Things That Would Have Gotten Me Fired in the Corporate World
This week's episode: Spending enormous resources on a program to reduce X, and then not tracking (or even putting in place a mechanism to track) whether X was reduced as promised. James Taranto quoting the National Journal quoting Administration officials:
The Congressional Budget Office estimates that the health care law will reduce the number of uninsured people by about 24 million over the next few years, and that about 6 million previously uninsured people will gain coverage through the law's exchanges this year. So, is enrollment on track to meet that goal? Overall enrollment is looking pretty decent, but how many of the people who have signed up were previously uninsured?
"That's not a data point that we are really collecting in any sort of systematic way," Cohen told the insurance-industry crowd on Thursday when asked how many of the roughly 4 million enrollees were previously uninsured.
Nicely done. The PPACA was passed first and foremost to bring insurance to the uninsured. I always thought that the Left misunderstood (accidentally or on purpose, I do not know) the nature of the uninsured and thus overestimated what impact the PPACA would have in this regard. But one way or another, you would track the impact, right? I can just imagine trying to explain to my old boss Chuck Knight why we spent billions to gain new customers for a product but didn't track how many new customers we gained.
Postscript: Here is my prediction -- The Administration will declare that no one had "real" insurance (as they define it) so everyone in the exchange was previously uninsured.
jdgalt:
I'd like to see our side also talking up how the reality is just the opposite.
I'm what you would call working poor -- have been underemployed for years, and live on about $16k per year. Up to the end of 2013 I got by with no health coverage, and went to free clinics when I needed to.
But now, thanks to ObamaCare, I've got insurance. It's subsidized, about $400/month, so I'm charged only $1/month.
The catch is -- the plan (and in fact all the cheap plans listed for me at coveredca.com) has a huge deductible, $5,000/year, which I can never possibly pay. So in effect I have zero usable coverage. What makes it worse is, now that I'm "insured" I'm no longer eligible for either the free clinics or free emergency room service -- I would be told to use my insurance, which means coming up with the impossible copays.
I would like to see every one of the imbeciles who wrote this law forced to walk in my shoes until they fix it.
March 7, 2014, 2:00 pmColoComment:
NPR told a similar story recently on its Morning Edition program. Woman was unemployed, uninsured, used free clinics for necessary health care, but now is signed up via Obamacare and cannot afford the now-mandatory, out-of-pocket cost (deductible) to see a health care provider.
This law is a travesty, not only because it doesn't work as designed (the design itself is faulty), but because it's in fact harming those who it was purported to help.
It's shameful that Democrats refuse to acknowledge what is happening. They are so invested in this bad law that they will not confess that it's a failure.
March 7, 2014, 3:28 pmmesaeconoguy:
“That's not a data point that we are really collecting in any sort of systematic way," Cohen told the insurance-industry crowd
Curious: why didn’t the insurance-industry crowd go
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qRxwBb7ev1Y
Answer: Obamascare contains all the worst elements of fascism,see clip.
March 7, 2014, 9:11 pmmahtso:
Sure I'll write it (again) because there is an election coming up in which control of the senate is up for grabs: these people on the Left, are they Coke or Pepsi?
March 8, 2014, 6:53 amjdmeth:
Guess I got a better plan. I'm on Medicare and SS, my wife and college student son get coverage for $20 a month. A doctor's visit for my wife was $97, she had a $5 co-pay.
March 8, 2014, 7:14 amsean2829:
It's really ironic. The uninsured poor will now be insured but a medical problem will still cause bankruptcy. The more fortunate folks who are just over the 4x poverty level may find the high insurance premium may make them financially insolvent. The problem with medicine in this country was and still is excessive cost. Obamacare is an exercise to force more people into an inefficient system.
March 8, 2014, 10:39 amMe too:
The point of the coke or pepsi thing is to suggest that they are one in the same. No difference.
March 8, 2014, 12:45 pmGriffin3:
In the immortal words of Steve Dallas: They both take like carbonated battery acid. Or was that Opus?
March 8, 2014, 2:07 pmAndrew_M_Garland:
Our economic and political leaders have their heads buried in computer models which happen to support their give-away policies.
Fred: How many jobs have we created?
CBO: Just a second (runs computer program model) 2,343,458 jobs.
Fred: Did this scan a detailed database of collected information?
CBO: No. It always says that.
CBO Creates Jobs On Paper
03/17/10 - Cato@Liberty - Daniel J. Mitchell [edited]:
=== ===
Doug Elmendorf is Director of the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). He basically agrees with me, that their employment model simply spits out pre-determined numbers, regardless of what happens in the real economy. The CBO recently estimated that so-called stimulus spending generated jobs and growth.
Someone asked if the CBO model would be unable to detect whether the stimulus failed. After hemming, hawing, and a follow-up question, he confessed "that’s right".
(See this at 39:00 on the C-Span video at the link.)
=== ===
AMG: Our economic future is being analyzed by CBO models that are entirely theoretical and are not compared to the reality that they are supposed to predict. It is the CBO that "scores" Congressional legislation, telling us what it will cost and how much we will save by "reducing the deficit".
Does this inspire in you a warm feeling of trust?
Christina Romer was chiair of Obama's White House Council of Economic Advisors. In 09/2010 she made revealing remarks at her farewell luncheon, and authored an official report to the President about the stimulus which is not worthy of a freshman paper in Econ 101.
Romer and Obama are Theoretically Correct, but only in accord with a flawed theory and ridiculous analysis.
March 8, 2014, 3:58 pmNateOgden:
The law wasn't meant for the uninsured it was meant for the hospitals and the Medical/Government complex. While an individual might still not be able to afford care or even not afford care now they could prior to ACA, if something big happens the hospitals and providers will be paid. You can also get access to high cost brand name drugs now. Also once people go over their $6350 out of pocket those high cost brand name drugs will be paid at 100% allowing Pharmaceutical companies to continue raising prices considerably higher than inflation.
Those are some of the obvious benefits for medical providers. The government now gets multiple multibillion dollar slush funds to play with. PCORI is billions they are free to give away to anyone supporting them. Reinsurance programs is necessary billions they can hold over the head of insurance companies. Works the same way the union racket does, give away tax payor money with the expectation that a meaningful portion will be given back.
March 9, 2014, 7:31 ammahtso:
No kidding; but the reality is that the two parties are not the same and the blogger routinely posts stuff that shows this to be true. Regardless of which side of the ideological spectrum you are on, ask: would you prefer a Democrat or a Republican appointing judges? Would you prefer that the Republicans or the Democrats control the senate when voting to confirm judges? I cannot imagine any informed person not seeing a difference.
March 9, 2014, 9:25 ammarque2:
Have you ever had RC?
March 9, 2014, 12:43 pmmarque2:
The uninsured poor were always covered. This is for lower middle - middle class folks to get their "subsidy" How they would go bankrupt anyway - I am not sure.
March 9, 2014, 12:46 pmMatthew Slyfield:
I prefer Dr pepper. Which political party is Dr Pepper?
March 10, 2014, 8:44 amAnother_Brian:
Wouldn't they then have to adjust the previously stated number of 6 million uninsured?
March 10, 2014, 10:12 ammarque2:
Is Dr Pepper a cola? It doesn't use Kola nut. I think that is the definition - needs to contain kola.
March 10, 2014, 10:56 ammarque2:
Check out what I found. If you really dislike the cola parties there is
March 10, 2014, 11:34 amOpen Source Cola!
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-source_cola
teapartydoc:
Affordable health care offered at competitive prices will not occur until government licensing of professionals comes to an end. Read chapter 9 of Capitalism and Freedom by Milton Friedman.
March 10, 2014, 1:27 pmmahtso:
Operator error -- I thought I posted this yesterday, but: please provide the details of your plan so that others who would benefit from such low-cost insurance can also take advantage.
March 11, 2014, 8:33 amjdmeth:
Everything depends on what your situation is. I went to healthcare.gov, I entered my SS income, wife's age, sons age and school status. I then picked the plan that offered the best coverage for the least premium and biggest subsidy.
March 11, 2014, 10:10 amMatthew Slyfield:
So, why do we have to confine it to colas? The Greens would probably be Mt Dew or maybe a lemon/lime soda like Sprite.
March 11, 2014, 4:10 pmMatthew Slyfield:
" I think that is the definition - needs to contain kola."
Is that so?
"However, contrary to what is implied by the "cola" name, Coca-Cola syrup does not contain any kola nut extract.[2] Since no kola extracts are present in the recipe, the primary taste of Coca-Cola comes from vanilla and cinnamon with trace amounts of orange, lime and lemon and spices such as nutmeg.[3]"
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coca-Cola_formula#Reed_recipe
March 11, 2014, 4:39 pmmarque2:
You mentioned Coke and Pespsi products again. Greens would have to go for 7up or Squirt. But then since Coke is Den and Pepsi GOP - the greens would probably go for Sprite if their Jones sodas weren't available :)
March 12, 2014, 7:15 amjdgalt:
I'll guess that you're under 50. I'm not.
May 29, 2014, 11:07 pmjdmeth:
I'm 62 but have been on disability for two years. I have the minimum Medicare doctors' plan and drug coverage for myself. My diability payments are our sole source of income.
May 30, 2014, 1:10 am