dagblog - Comments for "Is Obama Giving Up?"

There are similarities

Peter Schwartz — Sun, 12 Jun 2011 23:50:14 +0000

There are similarities between RyanCare and ObamaCare, but the differences are important, too.

• RyanCare states that competition is the mechanism for bringing down costs for the elderly. The voucher is intentionally kept lower than the costs of insurance to "goad" prices downward and also to lower government outlays.

• If the vouchers aren't going to be less than what government is paying now, RyanCare doesn't save money. At the same time, if competition isn't going to bring prices down, then the elderly won't be able to afford insurance or will suffer from worse care.

• Opponents of RyanCare would argue that competition won't bring down costs for the elderly because elder care is inherently unprofitable. And the people who need the most care and would have to buy the richest policies to replace Medicare often can't afford it.

• In short, the facts that normally make competition work don't seem to be present when it comes to health care for the elderly. The folks who need the "Cadillac" can't afford it. And the folks selling the "Cadillac" are unlikely to sell it at a price the elderly can afford.

• I guess we could devise an experiment to test the relative efficiency of RyanCare and ObamaCare, but I find it hard at this moment to see how one could control for all the relevant factors. And it's a little hard to see how RyanCare, which inserts a profit-seeking middleman into the equation, could win this contest.

• ObamaCare is different because it means to serve a wide range of humanity with widely varying needs and resources. Totally different case, IMO.

• Also, if I'm not mistaken, the exchanges are meant to be highly regulated sandboxes in which insurance companies will compete. Companies who don't play be those rules don't get access to the customers in the exchange.

• RyanCare, AFAIK, doesn't envision any such sandbox or rules. The senior is simply out in the wider market place with his voucher in hand looking for whatever policy he can find.

Thanks for the link. It

Elusive Trope — Wed, 08 Jun 2011 15:09:18 +0000

In reply to Thanks for clearing it up a

Thanks for the link. It would make for a good platform for discussion on the impending election. Plenty of stuff to argue about - much of which pops up in these threads. Maybe if I get the time I will blog this.

As far as the Dems - the problems is that there are the Senator Nelsons who basically Republicans with a D, there is the Sanders, and all the ones somewhere in between. Trying to get a cohesive message from this bunch is impossible. I would say that if you're going to win elections in my neck of the woods, you have to pay lip service at the very least to supply side economics or you won't be elected.

Thanks for clearing it up a

we are stardust — Wed, 08 Jun 2011 14:21:05 +0000

In reply to i put the "not" where is

Thanks for clearing it up a bit. I think you will like this thedemocraticstrategist page; the authors agree with you on the persuadable middle voters and that they are 'open-minded', which examples made me laugh. They are trying to be serious, and have a pdf strategy from their group linked.

Without spending any time on where I agree and disagree, they do seem to take it for granted that Dems leaders want government to help create jobs, and some days that seems debatable. I go back to the idea that if eight years of Bush didn't cure us of trickle-down economics being viable for anyone but those at the top, and the Dems failing to explain why they won't work again now, what use are they?

Are they 'being respectful' or weak; or do they maybe actually suppport supply-side economics? I really don't know any more.

Well I think everyone

Elusive Trope — Wed, 08 Jun 2011 14:18:46 +0000

In reply to @Another Trope (your stuff in

Well I think everyone understands that the debt problem is about where it is trending.

No, not everyone understands that. IMO. To most debt is debt. (and if everyone understood this, it would mean terms like "projection" wouldn't be scary)

And all the other side does is say - "well, the US is some household has gone through rough times and overspent even in the good times, and now they're taking out their fifth or sixth loan on their house with little prospect of finding new revenue to even deal with the first loan. And they talking about spending even more money than the previous year and take out more loans on their house." And if you counter with CBO ("the CBwhat?) and GDP (how many Americans know what this stands for and of those how many can give a reasonably accurate description of what it means) and percentages and student loans and Donald Trump and what the debt was 50 years ago and all you'll get is at best confusion.

People want things simplified. But the issue (problem) isn't simple. And when one simplifies with an analogy, it allows the other side to twist it, because it is an analogy with all its limitations, in order to fit their agenda.

Basically you think it is a relatively easy task to get the American people up to speed on the debt, deficits and government spending. I don't, for a host of reasons. We'll go around and around and around without seeing eye to eye on how to approach this, so there is really no point in continuing this. Keeping in we basically agree on what the government should do in regards to spending and deficits in the current economic environment.

Very nice blog and comments.

Bruce Levine — Wed, 08 Jun 2011 13:52:59 +0000

In reply to Is Obama Giving Up?

Very nice blog and comments. I come out feel strongly both ways.

Googled WI and OH and

we are stardust — Wed, 08 Jun 2011 13:52:07 +0000

In reply to Well, I'd look at things on a

Googled WI and OH and privatization of infrastructure, and found this at Howie Klein's place with a few of the things their Govs want to sell off, and a link to 'In the Public Interest.org ' discusiing some of the pitfalls (and I don't mean you have to read it, or be interested; I put it up in case others may want to read). Seriously: it's not homework, Mr. Cho.

Howie's page has video of Bernie Sanders' floor speech on his bill for balancing the budget; it's nice. ;o)

This is true and

Peter Schwartz — Wed, 08 Jun 2011 12:16:29 +0000

In reply to According to this gallup poll

This is true and important.

There are the facts, the policies, and there is the political strategy.

Yup. But don't worry there

Saladin — Wed, 08 Jun 2011 05:13:13 +0000

In reply to Is Obama Giving Up?

Yup. But don't worry there will be a big fight over tax cuts for the wealthy right before 2012 where he will make a principled stand and say he was wrong to extend them. Also Goolsbee's an idiot, but let's hope his devauling the dollar for exports works, but I am not hopeful since the rest of the world is a disaster too.

I'm sure most of us here will be voting for him (not I should say happily, but what are you going to do). Political Scientests all rely on recent history for their models (the HW comparison you make). But the models work until they don't. Roosevelt was relected in pretty bad times. Sad, we know so much more these days.

Well, I'd look at things on a

Cho — Wed, 08 Jun 2011 04:19:28 +0000

In reply to More positive take than I

Well, I'd look at things on a case by case basis. Private prisons don't seem like a good idea. Private utilities seem to work just fine in a lot of places. Depends on the regulators and such. But, no, I don't have any deeply enlightened thoughts on the subject...

Once again not sure what this

Cho — Wed, 08 Jun 2011 04:13:40 +0000

In reply to There are lots of ways to San

Once again not sure what this has to do with what I said.

But just to respond - yes there are many smart people who may or may not agree with what I say. And yes, legislation is hard to pass. And sure, I'll take your word for the manifold ways of getting to San Jose.

As for pillorying Obama, that's not at all what I'm doing here. I was remarking on the similarity in structure between Obamacare and Ryancare, a similarity that makes Ryan a hypocrite for attacking Obamacare. By the same token I think that progressives have to come to terms with the fact that their own biases prevent them from recognizing those similarities and thus from taking Ryancare seriously. In short, it has problems, mainly in the low subsidy levels and the absence of a public option. But if you fix those problems - upping subsidies and including a Medicare option in both Ryancare and Obamacare's insurance exchanges - then you have a great bi-partisan compromise available.