilt of picking up your kid late, basically.

[All-American]

The way they explain it is that life is about incentives, and not all incentives are financial. There are psychological incentives that are much more powerful than small financial incentives. Feeling guilty about picking your kid up late and taking advantage of the day care is the psychological incentive to get your kid on time. When the day care starts charging a fee for coming late, parents feel that it's OK to come late because after all they are paying for it. No more guilt. The late fee gives parents psychological "permission" to pick their kids up late and so if it's inconvenient to come on time, they just come late and don't have to feel bad about it.

The late fee eliminates the guilt of picking up your kid late, basically.

Right. No need to feel bad about freeloading off of society if you have to stop by the ER without insurance. You paid your tax, after all.

[Katy Lied]

Right. No need to feel bad about freeloading off of society if you have to stop by the ER without insurance. You paid your tax, after all.

Thats what I am afraid of. I feel that paying my $96 penalty entitles me to the full services of any ER I happen to be near. And I am afraid that millions of others feel the same way, especially the young and healthy who would only have something catastrophic happen (which is geared to the ER).

[VirginiaCougar]

Thats what I am afraid of. I feel that paying my $96 penalty entitles me to the full services of any ER I happen to be near. And I am afraid that millions of others feel the same way, especially the young and healthy who would only have something catastrophic happen (which is geared to the ER).

One of many problems with our current healthcare system is that everybody already feels entitled to go to the ER if something serious happens. Actually that is what the individual mandate is about and why it started off as a Republican idea in more rational times. Everyone is already in the healthcare system, everyone is going to use it at some point and you never know when that accident, injury, serious illness will occur.

The $96 penalty doesn't change that. I do think that the number is absurdly low and one specific fault (of many) in the ACA. But to the Lee/Cruz types I would say - there are appropriate Constitutional ways to fix the bill and others that abuse and deeply harm the Constitution and its legislative processes. The very thing that some of these idiots in DC purport to support. This week we will see the repeat of the stupid 1996 mistake, one that hurt the GOP deeply back then and will again this time. Will we ever learn as a party or will we continue to allow our most extreme voices drag us into irrelevance? (Likely taking the US economy with it)

[byu71]

One of many problems with our current healthcare system is that everybody already feels entitled to go to the ER if something serious happens. Actually that is what the individual mandate is about and why it started off as a Republican idea in more rational times. Everyone is already in the healthcare system, everyone is going to use it at some point and you never know when that accident, injury, serious illness will occur.

The $96 penalty doesn't change that. I do think that the number is absurdly low and one specific fault (of many) in the ACA. But to the Lee/Cruz types I would say - there are appropriate Constitutional ways to fix the bill and others that abuse and deeply harm the Constitution and its legislative processes. The very thing that some of these idiots in DC purport to support. This week we will see the repeat of the stupid 1996 mistake, one that hurt the GOP deeply back then and will again this time. Will we ever learn as a party or will we continue to allow our most extreme voices drag us into irrelevance? (Likely taking the US economy with it)

What the republicans need to learn, especially the Cruz types, is it doesn't matter at all if you are totally correct if your voice doesn't matter. The only way your voice can matter is if you join a coalition of people who agree with you "MOST" of the time.

You have to fight the democrats and a very compliant press. A very difficult uphill battle considering most Americans only turn in occasionally to what is going on. If they don't have cable and watch Fox, they are going to get the democrat slant on everything.

By the way what an ass David Gregory is. He has Cruz on and instead of dealing with the shut down and the compromise put on the table, he wanted to deal with Cruz and his lack of support. Cruz represents a minority of the republican party and yet the networks love to talk about him over and over as the republican party.

[imanihonjin]

Thats what I am afraid of. I feel that paying my $96 penalty entitles me to the full services of any ER I happen to be near. And I am afraid that millions of others feel the same way, especially the young and healthy who would only have something catastrophic happen (which is geared to the ER).

I wish that HSA's were being pushed more. IMO, this would have dramatic effects on the rising costs of insurance. When people realize that the money for the services they are receiving is solely coming from their own pocket, they become more cognizant of what they are actually receiving. This disconnect between costs of health care to the actual consumer of those services has led to an over consumption of health care services. The biggest danger of Obamacare is the fact that it does not do much to make consumers more aware and because of the number of individuals who will now be covered, the over consumption of services will not only continue but the number of over consumers will also grow. What this will do to premiums under the current system of health care will be devastating.

[byu71]

What this will do to premiums under the current system of health care will be devastating.

