November 29, 2013
— DrewM Via Byron York....America, you've let Obama down. Again. You're lucky he's still willing to lecture you about how awesome he is.
Maybe our brains just arenÂ’t wired to use a site like HealthCare.gov, whether it works or not.The exchanges are based on a laudable idea: that competition, transparency and consumer choice will lead to higher-quality, more affordable products. The decisions consumers make will thus have significant implications for their own personal and financial health, as well as the overall sustainability of the exchanges. But despite the good intentions behind the website, behavioral science research suggests that many consumers may be ill equipped to make good decisions in the insurance marketplaces.
Choosing health coverage is particularly challenging. Humans have difficulty making optimal choices under conditions of uncertainty, when weighing probabilities of long-term risks and benefits, and when analyzing complex products with multiple components of unclear relative values. WeÂ’re bad at assessing the likelihood of low-probability events, like winning the lottery or getting in a car accident. We overestimate our ability to repay loans and spend more with credit cards than we would with cash. We struggle with decisions about how to invest our retirement savings and are highly susceptible to the number and types of 401(k) plans weÂ’re offered. In short, we have trouble with precisely the types of issues involved in choosing the right health coverage.
Obama trusted in you and respected you enough to give you choices and you just can't handle it.
What a bunch of stupid simpletons you are!
The only small, barely worth mentioning problem with this theory and quite frankly I'm a little embarrassed to even bring it up, is that there were MORE choices for people BEFORE ObamaCare and it's non-functioning web portal were gifted to us.
Funny how millions of people managed to organize their lives to select their own plans based on cost and coverage as well as pay for them until ObamaCare came along to make it better for them. Now they can't buy insurance and have two weeks or so to scramble to find ways to try and stay covered.
And yet the ungrateful bastards are complaining.
You can see where this is going. Or maybe you can't because your tiny brains can't process all the possible choices available so let me help you out....Single Payer.
Just shut up, pay what the government tells you to pay and let the big brains figure it out for you.
More serious added thought:
A lot of people getting insurance through the market place may be people who are getting insurance for the first time either due to medical conditions or economic circumstances. Those groups could well be ill equipped to deal with the choices, limited though they are, presented by the ACA market places. This is especially true for high subsidy recipients who are being insulated form the true economic reality of their plans. It's hard to make rational decisions when the information is so distorted and disconnected from your actual economic conditions (you might qualify for a "cheap" plan after subsidies but can't afford any of the high deductible costs of the policy you are force to buy).
This is part of the problem, though Obama would see it as a feature. The ACA is redistributing health insurance dollars from people who have them and are used to making informed decisions to people who aren't.
It's not that "people" are too stupid to make good choices (millions and millions of people have been doing it for decades), it's that many core Democrats who will be the recipients of the spreading around of this wealth are.
Posted by: DrewM at
06:45 AM
| Comments (163)
Post contains 627 words, total size 4 kb.
Posted by: t-bird at November 29, 2013 06:51 AM (FcR7P)
Now, if you'll excuse me, those cookies won't eat themselves. *bounds*
Posted by: alexthechick - Really Universe Really? at November 29, 2013 06:52 AM (Gk3SS)
Posted by: Caliban at November 29, 2013 06:53 AM (2ArJQ)
http://youtu.be/Hrm-rPSCIBw
Posted by: alexthechick - Really Universe Really? at November 29, 2013 06:54 AM (Gk3SS)
Posted by: NaCly Dog at November 29, 2013 06:54 AM (u82oZ)
Posted by: Insomniac at November 29, 2013 06:55 AM (UAMVq)
Posted by: The King at November 29, 2013 06:55 AM (d3clc)
Posted by: alexthechick - Really Universe Really? at November 29, 2013 10:52 AM (Gk3SS)
Hrm, has anyone ever tested that?
Perhaps we could start an experiment: Put out a plate of cookies by themselves, and see if they end up eaten ...
Posted by: ConservativeMonster at November 29, 2013 06:56 AM (ioT3q)
Heather Childers just said that the fate of Comet ISON is "literally up in the air". No, Heather, it is *literally* way out there in space *beyond* the air.
Earlier, Wossname the male anchor was complaining that his wife is "the Imelda Marcos of shoes". No, *Imelda Marcos* is the Imelda Marcos of shoes. That's the whole *point* of dragging her into the discussion!
