It’s a curious thing about the news these days with Gruber…..
and I suspect at least Rush has it, but where are all the people who spoke up about the truth as even Gruber knows it way back in 2008, 2009?
None of the machinations are a surprise. People talked about how health care prices would go up, how the healthy would pay for the unhealthy, we discussed getting the government involved in fat reduction just to keep the healthy from complaining about the unhealthy, etc, etc. Even the tax/penalty situation was talked about and the tax on cadillac plans everyone knew would end up in the consumer’s lap.
Why don’t news stories mention….”so and so said” then Gruber could go about his business saying that everyone knew anyway. ??
Anyhoo, Gaypatriot knows that he knew:
I am not a Harvard trained economist, but it was always obvious to me that the mathematics of Obamacare were simply impossible, absent a miracle.
Add millions of people to the health care system
Require that everybody in the health care system receive more services.
Reduce cost of health care.
Unless all the doctors and nurses in the country were replaced with magical elves riding on unicorns, the third bullet was always mathematically impossible given the first two. Giving more stuff to more people costs more, not less. How could it possibly be otherwise?
Obamacare leads to head explosions, at least after reading what Mr. Coyoteblog has to put up with.
Go read the whole thing, for this guy who runs campgrounds (I think) and hires mostly retired people on Medicare.
Here are 2 potential penalties and his situation.
The “A” penalty is for companies that do not offer any sort of health plan, no matter how crappy, to their full-time employees. The A penalty in this case is $2,000 per full-time employee, with the first 30** free (so with 60 FT employees and no health plan, the penalty is (60-30) x $2,000 = $60,000 a year.
The “B” penalty is for companies that avoid the “A” penalty. If a health plan is offered, but is not affordable (ie the employee monthly share of premiums is higher than a government-set floor) then the company gets penalized $3,000 for every full-time employee who both goes into an exchange and gets a plan with a government-subsidized premium. There is a cap on the “B” penalty that it can be no higher than if the “A” penalty was applied to the whole company.
But we had expected to avoid the A penalty by offering some sort of policy to our employees. ……………………………..
But it turns out that all the things that protect us from the B penalty make us almost un-insurable. First and foremost, insurers have a minimum participation rate they demand. They are not going to go through all the overhead costs of setting you up on their plan if no one is going to sign up.
A lot of the news out this week concerning Gruber and the “stupidity of the American voter” you have seen.
As an aside, here is a column about the man who actually LISTENED to Gruber and other architects of Obamacare and then got the story out – vs you know, a reporter. (ht Instapundit who notes the mild mannered investment adviser is officially a member of the Army of Davids now.)
Weinstein [the investment adviser], back at home, was stunned at the reaction. Why did he keep finding Gruber gaffes? Why didn’t the press glom onto this stuff first?
“It’s terrifying that the guy in his mom’s basement is finding his stuff, and nobody else is,” he says. “I really do find this disturbing.”
But – whatever…..we KNEW this. While this SHOULD be important to reports who should be reporting the news, the facts, the story – this isn’t news. We already knew this although the smoking gun had not been found.
So what IS new? This here:
Snopes is a member of the left wing, lying, Democrat protecting, report skewing media who’s existence is only there to keep you in the dark and to try to get you to groupthink to the left.
Anywho, let’s now take a trip over to Snopes, which decided that completely destroying its credibility was a good move for the week. First, Snopes writes up the “claim” in this way: “Claim: “Obamacare architect” Jonathan Gruber recently said Obamacare only passed due to the “stupidity” of the American voter and a lack of “transparency,” and video footage of his remarks was deleted from the internet.
Then, stunningly, it describes it as a mixture of truth and non-truth.
Click through for the vetting. Snopes is done for.
ht Ace of Spades who has gotten angry
Would that I could be this succinct…..here is a column that took less than a minute to read, has numbers, facts, position.
The column is in regards to the BIG headline in the Denver Post: ‘Uninsured Rate Drops’
Here’s a teaser, but go read the thing our of Peak Politics.
What’s the huge news? The uninsured rate dropped to 15.9%, the lowest it has been under this President. Too bad the AP didn’t look back to, say, 2008 when the rate was a significantly lower 13.9%. As we can see from U.S. Census Bureau, the uninsured rate under W never got higher than 15.8%, and, for the most, part hung around 14%, going as low as 13.7% in 2000.
Might we suggest a new headline: PRESIDENT OBAMA’S BEST DAY STILL WORSE THAN W’S WORST DAY.
The White House said Tuesday that President Obama would veto a House GOP bill to delay a contentious part of Obamacare for one year.