At which time the public will demand the government do something and that something will be Universal Health Care. Obamacare is a means to an end. Remember radical liberals are quite willing to blow up buildings to make their point. Blowing up the US health care system is no big deal to them if it get's them to their eventual goal.

[imanihonjin]

At which time the public will demand the government do something and that something will be Universal Health Care. Obamacare is a means to an end. Remember radical liberals are quite willing to blow up buildings to make their point. Blowing up the US health care system is no big deal to them if it get's them to their eventual goal.

And somehow, it will end up being the Republicans' fault.

[VirginiaCougar]

At which time the public will demand the government do something and that something will be Universal Health Care. Obamacare is a means to an end. Remember radical liberals are quite willing to blow up buildings to make their point. Blowing up the US health care system is no big deal to them if it get's them to their eventual goal.

That is both a doozy of a conspiracy theory and an extreme view shared by Cruz/Lee. So, if I don't agree with the Cruz/Lee view, I will blow up buildings? I think it equally absurd when Pelosi says that there "is nothing left to cut." That doesn't fit your black and white narrative. I'd never vote for her nor a number of extreme liberals.

I would say to you, "remember" that not all liberals blow up buildings (Most don't and shockingly Conservative ideology also leads to the blowing up of buildings), nor is that argument particularly relevant to our times. As as blowing up institutions, I would point to Lee/Cruz and Constitutional governance as a much more relevant example from our times. I would also say "remember" that the so-called "media bias" is an overblown argument intended to keep the ideologues "pure" in their belief and not having to deal with any complexity. Perfect case in point would be your example from last weekend's Sunday talk shows.

[Pelado]

VC - good to see you back. I was hoping to get your feedback from this exchange last week:

Well, Obama has been able to work with Boehner. They agreed on a grand compromise and on a number of other things, only to have the tea party wing of the GOP throw their own leader under the bus and drive back and forth over him a few times. I don't blame Boehner - he has tried. I don't blame Obama, he has tried and has been willing.

VC - Like CMBF, I'm unsure how/why you continually suggest that Obama and the Democrats were seeking Republican buy-in on ACA. The first two years were trademarked with Democrats passing pretty much what they wanted with not only no Republican input, but with virtually no concern for Republican input. Obama did work (ineffectively) on the "grand bargain" with Boehner, but that was only after huge Republican gains in the midterms. Prior to that, Obama didn't even have Boehner's phone number:

The failure of Obama to connect with Boehner was vaguely reminiscent of another phone call late in the evening of Election Day 2010, after it became clear that the Republicans would take control of the House, making Boehner Speaker of the House.

Nobody in the Obama orbit could even find the soon-to-be-speaker's phone number, Woodward reports. A Democratic Party aide finally secured it through a friend so the president could offer congratulations.

Intriguingly, Cantor and Biden frequently had "private asides" after larger meetings, according to Woodward. After one of them, Woodward writes that Biden told Cantor: "You know, if I were doing this, I'd do it totally different."

"Well, if I were running the Republican conference, I'd do it totally different," Cantor replied, according to Woodward.

Woodward writes: "They agreed that if they were in charge, they could come to a deal."

With the president taking charge, though, Obama found that he had little history with members of Congress to draw on. His administration's early decision to forego bipartisanship for the sake of speed around the stimulus bill was encapsulated by his then-chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel: "We have the votes. F--- 'em," he's quoted in the book as saying.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/bob-w...inglePage=true

The entire trajectory of the administration -- frustrated hope, unrealized change -- was foreshadowed in its first week:

The president called a budget meeting. Representative Eric Cantor, then the minority whip, expressed skepticism about the president’s stimulus plan.

Obama lectured the young Republican: “Elections have consequences. And Eric, I won.” Three days later the president introduced an $800 million stimulus bill.

“We have the votes,” White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel said, adding a trademark expletive.

And away they went -- and by “away,” we mean the two sides moved, furiously and fast, away from each other. The administration pressed ahead. Cantor insisted Obama’s plan wouldn’t get a single Republican vote. It didn’t.

“Obama had demonstrated that he believed he didn’t need any other input,” Woodward writes. “The Republicans were outsiders, outcasts. The president and the Democratic majorities in the House and Senate would go it alone. There was no compromise.”

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-0...et-debate.html

[Color Me Badd Fan]

One benefit of Obamacare is watching the labor unions squirm. I seem to recall that some of these unions have captive health insurance plans -- basically, they offer the health plan and the union is paid the premiums. It's pretty big business for them. Obamacare is apparently taking away a big chunk of that business.