Posted by: Anachronda at November 29, 2013 06:56 AM (U82Km)
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at November 29, 2013 06:56 AM (I7p2r)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at November 29, 2013 06:58 AM (nzKvP)
Posted by: BlueStateRebel at November 29, 2013 06:58 AM (7ObY1)
Posted by: Insomniac at November 29, 2013 06:59 AM (UAMVq)
Posted by: Insomniac at November 29, 2013 07:00 AM (UAMVq)
Posted by: lowandslow at November 29, 2013 07:01 AM (7Nq2G)
Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) No Really! at November 29, 2013 07:02 AM (GaqMa)
You stop it with your facts and your reason and your logic.
Posted by: alexthechick - Really Universe Really? at November 29, 2013 07:03 AM (Gk3SS)
And when you complete this study please begin one that measures the propensity of Hanukah candles to leap from the Menorah to the curtains 15 feet away.
Apparently that is why I had to put the Menorah in the sink when we went out on Wednesday evening...and even then my wife was worried that they would burn the house down.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at November 29, 2013 07:03 AM (oJ5Fd)
It -- particularly the website issue -- has become an effective example of Shiny Stuff and "Squirrel!" to keep the chattering classes chattering. No one except for a few malcontents in the audience is bothered by amnesty, Iran or Choom Boy's other felonies now.
Posted by: MrScribbler at November 29, 2013 07:04 AM (kaGpp)
Posted by: Martin Bashir at November 29, 2013 07:05 AM (7ObY1)
What line of work is she in? Because the argument can be made to force anyone to work against their will if she accepts the premise that physicians can be coerced by government.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at November 29, 2013 07:05 AM (oJ5Fd)
Posted by: BlueFalcon in Boston at November 29, 2013 07:05 AM (KCvsd)
Posted by: USA at November 29, 2013 07:06 AM (VIaw0)
Posted by: Krebs v Carnot: Epic Battle of the Cycling Stars [/i] [/b] [/s] at November 29, 2013 07:07 AM (0CBU6)
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at November 29, 2013 07:07 AM (c2oll)
Posted by: no good deed at November 29, 2013 07:07 AM (HsJeN)
Posted by: eman at November 29, 2013 07:07 AM (AO9UG)
Posted by: Caliban at November 29, 2013 10:53 AM (2ArJQ)
This, this, a thousand times this.
Posted by: Krebs v Carnot: Epic Battle of the Cycling Stars at November 29, 2013 11:07 AM (0CBU6)
I think the problem is that all y'all are just heartless.
Posted by: alexthechick - Really Universe Really? at November 29, 2013 07:07 AM (Gk3SS)
Posted by: The kid who yells THAT'S RAYCISS!! at November 29, 2013 07:08 AM (xXhgd)
Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit [/i][/s][/b] at November 29, 2013 07:08 AM (0HooB)
Remember when the FBI guy who infiltrated Billy Ayres' Weather Underground came back and reported that "one quarter of the population will need to go"? What better way than a few months of no health care? Especially for the elderly. Now a quarter of the population most likely wouldn't die because of this, but if there were, say, a flu epidemic or some antibiotic-resistant bug...
Posted by: RushBabe at November 29, 2013 07:09 AM (hrIP5)
Last I heard, forcing someone to render services against their will was slavery.
Posted by: Insomniac at November 29, 2013 10:59 AM (UAMVq)
That's just racist.
Posted by: tbodie at November 29, 2013 07:09 AM (TsudI)
Posted by: D-Lamp at November 29, 2013 07:09 AM (bb5+k)
Posted by: Insomniac at November 29, 2013 07:10 AM (UAMVq)
Posted by: D-Lamp at November 29, 2013 07:11 AM (bb5+k)
Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at November 29, 2013 07:13 AM (hSLJC)
Posted by: Avi at November 29, 2013 07:13 AM (kcF49)
That's really offensive....and when I stop laughing I will think of a cutting response.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at November 29, 2013 07:13 AM (oJ5Fd)
11: "Perhaps we could start an experiment: Put out a plate of cookies by themselves, and see if they end up eaten ..."
This theorum has been tested repeatedly in my household.
They invariably end up eaten.
