Looking back, it is amazing that Obama wasn’t laughed off the stage at the outset. His central claim — that premiums would drop for the typical family by $2,500 — could literally have been taken from the back of an envelope. As the New York Times explained back in 2008, the $2,500 number came from economist David Cutler, who predicted that Obamacare would reduce all health-care spending by $200 billion a year. Candidate Obama, looking for a good sound bite, simply divided this number by the number of families in the United States; then, calculating inexplicably that total health-care spending and family health-insurance premiums were exactly the same thing, he concluded that all money saved would be returned to the people. That Obama considered this a reasonable way of selling a plan that reorganized one-sixth of the economy betrays either a fundamental economic illiteracy or a deeply troubling readiness to mislead.I'm voting for stupid. I have never been impressed with Barry's intellect. While he is more than willing to lie without batting an eye, I think this one is rooted in dumb. Unfortunately, the media have consistently refused to look at the shit this guy is doing in a critical way. The Obamacare rollout has been a disaster, yet we hear about "glitches." Incompetence is not a glitch.
Everything you never wanted to know about the world of temporary attorneys. And maybe more.
Try it!
Sunday, October 13, 2013
You mean he lied to us to make Obamacare sound good?
Well, of course he did. Otherwise, it wouldn't have sounded good. But who wouldn't be thrilled to hear that their insurance premiums would be going way down? Never mind that it made no sense -- lie to me, bitch! So, he did:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment