Winners, Losers…and the Forgotten Man

Under Obamacare, there are winners:

“For others, the policies purchased through the exchanges are proving to be more affordable than what they had.

Bill and Linda Wood, small business owners from Westerville, Ohio, just purchased a plan on the new insurance exchange that will save them about $6,200 on premiums next year alone. This was extremely welcoming news for the Woods, who received a cancellation notice from their insurer last summer stating that their plan did not meet Obamacare standards.

Under their new policy, the Woods will pay a monthly premium of $130 after subsidies, compared to the $360 monthly premium under their old plan.”

And there are losers:

“Ed Anderson, a graphic designer from Columbus, Ohio, who was recently bumped from his wife’s insurance policy for reasons relating to the new law, discovered that his family’s monthly premiums will double even if he chooses the most inexpensive plan available to him through the new federal insurance exchange in his state.

Anderson said he and his wife currently pay a monthly premium of $460 through Blue Cross Blue Shield. But now that he can no longer stay on his wife’s plan, he will have to get his own coverage. The most inexpensive option would cost him a $428 monthly premium. And he and his wife can’t qualify for a federal subsidy because their joint income exceeds the cutoff. The new insurance policy will cost the Andersons an extra $5,000 a year in premiums alone.”

The next time a liberal says that “companies are not going to throw people off their plans”, you can remind them of this:

United Parcel Service plans to drop health insurance benefits for working spouses of nonunion employees if they can get coverage elsewhere. It blames the change partly on the new health-care law.

UPS estimates that 15,000 of the 33,000 spouses it covers will be dropped. The change is scheduled to take effect Jan. 1 for spouses of U.S. employees.

The worldwide parcel-delivery company says it’s just going with the crowd. UPS cited a benefits consultant’s survey that found that more companies are planning to restrict benefits for working spouses.

But remember that the winners in this example are not getting a lower insurance rate – they are only making a lower PAYMENT thanks to the taxpayer subsidizing them. In both of these examples, both families had insurance BEFORE Obamacare that was cancelled BECAUSE OF Obamacare. This little detail makes the real loser the “forgotten man”, the person that Yale University professor William Graham Sumner identified in an a 1876 essay as:

“As soon as A observes something which seems to him wrong, from which X is suffering, A talks it over with B, and A and B then propose to get a law passed to remedy the evil and help X. Their law always proposes to determine what C shall do for X, or, in better case, what A, B, and C shall do for X… What I want to do is to look up C. I want to show you what manner of man he is. I call him the Forgotten Man. Perhaps the appellation is not strictly correct. He is the man who never is thought of…. I call him the forgotten man… He works, he votes, generally he prays—but he always pays…

That “forgotten man” is the taxpayer.

TINSTAAFL – There Is No Such Thing As A Free Lunch. Econ 101.

22 thoughts on “Winners, Losers…and the Forgotten Man

  1. Michael: I’ve conducted a fairly detailed analysis of Obamacare since it will affect many of my clients adversely. There are too many disastrous consequences for working Americans and Business owners (aka: taxpaying Americans) to address in a single blog post. The law was either very poorly conceived and constructed, or something far more nefarious was at work on the part of its designers. I am inclined to think the latter is the case, as I’ve seen several of the culprits (I was tempted to call them bastards, but that would be a gratuitous slur against the helpless children of unwed mothers) interviewed and they are straight out of Central Casting from movies about mindless, and heartless bureaucrats in some dystopic future Hell-on-earth. Ezekiel Emmanuel in particular could step into Peter Seller’s title-role in DR. STRANGELOVE, as the mad former Nazi scientist without requiring make-up. The unrestrained egos and self-important arrogance of these “central planners” is something I’ve encountered before in meetings with Federal government zombies, but I’ve never before witnessed these “Masters-of-the-Universe” being let loose before the public. Usually these moronic egomaniacs are keep out of the public view, and pleasant, “happy talk” dissemblers are made available to the media and the public to affirm how empathetic the authoritarians actually are. Either Our Dear Leader is really desperate (likely), no one in the Obama Administration actually understands Obamacare any better than Obama (possible) or American citizens are being conditioned for our collective future in which dissent will be not just marginalized, but illegal, and our New Commissars will rule America with the unyielding pronouncements that unappetizing lunatics like Zeke Emmanuel appear to delight in. I think the third alternative may be the most likely, and that is indeed a concern. By the way, I’m not yet certain whether our Obamacare White Paper will be proprietary, but it I can I will be delighted to share it with any denizens of RNL who have an interest. Warm regards, CDE