Posted by: Azenogoth at November 29, 2013 07:13 AM (v6cwT)
Posted by: The White House at November 29, 2013 07:13 AM (FcR7P)
Posted by: real joe at November 29, 2013 07:13 AM (xXhgd)
Posted by: madamex at November 29, 2013 07:14 AM (1zsKV)
Posted by: Nip Sip at November 29, 2013 07:14 AM (0FSuD)
Posted by: 18-1 at November 29, 2013 07:15 AM (uUvS8)
want to subsidize other people's healthcare. Especially when there are
already solutions in place and have been for years.
And subsidize hundreds of thousands of new liberal apparatchiks to administer the healthcare and punish the opposition.
Posted by: PJ at November 29, 2013 07:15 AM (ZWaLo)
Posted by: Caliban at November 29, 2013 10:53 AM (2ArJQ)
Well if you think about it, the entire point of insurance is to subsidize other people's healthcare. There are a large number of people all paying in a "small cost" so that when a person needs it they don't pay it all, all with the idea that you will receive that treatment as well. And that part is what is no longer true. You are being told to pay a lot more to subsidize the others and its going to take you a lot longer to hit that limit where you start receiving that, adding to even more of your cost.
Posted by: buzzion at November 29, 2013 07:15 AM (LI48c)
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at November 29, 2013 07:16 AM (c2oll)
Posted by: D-Lamp at November 29, 2013 07:16 AM (bb5+k)
Posted by: alexthechick - Really Universe Really? at November 29, 2013 11:07 AM (Gk3SS)
Look who's talking!
are
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at November 29, 2013 07:16 AM (oJ5Fd)
Posted by: teh Wind at November 29, 2013 07:16 AM (B3WUC)
Posted by: real joe at November 29, 2013 11:13 AM (xXhgd)
Calling the prezzy a dog? Raaaaaaycisssss.
Posted by: ConservativeMonster at November 29, 2013 07:16 AM (ioT3q)
Posted by: Mike Hammer at November 29, 2013 07:16 AM (aDwsi)
Actually the government only offers four plans, and they all cover the same thing. The only thing different are the deductibles and the premiums. That's not choice, it's the government telling the insurance industry what policies will be offered and what they will cost.
AND
The government guarantees the companies against any loss. AND restricts any profit.
Posted by: Minus 3 ° F at November 29, 2013 07:17 AM (xQZ+T)
Posted by: Nip Sip at November 29, 2013 07:17 AM (0FSuD)
Look who's talking!
are
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at November 29, 2013 11:16 AM (oJ5Fd)
And that's just how we like her.
Posted by: ConservativeMonster at November 29, 2013 07:17 AM (ioT3q)
Posted by: Mike Hammer at November 29, 2013 07:17 AM (aDwsi)
Also... many of the senior citizens I know - also O supporters- on medicare think they're immune. I think... not. And when it hits them, they will be the first ones into the gas chambers.
Posted by: shibumi at November 29, 2013 07:17 AM (25HWz)
Posted by: Les Nessman at November 29, 2013 07:17 AM (v6hyJ)
are
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at November 29, 2013 11:16 AM (oJ5Fd)
Delicate flower of innocent virtue!
*bounds about more*
Posted by: alexthechick - Really Universe Really? at November 29, 2013 07:18 AM (Gk3SS)
Posted by: D-Lamp at November 29, 2013 07:18 AM (bb5+k)
Posted by: nerdygirl at November 29, 2013 07:18 AM (mck3/)
Posted by: eman at November 29, 2013 07:20 AM (AO9UG)
Posted by: Nip Sip at November 29, 2013 07:21 AM (0FSuD)
Posted by: ConservativeMonster at November 29, 2013 11:17 AM (ioT3q)
Well....that and a bustier and 4" pumps.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at November 29, 2013 07:21 AM (oJ5Fd)
But what would that spiral to? Less subsidizers, and more subsidizees!!
You guys have my condolences.
Posted by: Matt at November 29, 2013 07:21 AM (DjrJ0)
Posted by: Mike Hammer at November 29, 2013 07:21 AM (aDwsi)
Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit [/i][/s][/b] at November 29, 2013 07:22 AM (0HooB)
Posted by: D-Lamp at November 29, 2013 07:22 AM (bb5+k)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at November 29, 2013 10:58 AM (nzKvP)
People really do believe in Slavery when they think it benefits themselves.
Posted by: D-Lamp at November 29, 2013 11:09 AM (bb5+k)
You misunderstand, they don't think of it as Slavery, they think of it as the docs fulfilling their duty to society. As Karl Marx said "In a higher phase of communist society, after the enslaving subordination of the individual to the division of labor, and therewith also the antithesis between mental and physical labor, has vanished; after labor has become not only a means of life but life's prime want; after the productive forces have also increased with the all-around development of the individual, and all the springs of co-operative wealth flow more abundantly—only then can the narrow horizon of bourgeois right be crossed in its entirety and society inscribe on its banners: From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs"
Posted by: Penfold at November 29, 2013 07:22 AM (xmZmI)
It's Socialism 101:
You people who are too selfish to not work toward the greater good are the problem. You aren't foresightful enough to recognize that, if you are 20 something and healthy, you're supposed to pay in so that others who are less healthy can have health care.
Human nature being what it is, people decide things on the basis of what's good for THEM, and not society as a whole.
That's what he's getting at. The same upstream argument socialists have been arguing for centuries. And Obama thinks that's WRONG! Shame on you.
Oh, am I the only one reading the cryptic note about 401K plans, and seeing an ominous foreshadowing here?
Posted by: BurtTC at November 29, 2013 07:23 AM (TOk1P)
Posted by: Nip Sip at November 29, 2013 07:23 AM (0FSuD)
Posted by: D-Lamp at November 29, 2013 07:24 AM (bb5+k)
I used to think that the 401(k) confiscation theorists were crazypants. Now I'm shocked it hasn't happened yet.
Posted by: alexthechick - Really Universe Really? at November 29, 2013 07:24 AM (Gk3SS)
"However, Tainter is not entirely apocalyptic: "When some new input to an economic system is brought on line, whether a technical innovation or an energy subsidy, it will often have the potential at least temporarily to raise marginal productivity" (p. 124). Thus, barring continual conquest of your neighbors (which is always subject to diminishing returns), innovation that increases productivity is – in the long run – the only way out of the dismal science dilemma of declining marginal returns on added investments in complexity."
Luckily for us, the Left's minions in the regulatory apparatus are ALL about innovation that increases productivity and would never do something so stupid as to put in place regulations which stifle economic activity. I can't imagine them, for example, putting regulations in place which would necessarily cause electricity prices to skyrocket. No sirree, Bob.
Posted by: Sudden Clarity Clarence at November 29, 2013 07:24 AM (XVWHG)
Posted by: BurtTC at November 29, 2013 11:23 AM (TOk1P)
?
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at November 29, 2013 07:24 AM (oJ5Fd)
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at November 29, 2013 07:25 AM (bxKJf)
Oh, am I the only one reading the cryptic note about 401K plans, and seeing an ominous foreshadowing here?
What note?
Posted by: Infidel at November 29, 2013 07:26 AM (IEbb0)
He does not have opposable thumbs and cannot turn the dials on the stove.
Posted by: Les Nessman at November 29, 2013 11:17 AM (v6hyJ)
My puppy has just learned to turn the TV on and off by licking the touch sensors.
Posted by: jwb7605[/u][/i][/b] at November 29, 2013 07:26 AM (Qxe/p)
"The ACA is redistributing health insurance dollars from people who have them and are used to making informed decisions to people who aren't"
You're starting to get it - typical old racist granny saved her whole life for that new hip - Obamacare is going to give her a pill and redistribute her wealth - take scare of that whole reparations don't go far enough statement.
Posted by: Burnt Toast at November 29, 2013 07:26 AM (80R0X)
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at November 29, 2013 11:25 AM (bxKJf)
If only our brains were wired to use a non-functional website.
Cause that would clearly be a superior way of thinking. Or something.
Posted by: ConservativeMonster at November 29, 2013 07:27 AM (ioT3q)
Easily the most fucking idiotic sentence ever uttered in politics.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you.
Posted by: The Magnificent Speech Writers of Lord O at November 29, 2013 07:27 AM (25HWz)
Posted by: D-Lamp at November 29, 2013 07:27 AM (bb5+k)
Obvious answer to ALL of our problems, You Guys: a THIRD term for god-king 0Bama!
Posted by: MtTB at November 29, 2013 07:28 AM (8E9QA)
Posted by: jwb7605 at November 29, 2013 11:26 AM (Qxe/p)
Sounds like a useful backup TV remote.
"Puppy, TV ON!"
"That's a good boy!"
"Volume, UP!"
"Who's a smart doggy? Who's a smart doggy?"
