The Motley Fool Discussion Boards

Previous Page

Politics & Current Events / Political Asylum


Subject:  Re: The ACA, a chart Date:  11/1/2013  6:30 PM
Author:  THEMATHISNEAR Number:  1908438 of 2206846

Your ad hominem on Dr. Gruber (and me) doesn't really make for anything more than a fallacious argument.

No, fallacious is relying on numbers supplied by a former bureaucrat who has a built-in bias toward the outcome he advocates. Much like the 'hide the decline' global warming liars, he has a vested interest in seeing Zerocare continue to be implemented. For instance, he can say that 80% of people are unaffected, and that may be technically true today, but if he is the anointed 'expert', it would be disingenuous for him not to supply information that would indicate that these people will be affected soon. Yet, that will happen, because it is an economic certitude that when you increase the number of high risk people in a risk pool that are not paying premiums commensurate with their risk profile AND you mandate coverage for additional goods and services for everyone, THEN everyone's costs MUST increase, including those obtaining health care through their employer. If it doesn't happen in this open enrollment, it will be in the next one. There is no way around this.

As an economist, he should be able to describe this, yet he doesn't. He is known as "Mr. Mandate", so it would be bad for his career path if he didn't support Zerocare. And it seems he has published a comic book extolling the virtues of government-run healthcare.

He is ten times more biased than the Koch Brothers, so his numbers simply don't matter. He's all in on this, regardless of the data.
Copyright 1996-2018 trademark and the "Fool" logo is a trademark of The Motley Fool, Inc. Contact Us