Our Boy Bill falls flat

Posted: September 8, 2013 at 2:58 a.m.

Former President Bill Clinton came to Little Rock on Wednesday and asked you to marry Obamacare because you could learn to love it, and it could change.

John Brummett is blogging daily online.

This story is only available from our archives.

Editorial, Pages 83 on 09/08/2013

I'm watching it on c span right now. It doesn't seem so bad. More professorial than salesman. Yet even as he was pointing at the parts of the plan he viewed as more positive I wasn't convinced I wanted to buy this plan. I'm dubious that the cost savings will happen with these methods. Improved access is the good. But it's going to cost more,not less--probably a lot more.

Posted by: tfish053

September 8, 2013 at 4:57 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

tfish: " Improved access is the good.">>

Improved access, when you are one of the 30-50 million people not in the system, or one of the 20,000 that die each year due to lack of access, is not just "good" it's actually essential to remaining alive.

tfish: "it's going to cost more,not less--probably a lot more.">>

Probably not. See here:

"...today, we’re going to use a brand new report from the Kaiser Family Foundation to explain how the subsidies work. Get. Excited.
Kaiser’s report is arguably the most in-depth look we have at how much health insurance will cost under Obamacare, using actual rates that insurers will charge in 17 states and the District of Columbia.
“Our aim here was to really start making it tangible for people,” says Larry Levitt, one of the report authors. “So much until now has been hypothetical, with simulations and models. Now that we have real premiums in 17 states and D.C., we could start looking at what consumers in real circumstances would pay.”

The ACA uses well understood principles of market competition and transparency to keep prices down. And right now we incentivize disease rather than good health. That's insane. When you fiscally reward a certain outcome, expect to get more of that outcome. It will cost more in some sense of course because making sure all citizens are covered (those 30+ million that we are currently cost shifting and hiding under the rug), will have costs. But it's hard to imagine we could be doing it worse, while at the very same time leaving millions uncovered and paying about twice what our peer countries pay.

"The Remarkable Slowdown In Health Care Costs Since The Passage Of Obamacare"

"More Good News on Health Care: Medicare Costs Are Down, Down, Down"

Posted by: fayfreethinker

September 8, 2013 at 6:33 p.m. ( | suggest removal )


The majority of the state disagree with you.

Posted by: Tankersley101

September 8, 2013 at 9:26 p.m. ( | suggest removal )


Posted by: Tankersley101

September 8, 2013 at 9:26 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

>>The majority of the state disagree with you.

Conjecture but, likely true.

Ronald Reagan, Winthrop Rockefeller, Sr and a host of Southern conservatives had "most of of the state" convinced in 1965 that LBJ-Care (Medicare) would end in socialized medicine and lead the nation on the path of ruin.

Try to take LBJ-Care away from the elderly today, even the Medicare Republicans. Their children couldn't pay the bills in 1964 and for certain couldn't pay their bills today.

ACA will be no different.

Posted by: cdawg

September 8, 2013 at 11:24 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

"The majority of the state disagree with you." - Tankersley101

Tankersley101, how does a majority opinion always become the correct opinion, and the one government should follow?

If that is true, I believe there may be some southern states where the majority opinion is that segregation should still happen. Because a majority thinks that, it should make it right?

Posted by: User13

September 9, 2013 at 12:27 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Tank: "The majority of the state disagree with you.">>

Since I live in a nice liberal haven in conservative red state central, I'll take that as a compliment.


Posted by: fayfreethinker

September 9, 2013 at 10:19 a.m. ( | suggest removal )