Posted by: ConservativeMonster at November 29, 2013 07:28 AM (ioT3q)
Posted by: USA at November 29, 2013 07:28 AM (VIaw0)
Posted by: AnnaS at November 29, 2013 07:29 AM (UN0/t)
Nope. They're going to take them. Period.
Posted by: Washington Nearsider at November 29, 2013 07:29 AM (fwARV)
Posted by: D-Lamp at November 29, 2013 07:29 AM (bb5+k)
Posted by: RWC at November 29, 2013 07:29 AM (LpbKr)
Posted by: Kristophr at November 29, 2013 07:29 AM (c6N69)
Posted by: The Magnificent Speech Writers of Lord O at November 29, 2013 11:27 AM (25HWz)
Let me, uhm, be clear, I'm a better speechwriter than, erhm, my speechwriters.
Posted by: Lord Obama at November 29, 2013 07:29 AM (ioT3q)
Posted by: Mike Hammer at November 29, 2013 07:30 AM (aDwsi)
Posted by: Beto at November 29, 2013 07:32 AM (MhA4j)
Posted by: Mike Hammer at November 29, 2013 07:33 AM (aDwsi)
Posted by: D-Lamp at November 29, 2013 07:33 AM (bb5+k)
Posted by: t-bird at November 29, 2013 07:33 AM (FcR7P)
Even if they don't seize them ... what happens when all the boomers start making withdrawals?
A withdrawal requires that someone else buy the stock being sold. When a whole bunch of people dump stock on the market at the same time, the market crashes. I suggest cashing out now, taking the tax hit, and investing in something tangible, like precious metal, or rental property.
Posted by: Kristophr at November 29, 2013 07:33 AM (c6N69)
Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit [/i][/s][/b] at November 29, 2013 07:33 AM (0HooB)
Yoink...
** a whirlwind of crumbs **
Posted by: The Invisible Cookie Monster[/i][/b][/s] at November 29, 2013 07:33 AM (DL2i+)
Posted by: toby928© insists on talking about robots at November 29, 2013 07:33 AM (QupBk)
Posted by: Mike Hammer
*glares at human servant*
*goes back to Sudoku puzzle*
Posted by: Mike Hammer's Cat at November 29, 2013 07:33 AM (BrQrN)
Posted by: Beto at November 29, 2013 07:34 AM (MhA4j)
Posted by: Mike Hammer at November 29, 2013 07:35 AM (aDwsi)
Posted by: real joe at November 29, 2013 07:35 AM (xXhgd)
87 -
In the quote above:
"We struggle with decisions about how to invest our retirement savings and are highly susceptible to the number and types of 401(k) plans weÂ’re offered."
See, you're not wise enough to make those decisions either. Here, let's have the government help you with that...
Posted by: BurtTC at November 29, 2013 07:35 AM (TOk1P)
Posted by: toby928© insists on talking about robots at November 29, 2013 07:38 AM (QupBk)
Posted by: runningrn at November 29, 2013 07:38 AM (PLOz8)
Posted by: Chief Justice John Roberts at November 29, 2013 07:39 AM (FcR7P)
Posted by: no good deed at November 29, 2013 07:40 AM (HsJeN)
*silently chuckles to self*
Posted by: Mike Hammer's Cat at November 29, 2013 11:35 AM (BrQrN)
ARF! YIP! GRRRR. ARF!
Posted by: jwb7605's puppy[/u][/i][/b] at November 29, 2013 07:41 AM (Qxe/p)
Posted by: dogfish at November 29, 2013 07:41 AM (6TbeQ)
Posted by: Mike Hammer at November 29, 2013 07:41 AM (aDwsi)
Posted by: Mike Hammer at November 29, 2013 07:43 AM (aDwsi)
Posted by: Krebs v Carnot: Epic Battle of the Cycling Stars [/i] [/b] [/s] at November 29, 2013 07:44 AM (0CBU6)
126 -
Yep, socialism in all its various forms is ultimately about a small group of wise leaders deciding EVERYTHING for everyone else.
It can't work otherwise, and it doesn't work anyway, because people will STILL do what is in their own self-interest, even if that includes doing nothing at all.
Posted by: BurtTC at November 29, 2013 07:44 AM (TOk1P)
Posted by: EROWMER at November 29, 2013 07:45 AM (OONaw)
It really is. Especially since I can hear the you guys, Serious You Guys, stop being so meeeeeaaaaannnn.
