Group items tagged

Here's why. Sanders and Warren are two of the three or four Democrats with the best chance of winding up as the party's presidential nominee this November. There is an active disagreement between the two over whether, at a meeting in December 2018, Sanders told Warren that he did not believe a woman could be elected president. Warren says he did. Sanders says he didn't.

That's where I come down, too. If this was former Vice President Joe Biden and former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg calling each other liars over a disputed meeting, it's hard for me to believe supporters of Sanders and Warren would be similarly disinterested in pursuing who is right and who is lying. Or if you want to be charitable about it: Why there is such a clear misunderstanding of what happened in that meeting in December 2018?

The point here is that both of these people can't be telling the truth. And we still haven't gotten to the bottom of who is lying (or misunderstanding) and why. So whether or not the candidates want to move on, we shouldn't. Because if you want to be the Democratic nominee against the most truth-challenged President in American history, then your commitment to honestly -- no matter how uncomfortable -- is of the utmost importance.

Additionally, Republican governors have mostly been slow to expand Medicaid coverage to low-income residents of their states or have declined to do so at all, decisions that have both decreased the number of potentially satisfied Clinton voters with new coverage and further destabilized markets and prices. The study finds that had Georgia, Florida, North Carolina, and Wisconsin embraced Medicaid expansion or even pursued slightly less-obstructionist policies, it could very well have tipped those states—and the 2016 election—to Clinton.

it does suggest a link between health care and voting that experts have long observed. A series of election studies by Harvard researcher Robert Blendon illustrates that while health care isn’t always a major factor in elections, in the cycles when it does rise to be a top priority for many voters, dissatisfaction with costs is the main driver of their decisions. Notably, it doesn’t really matter if voters’ personal costs have really increased; what matters is that they believe prices are rising.

the news of premium hikes will work in his favor, though his criticism in reaction to news has revealed more about the limitations of his own policy knowledge than anything about how he’d fix the problem.

For one: The administration’s announcement is a mere formalizing of increases many people familiar with the industry predicted throughout the year.

If Trump is indicative, Republican politicians don’t have the language to capitalize on some of the weaknesses of the law right now. Over the past two years, neither their calls for blanket repeal of Obamacare, nor the coverage of historic gains in insurance coverage, have meaningfully altered public opinion one way or the other.

Only a small sliver of the population is enrolled through the exchanges, and most people in the country are covered through their employers, where premiums have risen at rates similar to previous years.

The federal government will protect most Americans from the real financial impacts of a spike in premiums, and only between five and seven million people will bear the full sticker shock of Obamacare premium hikes.

Additionally, most people with subsidized coverage who are directly threatened by the loss of Aetna or other major insurers won’t have to go shopping for new plans until 2017.

he future of the Affordable Care Act isn’t even the top health care issue for registered voters, but that finding comes with a few grains of salt. Sixty-six percent of those polled viewed the future of Medicare as a non-exclusive “top priority,” with an equal proportion viewing access and affordability of health care as such.

Proposals like Donald Trump’s that involve remaking a system that is just beginning to settle have challenges with winning over many people who actually have to navigate the changes involved.

So what’s left for Republicans and Donald Trump? Probably not another health-reform-fueled revolution. It’s unlikely that premium increases can influence enough lives now to provide that kind of momentum at the polls, and Trump’s incoherence looks more like a last-ditch gambit than legitimately savvy capitalization on what appear to be real problems with the law.

Americans are seeking affordable ways forward with what they have in ways that disrupt their lives the least. For now, their response is probably not panic

President-elect Biden’s inclusion of policies to shore up the health law in his first major legislative package has raised those hopes further.

“We’re talking about improving affordability after not being able to have that conversation for years.”

One conducted in 2018 shows that 42 percent of those who shopped for individual market coverage found it “very difficult or impossible to find an affordable plan.”

The Biden plan would create a new cap — 8.5 percent of an individual or family’s income on premium contributions — for midlevel health plans, something the president-elect had also proposed during the campaign. This policy would mostly affect higher-earning Americans who do not currently qualify for subsidies.

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimates that a family of four earning $110,000 would see monthly premiums for a midlevel health plan fall to $779 from $1,529.

These are low-income Americans, who make up the majority of those who still lack coverage in the United States. These people already receive help buying coverage, but are still left with paying a monthly premium share that can be unaffordable.

Numerous academic studies show that premium subsidies are the strongest driver of health law enrollment. Experts say this type of large increase, directed toward low-income Americans, could drive millions more to sign up.

“It’s important both in terms of helping people through this crisis, and as a sign of the seriousness with which he is considering the future of improvements to the Affordable Care Act,” she said. “This is a step in the right direction, and it’s certainly consistent with the bigger vision he campaigned on.”

I do not see them fleeing in large numbers.”

premiums are set to rise an average of 25 percent next year. The selection of health plans on the exchanges is also shrinking.

Customers bolting the exchanges won’t necessarily avoid the rising premiums by shopping “off-marketplace.”

The big downside to shopping off the exchanges is that customers would not receive insurance subsidies. But for customers who wouldn’t qualify for subsidies anyway, shopping off the exchanges potentially gives them more options – including, in some cases, cheaper plans.

a total of 6.9 million people are getting insurance in the individual market outside the exchanges.

about 11.1 million people are enrolled in ObamaCare exchange plans, with 9.4 million of them getting premium subsidies.

