Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This Marc Thiesen calls himself an "economist"?!? This really explains why so many people distrust economists. He sure gives his profession a really bad rap. We know that about 8 mio people signed up for ObamaCare and about 4 million more people now have health care coverage than before. Not ideal, but a lot better than before. Let's go into details of what he said and "predicted":
- "Even if the administration manages to fix the Web site and finally implement the individual mandate, people still may not join — because the plans being offered are so unattractive."
- "Even with federal subsidies, few Americans will bother to buy insurance with a $4,000 to $12,700 deductible — and millions won’t even be eligible for the subsidies."
- "If enough Americans don’t join the exchanges, Obamacare collapses."
- "London’s Daily Mail reported that total sign-ups in the first week were just 51,000 people."
One more pseudo-"economist" we can scratch from our list to trust in anything.
The dust has not settled on this Socialist monstrosity as of yet. Lets be patient and let the chips fall where they may. I would like to take another look at how this has effected our economy, lets say, a year from now, Next September.... see you then..
The dust has not settled on this Socialist monstrosity as of yet. Lets be patient and let the chips fall where they may. I would like to take another look at how this has effected our economy, lets say, a year from now, Next September.... see you then..
Hahaha, a moderate market-based reform is a "Socialist monstrosity?" There wasn't even a public insurance option, much less a single-payer reform or a British NHS-style nationalization of our healthcare system. The most "Socialist" thing was an expansion of Medicaid, and numerous states have balked at THAT out of spite and/or parsimony.
We do need health care reform and civilized first world nations should have some sort of universal healthcare... the country was going to go bankrupt with or without obamacare.. might as well get to the inevidable faster rather than slower.
Major reform is needed to avoid disaster at this point. We are still gaining debt at 800 billion a year... when the next downturn hits it will take massive goverment spending to stave off collapse... everybody has been lulled back to sleep. Its a fun thing to observe. The problem is easy credit and our fractional reserve compound interest debt based banking system. Its taking massive blood transfusions globally to keep the patient alive.
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, 615' Elevation, Zone 8b - originally from SF Bay Area
44,551 posts, read 81,085,957 times
Reputation: 57744
Those who qualify for subsidies are happy, those of us that are paying higher premiums and $300+ for office visits instead of the $30 co-pay we used to have are unhappy but for the most part can afford the additional costs. When people with lower middle-class incomes and little/no savings have a hospital stay and have to pay their annual maximum out-of-pocket I expect we'll hear some horror stories.
He's a Republican speechwriter. Even if he were an economist, most seem to be politically skewed. They either advocate for the Democrats or for the Republicans.
I'd say it's about half right.
My insurance plan doesn't have huge deductibles and I'm not eligible for welfare subsidies. I'd be best off by paying for the old insurance plan I used to have that does not meet ACA standards and paying the 1% penalty. Unfortunately, that's not an option. So my options are either pay for insurance or pay the penalty and not have insurance. The penalty is much less expensive than the insurance but I'd still rather have insurance.
With people being dropped with documentation problems; tax time surprises for many; plus the rest to be implemented yet it just might become too expensive for government and many people yet.
For many replies and the original "economist" it goes like this: If my ideology and reality do not match then always wait a year for reality to bend to my ideology. If after a year reality still differs from my ideology just wait another year. As an alternative I recommend looking at and accepting reality... it will eventually bite you anyways.
For many replies and the original "economist" it goes like this: If my ideology and reality do not match then always wait a year for reality to bend to my ideology. If after a year reality still differs from my ideology just wait another year. As an alternative I recommend looking at and accepting reality... it will eventually bite you anyways.
In the case of Obamacare we do have to wait a year or 2 since the employer mandate has not been implemented. I would think the creators of the bill were expecting more the 8 million sign ups with a good portion being Medicaid expansion. It will take some years to judge this type of massive legislation if it is a failure or success. It sounds like you have your mind made up with out all the stats being available at this point, does that make you better then economist you are trashing? I say no.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