Posted by: alexthechick - Really Universe Really? at November 29, 2013 07:45 AM (Gk3SS)
Posted by: Mike Hammer at November 29, 2013 11:43 AM (aDwsi)
Puppy has been there, done that.
She's got "just out of range" figured out, though.
Posted by: jwb7605[/u][/i][/b] at November 29, 2013 07:46 AM (Qxe/p)
Posted by: t-bird at November 29, 2013 07:46 AM (FcR7P)
127 -
If our cats operated as a pride they could bring the dog down, but they don't. They're too busy bickering and arguing with each other, and the male cat is the only one trying to do all the work. And he's too small for the job. The dog just looks at him like he's crazy.
So the dog lives another day. For now.
Posted by: BurtTC at November 29, 2013 07:47 AM (TOk1P)
Posted by: Mike Hammer at November 29, 2013 07:47 AM (aDwsi)
Posted by: runningrn at November 29, 2013 07:48 AM (PLOz8)
Lets accept for the moment that 'people' are bad at these long term planning skills. When the writer (whoever it is, I'm not giving Politico the page view) says this, I have to assume he means the majority of people are bad at this. Otherwise he'd say 'some' or 'half' or somesuch. So a minority of people are good at these skills. But! If it's such a tricky thing, I'd think that the majority of the 'competent' are really only good at managing their own lives, plus maybe their immediate families. A minority would be good at planning not only their own futures, but others. The number of 'managers' who can successfully 'manage' other peoples lives goes down as the 'managed' pool grows. So how many 'managers' out there can successfully manage hundreds of thousands of other peoples lives? And are they really being uncovered the popularity contests we call elections? Are they really being hired and fast-tracked through the government bureaucracy? From the evidence, I'd say they were not.
So then, folks like the Politico writer are essentially proposing that INCOMPETENTs be promoted to these 'manager' roles because there cannot possibly be enough competent 'managers' to deal with all the work. Which leads to the incompetents screwing up the plans or execution of the competents.
So how about they just leave us to succeed or fail on our own and to help (or not according to our consciences) those who fail.
AoS obligatory foul language: Leave me alone you fucking assholes and go eat a bag of dicks.
Posted by: J. Random Dude at November 29, 2013 07:50 AM (8OfdL)
Posted by: J. Random Dude at November 29, 2013 07:50 AM (8OfdL)
Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit [/i][/s][/b] at November 29, 2013 07:52 AM (0HooB)
Posted by: JeffM at November 29, 2013 07:53 AM (LIc41)
Oh no. The Huguenins are learning the hard way that not doing business with someone is "discrimination".
Free speech stops where ghey begins.
Posted by: noone,really at November 29, 2013 07:58 AM (5ikDv)
"Exchanges may thus want to take an active approach that works with insurers to design appealing products rather than passively accepting all-comers."
For example, in Minnesota this means that the exchange board (seven unelected bureaucrats) will have the ability to arbitrarily deny plans that have already met state and federal requirements from being sold on the exchange. Exchange minions are already going around the state telling people the board is going to limit choices in order to expand real choices. Which is terrible news for people in, say, Rochester (Mayo) where there are only about seven total choices from which all age groups must choose: http://bit.ly/1adLOoA
Posted by: Mippilis at November 29, 2013 07:59 AM (epW0L)
No, that's not technical, that's just correct.
And it leads to the problem with Socialism....that they always have the answer -- after the fact.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at November 29, 2013 08:00 AM (oJ5Fd)
Posted by: mindful webworker - got Republic? at November 29, 2013 08:08 AM (K7W+A)
Why banks? Cuz that's where the money is.
Posted by: PJ at November 29, 2013 08:25 AM (ZWaLo)
But some strange surfing did get to this, the review page of the new fragrance by George Takei, "Eau My".
http://tinyurl.com/kg5wcyu
Posted by: scottst at November 29, 2013 08:31 AM (agfwK)
http://andelino.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/9162007_democrats_then_and_now1.jpg
Posted by: Richard McEnroe at November 29, 2013 08:34 AM (XO6WW)
Posted by: noone at November 29, 2013 08:35 AM (vu484)
Posted by: DriveBy at November 29, 2013 08:43 AM (C9Vc8)
Posted by: Biff Boffo at November 29, 2013 08:46 AM (oPVx2)
Posted by: Michael at November 29, 2013 08:47 AM (smKbx)
Posted by: Meremortal at November 29, 2013 08:55 AM (1Y+hH)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of Somethingorother at November 29, 2013 08:58 AM (qyfb5)
Posted by: real joe at November 29, 2013 11:13 AM (xXhgd)
More closer:
Dad burned the toast so we are letting the dog rape the baker on tuesdays and full moons.