The House is set to vote this week on the Simple Fairness Act, which let Americans go without health insurance in 2014 without facing the tax penalty prescribed by the Affordable Care Act.
ObamaCare’s implementers continue to roam the battlefield and shoot their own wounded, and the latest casualty is the core of the Affordable Care Act—the individual mandate. To wit, last week the Administration quietly excused millions of people from the requirement to purchase health insurance or else pay a tax penalty.
Low information voters are where it’s at people. He has 0 respect for you, for the office, for the rule of law, for the constitution, for your ability to figure anything out.
So last night, I’m out with friends who we’ll describe as left, but very smart. People who “care” and so are left. We don’t talk politics.
Hence I was caught off guard when the conversation moved from
a) one person’s father who is incredibly obese and does nothing to protect his health and how could she talk to him about it again during an upcoming visit when none of her other talks over the years have done any good
b) another person’s baby niece who’s had 3 heart surgeries since birth, spent 6 months in the hospital and who’s total bill at this point due to PA covering big ticket items like this is around $15,000
c) Universal health care
These are personal loving stories. Is this where I jump in with my own thoughts on coverage? (government catastrophic care for all-maybe incentivize the buying of coverage yourself and staying healthy=avg price of a house, open borders in insurance sales, medical lawsuit reform, continued tax incentives for charities willing to help out.
Nah, I didn’t. So a bit guilty at this point for not standing up…..but in the meantime I thought of a good argument that could get under a lefties’ skin. One person had mentioned universal health care because the government being so big could negotiate prices. Yet, one reason Walmart is despised due to these exact practices. They order stuff from manufacturers, get them to build up their infrastructure to keep up, then demand X price. Their cheap prices run other stores out of business and they then have the monopoly. Is that what good people want to see of the government?
The thing about resolutions, is you can resolve to start again. Right now. Perhaps I’d have been tougher without the margarita on board.
UPDATE: Fyi, the technology fumble of Obamacare is recognized by these folks, but they figure it will straighten itself out in time. AND that universal coverage would have been the better route to take.
Ah screw it….do what you want. Just be sure to fill out all the paperwork in triplicate on our “secure” website. And buy one of these items that we say you can.
Yes, last week you couldn’t buy that item for $200/month and you were stuck with an increase of 400%. Too bad, so sad. If you had waited, you could have bought that insurance we’re always badmouthing that actually acts like insurance. Just says that “it’s a hardship” and we’ll cover you. Just like if you want subsidies, just say you only make x amount of money. Oh and if you’re an insurance company, you can basically do what you want to do too. Keep policies, cancel policies, offer cheap policies….don’t worry, you won’t get in trouble. Trust us. Oh – and ps – if someone doesn’t pay you by your due date, go ahead and cover them anyway. If it costs you a million or so, don’t worry – we’ll cover it because well, with all these healthy people signing up there will be lots of money. Trust me.
Take it away Ace of Spades:
Does Obama really think that insurance companies can write these policies, advertise them, get sign-ups and get a first payment in 11 days?
I believe he doesn’t believe that.
None of these fixes are designed to be fixes. They’re designed to appear to be fixes, so when people are uninsured, Obama can say, “I tried. I gave them options.”
Just never the option of what he promised: Of keeping health insurance they liked.
Basically, this means they’ve expanded the definition of “hardship” to include “screwed by the Obamacare regulations.” Come to think of it, that makes sense.
Or rather, “we’re screwed because you people keep complaining, so because of that you can claim hardship”. Squeaky wheel and all.
Suggestion for the GOP.
Start a bill. This one says “the insurance market is open and they can provide whatever type of insurance they want. And you are free to buy or not buy whatever type of insurance you want and your state can require or not require what they want and we, the Federal Government are stepping aside”
Apparently the cancellation of plans, good plans, was to get healthy people into the exchanges.
I thought it was all about the cancellation of inadequate plans. Still so naive after all these years.
I got this wrong too Mr. Coyote Blog. If the insurance is going to be “better”, then wouldn’t that mean more coverage and lower deductibles?
And wouldn’t you rather pay for your own birth control, as needed, than need to pay the first $4000 for cancer?
But then again – Obama said that preventative birth control would be “free of charge” without copay.
We don’t know what’s going to happen until it’s in force.
By the way, there is a certain schizophrenia here that is entirely political: These new policies have a $10,000 deductible, but they pay 100% for condoms? They may well be creating a combination of catastrophic insurance and pre-paid medical care that has the worst of both approaches.
Politicians lie. But what is it about this administration that lies in ways that are inevitably going to be discovered, in just a few months? Can they really be so focused on getting through each individual news cycle that this kind of behavior makes sense?