    • CDE,

      The people who wrote this law have already told us it is about wealth redistribution, rationing of care (to eliminate the ‘useless eaters) and control of every aspect of our lives. They did so openly and proudly. All you have to know is how to speak “Progressive” and it is perfectly clear that this is NOT about healthcare. It is about MARXISM!

      • Joe: I’ve missed your comments for a bit, but you are spot-on in your assessment of Obamacare’s actual objectives. I spent time earlier in my career in and around the insurance business, and I recognized as soon as the law was made public that it was not actuarially sound and would never be able to survive as drafted. It appeared from the beginning that Obamacare was not about healthcare, but rather it was another hidden wealth and income redistribution program, and that it would likely have devastating effects on both US employment and the overall economy.

        Progressivism, which is the American version of Marxism, has never understood how to produce economic growth because its basic understandings of economics are fantasies. Anyone who has read Marx, Keynes and their disciples and has an understanding of reality-based economic theory knows that Marx and Keynes had no empirical basis for their highly theoretical and largely political systems. Redistribution is a basic premise of Marxism and of Our Dear Leader’s economic policies and redistribution when practiced in real life has always created economic decline and shared misery among the average citizens, while the political elites have never been subject to the same effects. Sound familiar? Our Dear Leader has publicly stated he will veto proposed legislation that will require him and his family to live under Obamacare and Obama has already exempted Congress and his political cronies as well. This is classic Marxist strategy, as was exhibited in Fascist Italy, Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia and elsewhere. So yes, my friend, Obamacare is Marxist to the core and has been from its first drafts. And Marxism has failed horribly and decisively in every nation where it has been implemented, which is an historically documented fact.

        To conclude, I recently had an informal conversation with someone who served as a Research Assistant to one of the most prominent professors of Keynesian economics in the US during the the mid-1990’s. That person, who is now a professor in another university shared an unbelievable story that explains alot about Mr. Obama’s economic policies. During the 2008 Presidential Campaign, Mr. Obama’s image handlers realized that their candidate had no knowledge of economics or economic concepts at all. This created a bit of a panic, with the debates approaching and the economy likely to be a major topic, Obama’s flacks desperately approached the prominent Keynesian economist and asked him to provide a one-on-one tutorial to Obama to equip the future President with his first exposure to basic economics. The professor, a political Progressive and Obama supporter, agreed and began working with candidate Obama to introduce him to economic concepts and their applications. After a short time the professor refused to continue, left Washington and returned to his university, where Mr. Obama’s handlers began calling him and making desperate requests for him to restart his coaching. He refused, stopping taking their calls and eventually told his RA that Barack Hussein Obama, the American media’s “smartest man in the room” was not only unteachable, but that his “empty headed arrogance” was completely unbearable. No one replaced the professor, and the unteachable man who knew nothing about economics was elected and reelected as our 44th President. And for the results, as Casey Stengel would have said, “You could look it up.” Cheers, CDE

        • CDE,

          I would concur — on all points. However, I would also offer this word of caution:

          We should NOT think that the ACA is incompetent. Reading the bill, there is way, way too much work in it to be incompetent. The cross referencing to other laws is extensive. Plus, the groundwork that was laid by hiding the more onerous parts of the ACA in the stimulus shows very careful planning (that is where the Death Panels were hidden).