Posted by: Burnt Toast at November 29, 2013 09:04 AM (80R0X)
Wow, Merogivn, was about to use exactly the same pull-quote, but I don't know to do the italics thinggy here -
*The exchanges are based on a laudable idea: that competition, transparency and consumer choice will lead to higher-quality, more affordable products.*
OK, my head is actually going to explode now. WTF, I mean, WTFF?!
For years, I have bought my (not that expensive, though still far more expensive than it should be thanks to state-level distortion, er, regulation, cross-susbidies, and all that shit) health insurance via eHealthInsurance.com. It usually takes about 10 minutes, then 15 more minutes to fill out the paperwork when it comes in the mail.
We really are living in a country completely detached from reality. Imagine if this idiotic administration announced they were setting up, you know, "food exchanges" in lots of neighborhoods, where one could buy food, paper towels, batteries, bottled water, etc. Or "prepared food exchanges" where one could even drive through to get, I dunno, burgers, chicken, or tacos.
It would be no less ridiculous. The very "idea" of setting up "exchanges" when in fact a very distorted - entirely by the state, all levels - market has obviously existed for many many years still blows my mind. I have mocked this "idea" for a long time using the grocery store example above. Or, even better, the "food stamp store" or Cabrini-Greene style public housing examples, to get at the insanity of the public sector mimicking something that already exists in the real economy.
I've said it before. I don't see recovery from this. A country so degraded, with "elites" so clueless and alien in their instincts, and a populace sufficiently distracted/lazy/dumbed-down/oozing alien collectivist economically illiterate values simply doesn't have the tools to rescue itself.
Posted by: non-purist at November 29, 2013 09:13 AM (afQnV)
Posted by: Trivial Pursuer at November 29, 2013 09:21 AM (/sohm)
Posted by: Trivial Pursuer at November 29, 2013 09:30 AM (/sohm)
Trivial Pursuer, my thoughts exactly. Those numbers sound right - 85% and 87% - are they the actual ones? It's difficult to express my astonishment and despair at a situation in which those numbers reflect reality leading to the nation adopting (EVEN if crammed down its throat through doubly-unconstitutional means, both the Congress and the SCOTUS completely outside their lanes) this insane self-inflicted wound.
The US health care and related finance system was the best in the world (easily, for a major country). About 99% of its flaws were - SURPRISE! - related to the usual suspects: public sector interference that raises costs and inhibits innovation, and related rent-seeking and cartelization resulting from private actors (of course, rationally) gaming the system of state interference.
Without being dumbed down to the level of a K-School double major (and I don't mean that ironically, not in the least), I would confidently predict that even a partial de-regulation and de-cartelization of health care finance would unleash such cost savings over our existing system that an obvious, far superior system of direct cash support to the truly indigent involuntarily uninsured (a small number) would 10 times the resources it would require.
The entire health care cost level would be radically reduced with rational deregulation. In that situation, even the obvious solution to the involuntarily uninsured becomes fairly painless. Gee, it's almost like there's something called a virtuous cycle where good solutions beget easier solutions to remaining problems, or something. Think natural gas, telecoms, or airlines, times 5-10, when thinking of the economic impact of health care finance deregulation.
Posted by: non-purist at November 29, 2013 09:39 AM (afQnV)
Posted by: fb at November 29, 2013 10:16 AM (JVEmw)
"You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!"
<i>But despite the good intentions behind the website, behavioral science research suggests that many consumers may be ill equipped to make good decisions in the insurance marketplaces.</i>
So we of the Vanguard Party must guide the proletariat into making the correct decisions, rather than allowing their <i>false consciousness</i> to lead them astray. It's For Their Own Good.Posted by: Herp McDerp at November 29, 2013 11:54 AM (7QRNd)
Posted by: chunk at November 30, 2013 05:01 PM (/ME9Q)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.2579 seconds, 291 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.








Posted by: Mainah at November 29, 2013 06:49 AM (659DL)