Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : A US National Health Care System? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (16107)	4/4/2010 1:28:29 PM
From: Lane3	2 Recommendations Respond to of 42652

More on CBO scoring jeffreymiron.com A Preview of ObamaCare by Jeffrey Miron on April 4th, 2010 No CommentsComments ObamaCare is modeled, approximately, on the health insurance plan adopted in Massachusetts in 2006. So it is useful to watch developments here as an advance view of how ObamaCare will operate: Thousands of consumers are gaming Massachusetts’ 2006 health insurance law by buying insurance when they need to cover pricey medical care, such as fertility treatments and knee surgery, and then swiftly dropping coverage, a practice that insurance executives say is driving up costs for other people and small businesses. In 2009 alone, 936 people signed up for coverage with Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Massachusetts for three months or less and ran up claims of more than $1,000 per month while in the plan. Their medical spending while insured was more than four times the average for consumers who buy coverage on their own and retain it in a normal fashion, according to data the state’s largest private insurer provided the Globe. This is precisely the kind of strategic behavior that many critics of OamaCare fear; this one results from the ban on pre-existing conditions combined with community rating. And this gaming is exactly the kind of “dynamic” effect that CBO’s cost estimates tend to miss. CBO engages in “static” scoring, which means it does not incorporate behavioral responses to the incentives created by a law. Its cost estimates are therefore almost certainly too low. Note that static scoring is understandable; the correct assumptions to employ in dynamic scoring are not obvious, so dynamic scoring might be more open to political manipulation than static scoring. But honest discussions should recognize that static scoring will typically underestimate a bill’s expenditure and overestimate its revenues. My colleauges Greg Mankiw and Matt Weinzierl have a nice paper on this issue.

To: Lane3 who wrote (16107)	4/4/2010 3:36:46 PM
From: Alighieri	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

Now we're doing lots more stuff. Even at Medicare rates, that costs money, new money, money that wasn't being spent before. Whoa...I don't know where to start. Let me say that the statement above, if true, is an indictment of our health care system ...but I am not sure I accept your fanciful scenarios and conclusions. Clearly there would have to be guidelines and limitations, cost control measures, co-pays, deductibles, etc...you boil it all down in a few overly simplistic terms then reach conclusions that fit your predispositions. Al