          The problem we have is two-fold. 1st, this bill is an extention of the Marxist economic ideal combined with the Progressive, master-race eugenics sentiment that still hides within but dominates the thinking of these people. They honestly believe they are directing evolution. But the second part of the problem is the average American STILL knows the Progressive agenda is evil, but they are still American — so while they would never accept the Progressive agenda if the truth were told, neither will they believe the Progressives are actually trying to make it happen. In short, though we have strayed far, as a people, we are still too ‘good’ to believe that the evil we assign to the likes of Hitler, Stalin and Mao is now running our nation.

          And THAT is the true problem we face in getting people to see the threat. At least, this is how I see it. You may differ.

          • Joe: The ACA is typical of the Progressive view of solving problems. They spent thousands of hours writing the law, and connected it to components of other laws, provided an enormous budget for the website and for promotion, created pork in it for their supporters and appear to have never spoken with physicians or patients or to have researched the economic impact on working American citizens or business owners. The people who pay taxes and who deliver the care were not even considered. As you know, the Apostle Paul cautioned against muzzling the ox that grinds the grain,and that is exactly what Our Dear Leader and his pinheaded “experts” do constantly. Obamacare is about redistributing income and wealth from the people who earn it and create it, you and I, to the people who refuse to work, but vote for Progressive politicians. It came out this week that the top 40% of American earners pay 109% of Federal Income taxes…109%!!! That means the bottom 60% actually take money out of other Americans’ pockets and contribute nothing, nada, zero to the good of our nation. Tell me again why these people get to vote in Federal elections, because it’s a bit hazy to me why someone who is essentially a ward of the state, living off my ridiculously high tax payments, should have the same influence over policy as I do? So yes, Obamacare was a cynical Marxist ploy from Day #1, and it should be called what it is. And the idea that making more laws solves any problems is completely divorced from reality, but then so is our current “President.” Cheers & Merry Christmas, , CDE

            • CDE<

              Now, here is an important question no one seems to want to ask — but I will.

              "Do we REALLY believe that NO ONE in the RNC or Republican LEADERSHIP knows about all this?"

              How you answer that question should scare the buggars out of you.

              And on that note, Merry Christmas to you, too 😀


              • Joe and Chuck,

                I see We have complied with the Memo telling everyone that it is no longer allowed to be Referenced by OmamCare, but must be called the ACA…. to be Politically correct.

                Good for YOU !!! …….After all we are nothing if not a Compliant Nation. Even though the ACA is NOT the “Law” which is being followed, well who cares now……the Press and Academia have spoken …. and we should all follow lest we be labeled “Bigots” , “Racists” and or those with “Intellectual Inabilities”. I salute You !!

                After all, as Progressives know…..own the Langusge and you form and thus own the Debate.

                • Don,

                  If you think I used ACA instead of Obamacare because “they” told me to,… Well, I KNOW you KNOW better than that 🙂

                  I tell you what: how about a new name. I propose that, from now on, here on the RN, we call it the DOA Plan (Destruction Of America).

                  What do you say?

                  • No……ObamaCare is the Perfect and Accurate description of this travesty of American Freedom. The original Bill was illegally passed and has been illegally implememted….is no longer the original Bill….and was NEVER about HealthCare….and was NEVER affordable.

                    It is ObamaCare and it is DOA x 2……. America ( Dead on Arrival) with the ( Detruction Of America) ObamaCare Act.

                    I said below on one of the Mandela Threads to Fascisti…… We need to beware of “Trojan Horses” in the midst of our own camp. And I say it again……
                    Simply put calling this piece of Anti-Constitutional legislation anything but ObamaCare is a legitimation of this political legislative travesty. And the Progressives know ( even those who claim allegience to America’s founding Principles) that the first step is in controlling Words and thus speech and thus thought. I would remind of the Recent Virginia Race once again…..although it appears a non-Sequetor, it is in fact vitally linked wrt to “language” and Definitions and the outcomes of Controlling it.

                    Finally Ben Carson elloquently described the situation and the path to it’s solution. As many many parts where not Broken to begin with. Imagine that. Now THERE’S a change of language and definition for Yah…. :- )) .

                    • Don,

                      I’ll be honest. I do not think the States should even bother to “nullify” this monstrosity. They should just openly declare it to be lawlessness and ignore it — TOTALLY! And, if the feds object or threaten, the States should warn the fed that they can and WILL replace it.

                      It is time to stare the beast in the eyes and threaten it!

                • Don: My ACA reference actually picked up on Joe’s use of the politically correct term, which is not even accurate, since of the real name of Obamacare is “The Patient Protection & Affordable Care Act.” So Joe must be the guilty party!!! ;>)) Actually, I don’t think either Joe or me are supporters of the Obama Spin Machine’s attempt to create distance between Our Dear Leader and the growing disaster he readily accepted as his namesake not that long ago. By the way, in 1981, Liberal critics of libertarian economist Milton Friedman’s extremely successful economic recovery plan derisively christened Friedman’s plan, “Reaganomics,” during the period, 1981 – 82, that it took for the plan to turn around the economic disaster that President Jimmy Carter’s pathetic Progressive economic plan. With his usual grace and wit, President Reagan embraced and accepted “Reaganomics” as his own plan before it began transforming American economy and launching the longest economic expansion in US history, from 1982 – 2008, with several small cyclical recessions that were quickly corrected through effective free-market-oriented actions taken by the Fed. My point here is that Mr. Reagan embraced “Reaganomics” before it was the enormous success it eventually became. Barack Hussein Obama began running from Obamacare the moment it became a clear political liability.

                  The contrast between Presidents Reagan and Obama as men may be even greater than the 180-degree difference in their beliefs and policies and the results those policies have produced. President Reagan was a “man” in the traditional American model…strong, decisive, trustworthy, confident and committed to individual freedom, free markets and limited government. President Obama is a New Age character…metrosexual (maybe?), ideological rather than realistic, inconstant in his word and his policies, over-confident to the point of hubris, narcissistic, and committed to Collectivism, a Socialist (actually Marxist) economic model and to government as the central organizing mechanism for society. Finally, to apply my favorite (or at least top five) Biblical analogy, if a tree is known by its fruit, then Reagan must be recognized as the bringer of economic growth and an improved standard of living for ALL Americans, the strengthening of America’s position in the international community and the conqueror of the horror of Marxism around the world. The Obama-tree has reprised the Progressive Movement’s economic failures that have been universally experienced, the re-racialization of our nation and an infinitely more dangerous and less free world. Most Americans are much worse off under Obama than they were under President Bush, and I predict with complete confidence that trend will rapidly accelerate unless the Democrats lose control of Congress in 2014. Obama is a weak and narcissistic person, and his self-absorption and detachment from reality has made America a weaker nation and a less effective influence in the world. Leading from behind is not leading, and a weak America is bad for the planet. Under Obama America is clearly considered weak.

                  So yes, Don, Joe and I accept your premise that “Obamacare” should be called Obamacare. Please forgive us our sins, and we will forgive those who sin against us…sometimes. Regards & Merry Christmas, CDE

