A blog of the NYU Colloquium on Market Institutions and Economic Processes
by Mario Rizzo
I have taken a quick look at some of the provisions of the recently-passed House healthcare bill. What I want to do here is determine how it will affect me and others in a similar situation. I do not think my own situation is exceptional. I urge others to determine how it will affect them. Read the rest of this entry »
by Mario Rizzo
To much fanfare the House Democrats just revealed their healthcare plan. Three items from the CNN report caught my eye:
“The nearly 2,000 page bill — a combination of three different versions passed by House committees…”
A priori, I say this will be a nightmare to read and a mess to interpret.
“Pelosi’s office said the bill would cut the federal deficit by roughly $30 billion over the next decade. The measure is financed through a combination of a tax surcharge on wealthy Americans and spending constraints in Medicare and Medicaid.”
That is $30 billion over TEN years. When have Congressional estimates of savings not been seriously wrong in the direction of greater spending?
“Medicare expenditures would be cut by 1.3 percent annually.”
Politically impossible under the current mindset.
I am astonished by the patently obvious nonsense that is being peddled by this Congress. Let them admit that what they propose will cost a ton and add to the deficits. Then, at least, we could see if there are any counter-balancing benefits.
UPDATE: A few hours ago the House Democrats said the bill would cost $871 billion over ten years. However they “misspoke.” Oops. It has now been revealed that it will cost $1.05 trillion over ten years. (But now it will save about $100 billion over ten years.) Stay tuned.
by Mario Rizzo
The Wall Street Journal reports, mirable dictu, the latest Senate healthcare plan passes the Congressional Budget Office’s test for not adding to the deficit. In fact, the plan will trim the deficit by $81 billion over ten years. That is an average of $8.1 billion per year in a projected deficit that is so high I can’t remember what it is. This is your classic rounding error. Let that pass.
What is the basic financing mechanism? Read the rest of this entry »
by Gene Callahan
I heard Howard Dean on the radio yesterday morning (CBS AM, for those who care to look for a transcript — I tried but could not locate one) talking about why health co-ops won’t work. “You see,” he said (and I quote from memory — see no transcript note above), “our private health care system is inefficient — not because private enterprise is inherently inefficient, but because the insurance companies are owned by investors, so they need to take some of the premiums and pay out a return on investment. Private insurance only pays about 80 cents on the dollar to actual medical care, while Medicare pays about 97.”
Dean is apparently not aware that most “private enterprises” are owned by investors. The argument he gave is, in fact, a straight up Marxist argument for the inefficiency of capitalism. (Yes, “socialism” and “communism” get tossed around too freely in this debate, but in this case I’m merely being factual.)
So why isn’t Dean in favor of nationalizing the entire economy? Couldn’t we get bread, and computers, and automobiles more efficiently if we just cut out those useless profits? (Oh, forget that last item — I forgot that we are nationalizing the auto industry.)
