With metronomic regularity, the ObamaCare scam is shown to be rife with corruption, lies and incompetence.....pretty much the hallmark of the current regime.
Each day, Donald Boudreaux, professor of economics at George Mason University, writes a letter to the editor of a major American publication. Often, he writes in response to an absurdity offered up by a columnist or politician, or an eye-catching factoid misleadingly taken out of context. This guy is da' bomb!
Here's one of his poison darts....
1. "Dear Professor Krugman:
On your blog today you document that the percentage of Americans without health insurance has fallen since Obamacare kicked in. You conclude that This is what success looks like.
You miss the point of Obamacares most careful critics.
2. None of these critics denies that government can successfully use a mix of regulations, taxes, and subsidies to effectively mandate an increase in the number of Americans who have health-insurance policies.... the real concern is that
Obamacare will either diminish the quality or the accessibility of actual health-care provision (rather than of health insurance)
or that the costs of the extra health-care provision made possible by Obamacare costs reckoned as the value of other goods and services sacrificed as a consequence will be excessive.
3. Governments success at mandating that more people have health insurance .... no more implies that people thereby have better health care than would, say, governments success at mandating that more people have jobs imply that people thereby have a higher standard of living."
Good point....cover more doesn't mean better, or less expensive....
And, it turns out that Professor Boudreaux, was far too kind in accepting the "more"....
4. "Obamacare Misses Its Target on the Uninsured by Half
5. In March 2010, Obamacare was about to be voted upon by the House of Representatives, and the Democrats were in the process of deciding whether to ignore public opinion at their peril. At that time, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projected that Obamacare would cost $938 billion over a decade and would reduce the number of uninsured people by 19 million as of 2014....
6. ....the American people overwhelmingly opposed the intrusive overhaul with 20 of 21 polls taken that month showing it to be unpopular, most of them by double digits. The Democrats willfully passed Obamacare anyway and lost 63 House seats that November.
7. Two years later...the CBO adjusted its projection for the number of uninsured accordingly.... Obamacare would reduce the number of uninsured by 14 million as of 2014 (2 million before 2014 and 12 million in 2014 alone), at a 10-year cost of $1.677 trillion or $739 billion more than the 2010 projection.
a. (This February, the CBO projected that Obamacares 10-year cost would eclipse $2 trillion.)
8. In February of this year, the CBO projected that Obamacare would reduce the number of uninsured by 13 million as of 2014. In April, ....reduce[d] that estimate to 12 million.
9. Now the Urban Institute finds that Obamacare has actually reduced the number of uninsured adults by 8 million .... (Gallup shows a similar number.)
...far short of the number of newly insured that the CBO projected in April of this year, in February of this year, or in 2012 and its less than half the tally the American people were told Obamacare would hit when they opposed it in 2010.
10. Yet Paul Krugman says that health reform is gasp! working. Only in Washington could something that fails to hit even half of its original target be considered a gasp-inducing success."
Obamacare Misses Its Target on the Uninsured by Half | The Weekly Standard
I said earlier: 'With metronomic regularity, the ObamaCare scam is shown to be rife with corruption, lies and incompetence.....pretty much the hallmark of the current regime.'
That goes double for any fools supporting either Obama or his scams.
Each day, Donald Boudreaux, professor of economics at George Mason University, writes a letter to the editor of a major American publication. Often, he writes in response to an absurdity offered up by a columnist or politician, or an eye-catching factoid misleadingly taken out of context. This guy is da' bomb!
Here's one of his poison darts....
1. "Dear Professor Krugman:
On your blog today you document that the percentage of Americans without health insurance has fallen since Obamacare kicked in. You conclude that This is what success looks like.
You miss the point of Obamacares most careful critics.
2. None of these critics denies that government can successfully use a mix of regulations, taxes, and subsidies to effectively mandate an increase in the number of Americans who have health-insurance policies.... the real concern is that
Obamacare will either diminish the quality or the accessibility of actual health-care provision (rather than of health insurance)
or that the costs of the extra health-care provision made possible by Obamacare costs reckoned as the value of other goods and services sacrificed as a consequence will be excessive.
3. Governments success at mandating that more people have health insurance .... no more implies that people thereby have better health care than would, say, governments success at mandating that more people have jobs imply that people thereby have a higher standard of living."
Good point....cover more doesn't mean better, or less expensive....
And, it turns out that Professor Boudreaux, was far too kind in accepting the "more"....
4. "Obamacare Misses Its Target on the Uninsured by Half
5. In March 2010, Obamacare was about to be voted upon by the House of Representatives, and the Democrats were in the process of deciding whether to ignore public opinion at their peril. At that time, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projected that Obamacare would cost $938 billion over a decade and would reduce the number of uninsured people by 19 million as of 2014....
6. ....the American people overwhelmingly opposed the intrusive overhaul with 20 of 21 polls taken that month showing it to be unpopular, most of them by double digits. The Democrats willfully passed Obamacare anyway and lost 63 House seats that November.
7. Two years later...the CBO adjusted its projection for the number of uninsured accordingly.... Obamacare would reduce the number of uninsured by 14 million as of 2014 (2 million before 2014 and 12 million in 2014 alone), at a 10-year cost of $1.677 trillion or $739 billion more than the 2010 projection.
a. (This February, the CBO projected that Obamacares 10-year cost would eclipse $2 trillion.)
8. In February of this year, the CBO projected that Obamacare would reduce the number of uninsured by 13 million as of 2014. In April, ....reduce[d] that estimate to 12 million.
9. Now the Urban Institute finds that Obamacare has actually reduced the number of uninsured adults by 8 million .... (Gallup shows a similar number.)
...far short of the number of newly insured that the CBO projected in April of this year, in February of this year, or in 2012 and its less than half the tally the American people were told Obamacare would hit when they opposed it in 2010.
10. Yet Paul Krugman says that health reform is gasp! working. Only in Washington could something that fails to hit even half of its original target be considered a gasp-inducing success."
Obamacare Misses Its Target on the Uninsured by Half | The Weekly Standard
I said earlier: 'With metronomic regularity, the ObamaCare scam is shown to be rife with corruption, lies and incompetence.....pretty much the hallmark of the current regime.'
That goes double for any fools supporting either Obama or his scams.