  2. My personal experience with health insurance since OWEbozocare was passed by a Congress that didn’t read the bill.
    In 2008 the policy that covered my wife and I from BC/BS bought thru her employer cost a total of approx. $16,000 per year. Of that, $10,000 was paid by her employer and $6,000 was taken out of her paychecks. As of January 2013 the total had risen to $26,000 yearly, $16,000 from the employers’ pocket and $10,000 from her checks. The policy was expensive but our out of pocket expenses after the monthly premiums was not much at all. A doctor visit cost us $10 co-pay and a medical procedure cost us $100. The renewal policy for year 2014 will actually cost us about $85 dollars less monthly split by the employer and us. This would have been a welcomed change except now all doctor visits have a $50 co-pay, if the Dr. is in the system and 50% of his fees if he isn’t ( that will be somewhere from $150 upwards). All procedures will be $250, for in system and 50% if not. Since both of us have some existing medical issues (why our costs were so high before OWEbozo made everything go up astronomically) we are estimating it will cost us thousands more annually. Thanks a lot to the Congress and A.I.T.W.H. that made my costs rise like crazy while they exempted themselves from the B.S.

      • augger/Dusty: As you both may be aware, 70% of the doctors in California have indicated they will not be participating in Obamacare, if in fact that albatros ever manages to get off the ground. That is consistent with what my physician clients, who are a fairly large group, have been telling me in recent weeks. I work primarily with very successful and highly skilled doctors, most of whom are located in New York City, lower Fairfield County in Connecticut, the northern (and most affluent) counties in New Jersey, and increasingly in southern Florida. My client base skews toward doctors who do not accept Medicaid and accept limited Medicare patients, so most of them will be moving to variations of the new “Concierge” model of healthcare delivery. But more than 70% have already decided Obamacare will not survive beyond 2 – 3 – years and they have no interest in having cognitively challenged Federal bureaucrats dictate how they treat their patients and what they (the physicians) can earn. In some ways this is a classic organizational behavior problem in which high prestige doctors find it unacceptable to be ordered about by low prestige liberal arts majors now working as government clerks. The original experiments involved cooks and waitresses, but the concept is the same.

        The key issue here is that Obamacare is and will continue to suffer shortages of both healthy participants and doctors of all types. So Obamacare will be actuarially unsupportable, and those who do enroll will find an insufficient number of physicians to serve their healthcare needs. Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play? Regards, CDE

        • CDE, thanks for the confirmation. Maybe 2 years ago, I was trumpeting the very same thing you discussed here today, and sadly … our traveling gypsy crazy liberals decided to tell me I was full of it. The “Concierge” model is beginning to take hold all across the country, and may continue to gain traction long after the healthcare law collapses.

          When you are bored, you should take a look at the most recent years of the AMA Physician Survey(s). I think you’ll enjoy the read. 🙂

          • augger: We are making progress with our Obamacare Alternative Plan, and the Concierge Model comprises an important component. I keep meaning to send you the White Paper that introduces the Patient Centered Healthcare Initiative, but good intentions are worthless and I’ve been swamped recently with a diverse set of very interesting activities, some of which are actually making me some money. My colleagues and I are working on our third reworking of the paper and we are targeting year-end to have it ready-for-prime-time. I will go find your email address again and send you a copy when its ready. I will really value your feedback as this thing may really help when Obamacare completely implodes and the Progressives begin clamoring for “Single Payer” as the only alternative. Merry Christmas or Seasons’ Greetings (whichever works for you), CDE

          • augger: I meant to thank you for suggesting the AMA survey, and though I am never bored, if you send me a link or a website address I will certainly take a look. This is all very serious stuff. Regards, CDE

  3. I have several regular Docs………….
    I have short bowl (only half of my small and just over half of my large)……… a local doc and one at Emory.
    Because of the short bowl, I have kidney stone issues ( usually one removal a year, sometimes 2) a local and one at Emory.
    My wife and I are experiencing joint issues in knees, elbows and shoulders……mostly spurs so far. One local.
    All were in the network ( $10 per visit), but all said they weren’t guaranteeing that they would remain in it.

    • “but all said they weren’t guaranteeing that they would remain in it.”

      Many are unable to predict. We’ll have to wait out the rest of the year to find out.

  4. Dusty,

    Obama will send the squad over and administer a little relief in the near future.

    I suggest you look for alternative ideas like “envelope medicine” before they arrive.

Talk Amongst Yourselves:

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.