Re: I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.
 

I assume good will and bad sources. But apparently facts are passe now -- everyone can have their own.

Re: I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.
 

I took con law pass/fail, so my knowledge of how to use it isn't much better than my knowledge of what to do with a clitoris:confused:

Re: I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.
 

One of the best bits of irony recently is that Trump is all high and mighty over bribing Carrier not to lay off a few hundred people while Iran has now placed an order with Boeing that will result in thousands of jobs.

Re: I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.
 

why? tax breaks may be blunt tools but they do some stuff some times. And of course aerospace is one of our last truly domestic industries, thanks in large part to me, not to brag.

Re: I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.
 

If you look back at stories from 2009 about the exchange where Obama said, elections have consequences and I won, nothing about the meeting or the exchange seems particularly out of the ordinary. What is remarkable in retrospect is the way that conservatives have seized on that exchange to persuade themselves that Obama wouldn't work with them, in order to refusing to work with him. It is a classic case of projection.

Re: I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.
 

Nicely done.

Re: I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.
 

Hank would call this speculative:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Czk0pwGWgAAXphY.jpg

Re: I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.
 

not knowing science is a pretty thing- but drawing a graph is not proof. but assuming it is supported, but non-speculation, which it ain't, the slope of the costs w/o is not linear. Why?

Also, co-pay increases are how much? And coverage drops are how much? and how much are people who had no real coverage under their jobs are included?

math is hard.

Re: I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.
 

Dashed line looks straight to me.

The y-axis is nominal premiums, not any of those things.

Re: I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.
 

So why doesn't the actual premium line drop $2500? Isn't that what was promised?

Re: I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.
 

Cite?

As Hank notes, math is hard, but especially so for the intentionally disingenuous. The $2500 savings figure was based on the curve above (or, as Hank notes, possibly a curve with numbers showing "all in" costs") - a savings from the anticipated increase.

Cruz notably decided to market this as a promise of a $2500 decrease from the current premium. Math may be hard, but the man is just a raving liar. Aren't you ashamed of that kind of behavior? Don't you realize that is what got us Trump?

Re: I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.
 

Math IS hard, but I don't think the graph denies that. The graph was used in the report on ACA that just came out, and that report is apparently very long and detailed with a ton of data; as noted in the graph, the graph was originally from Kaiser and is based on data Kaiser is maintaining.

I haven't had time to look at the new report. But if you look at it and drill down on your questions I'd be interested in your take. All good questions.

Separately, I hope everyone follows Sarah Kliff. She's consistently done interesting reporting on Obamacare.

Re: I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.
 

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...ance-premium-/

I'm not citing Cruz. Obama said it himself. Repeatedly.

Re: I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.
 

I don't think that one addresses whether or not this was a flat decrease or a decrease from anticipated increases. It mostly focuses on whether the pledge was for premiums or all in costs. See Wapo: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.13398f267492

This was drilled down a lot at the time. He took flak for it but it was explained in some detail. In retrospect, he appears to have accomplished it, at least if limited to premiums.

Re: I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.
 

"I will sign a universal health care bill into law by the end of my first term as president that will cover every American and cut the cost of a typical family's premium by up to $2,500 a year."

See also: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUd-slJc-GY

Have premiums for anyone decreased by 3000% so that they received a raise?

I think it is reasonable for normal people to understand this to be a clear promise to decrease the premium. It's not ambiguous. You can say he misspoke repeatedly, but together with the "You can keep your plan" and "You can keep your doctor" lies, seems to be more of the intentional misrepresentation to get it passed.

Even if Obamacare is not a total failure, can you understand why many feel deceived about what it is, versus how it was sold?