I, for one, am glad our Republican friends seems to be making the same mistakes they did before 2012; that is, thinking the polling all favors their way.
Actually, it looks like Democrats are repeating the mistakes of 2009. Thinking that their problems are ‘structural’ and thus unavoidable, so no need to change course.
Well, that sums it up, doesn’t it?
In a year we’ll find out which of you is right.
Well, Obamacare could be working like a charm by spring and people will like their new insurance options. That seems to be what Democrats are counting on. And that would change the calculus substantially.
It will not be working like a charm by spring, it will never be working like a charm. It may well be functional, it will almost certainly be an improvement over the monstrosity we have been living with, but that is a low enough bar to fall over, never mind leaping.
What the hell can you expect from a Republican version of socialized medicine? The money that goes to health insurance company profit is money lost to health care. And we will never be able to keep them supplied with the level of sustained profit to which they imagine themselves entitled.
What do they bring to the effort other than demands? Actuarial tables, risk assessment, these things are long and widely known, the same calculations that go into Medicare and Medicaid are precisely the same science used by any health insurance provider. They don’t own that science. They don’t do research and development, they don’t discover previously unknown breakthroughs in actuarial science.
Their grossly overpaid executives will find other, more useful work, openings for baristas and bicycle messengers abound. And if they insist on utilising their special skill set, there’s always the Pigeon Drop and the Big Store.
If we measure its success simply by it being better than what was before, that will be measured in turn by whether there are more winners than losers. At this point, it is no sure thing because we don’t know how many people are going to be paying more than they did before, most of whom will probably define themselves as losers.
http://www.thewire.com/politics/2013/11/only-third-americans-think-obamacare-will-help-them/355334/
Most Americans think that the law will help the poor and uninsured. If we define them as the winners, and everyone else has to pay more, then the law is going to be a bigtime political failure. The political market hasn’t been willing to accept a new welfare program in a very long time, especially one that was sold this dishonestly as something that would benefit all Americans.
The CBO has taken declining and projected reduced costs for health care to project a 10% reduction in Federal outlays for the government’s health insurance programs. The savings across the entire medical field will be enormous.
Bad news takes six seconds to sink in. Good news affecting politics for the givernment takes six months. Conservatives and independents thrive in the six minute world. The Democrats need to demonstrate the ACA is long term good news program.
That is the key, but messaging won’t get the job done once the law is actually fully in place. At that point, it’s all about competence and cost.
It’s not quite as simple as individual winners and losers. If I have close friends or family members who go from not being able to afford any insurance at all to having affordable half-decent insurance, I’m probably going to be positively inclined towards the law, even if it means my own personal insurance went up by 10%.
That’s assuming they sign up and can afford the premiums. The “affordable” part seems to have been forgotten. People who get Medicaid are undoubtedly going to be better off, but a young person with no insurance who didn’t want any isn’t going to be mollified by a relatively low price tag.
Besides, your argument applies to any welfare program. People who don’t get food stamps are often friendly to the program because they know someone who does. But politically, welfare programs are still what they are, and ACA is being viewed as a welfare program.
Then there’s the changes to Medicare and employer insurance. The best Democrats can hope for is to not get hurt, they can’t benefit, because people already like Medicare and their employer insurance. If those things go through big changes, then the furor over what’s happening with individual plans will seem like a minor problem.
And if Obama is caught sacrificing Malia to Cthulu, his approval ratings will drop…
If the CBO was correct, that is.
Some people (by no means all) might like their own individual employer plan, but I’ve never met anyone who likes the concept of employer-provided health care as a whole, since it tends to lead to people being stuck in jobs they don’t like, and makes entrepreneurship very difficult.
Ah yes the Homer Simpson rationalization “well you bought all those smoke alarms and we never had a single fire”. It is the nature of insurance that most people don’t get as much out of it as they put into it. But for the few who do need it it pays off big time. I hope for your family’s sake you don’t extend this logic to fire safety.
That has nothing to do with it. Most people have insurance. If the cost of providing insurance to the few is that the many have to pay more, it will be a loser politically.
We know this because Democrats had to hide this from the public.
Except with Cthulhu. What else matters?!
That’s how Medicare and Medicaid work, and they are not losers politically.
The many believe they will also collect from those programs. They believe they are “paying in” for their own future benefits. Different dynamic.
And of course even those programs required lies to sell.
That is not the case with Medicaid.
Such as?
Hey! He said “Of course”, hence, what follows is proven fact and not subject to question. That’s just common sense.