HHS report seemed to be nudging people back toward the exchanges, noting that roughly a third of those avoiding the exchanges potentially could qualify for subsidies.

“millions of them may qualify for financial assistance that would let them purchase coverage and health care at lower cost” if they returned to the ObamaCare fold.

millions of them may qualify for financial assistance that would let them purchase coverage and health care at lower cost” if they returned to the ObamaCare fold.

Both marketplaces, for example, require covering individuals with pre-existing conditions.

The estimated number of insurance providers available on the exchanges for next year is 167, a net decrease of 68.

The decline in choice alone could result in more consumers leaving, even if they have to pay higher costs outside the market, in order to keep their doctor.

The HHS study noted that some of the 6.9 million shopping off-market also could qualify for Medicaid programs, which were expanded in many states.

Just for 2016, we know rates are going up in exchange plans,

And the way premiums are collected has also changed from being purely payroll-based, to including supplementary premiums based on capital gains, which has created a surplus into the National Health Insurance Fund.

Implementing the Global Budget Payment on top of Fee-For-Service reimbursement method effectively reduced annual medical expenditure growth from 12 percent to 5 percent since 2003

In addition, the NHI’s information system has migrated to the cloud, making it much easier for hospitals, clinics, and doctors to access medical information. We encourage hospitals to upload computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans so they can be retrieved for follow-up consultations. A personalized cloud-based service called My Health Bank also enables patients to check their medical records at any time.

We have premium subsidies for low-income and near-poor households, as well as the unemployed.

Taiwan has a constructive role to play in creating a robust global health network, and the best way to share our experience with other countries is through participation in the World Health Assembly and the WHO.

Many new residents cite cost of a living as a key factor behind their moves, but home insurance costs are rising faster there than the national average, meaning homeowners should brace for sticker shock.In Florida, the average home insurance premium in 2019 was $1,988. Today, it’s $2,714 — an increase of $726.

The risk is highest in the Sun Belt region, which is experiencing rapid growth, yet Americans are moving directly into areas of danger. Hurricane Ian alone killed more than 150 Floridians, knocked out power for 2.6 million residents and left Florida with a bill of nearly $113 billion in its wake.

Those states are also experiencing extreme weather: Hurricanes like Ian, Nicole and Fiona, as well as record heat, ice and snow storms, wrought billions of dollars of destruction in 2022 and killed nearly 500 Americans.

California bucked the trend in several ways. Despite being battered by wildfires and extreme storms in recent years, home insurance rates there grew by only 25 percent, below the increase in other coastal states. California lost 343,230 residents, accounting for a 0.3 percent dip, last year.

In South Dakota, 8,424 new residents moved into the sparsely populated state in 2022, while insurance costs have jumped 39 percent since 2015. In dry, sunny Arizona, where nearly 71,000 new residents flocked in 2022, costs grew 28 percent

Florida grew by more than 318,000 new residents in 2022, accounting for a population increase of 1.9 percent last year — the largest uptick in the nation. Texas, with more than 230,000 new residents, was right on its tails.

The latest Wikileaks dump shows that Clinton’s own inner circle was worried about her dissembling and reluctance to apologize over the email mess, even as the campaign ripped the press for raising those questions. --The media are a bit bored with the story line that she’s clobbering him and want the race to tighten.

But now we have Podesta himself and former Clinton aide Neera Tanden writing frankly about Hillary’s penchant for secrecy and terrible political judgment.

Podesta ripped two longtime loyalists, lawyer Cheryl Mills and spokesman Philippe Reines, along with Clinton attorney David Kendall, for not being “forthcoming on the facts.”

“A lot has to do with her instincts.” Tanden concurred again: “Her instincts can be terrible.”

When the press was harping on the fact that Clinton would not apologize for having a private server, and campaign officials were pushing back hard, it turns out that some privately agreed with the critics.

“Everyone wants her to apologize. And she should. Apologies are like her Achilles heel.”

The disclosure that ObamaCare premiums are rising an average of 25 percent—more in some states, less in others—has provided a measure of vindication for the program’s conservative detractors. It has also given Trump, who wants to repeal ObamaCare, new ammunition against Clinton, who wants to reform it—in part by increasing government subsidies.

The steep premium hikes, and dwindling insurance options in some areas, make clear that President Obama oversold the program.

Now Trump clearly bobbled a statement about his own employees being affected by ObamaCare—only a small percentage are, his company pays the rest—but that doesn’t neutralize the larger issue.

he press has been hungry for a new story line so people don’t check out in the final two weeks. The Wikileaks dump, ObamaCare news and some tightening polls in Florida are all it takes. Perhaps the media will shelve the speculation about Clinton’s Cabinet and treat this once again as a horse race.

The need to bolster the Affordable Care Act will become even more urgent, the coalition says, if Texas and other states succeed in their lawsuit to invalidate the entire law.

Yet another Democratic proposal, allowing states to create a Medicaid buy-in program for all their residents, regardless of income, has won support from 23 senators, including Mr. Booker, Mr. Brown, Ms. Gillibrand, Ms. Harris, Ms. Klobuchar and Ms. Warren.

And “during the whole debate over the Affordable Care Act, we supported having a public option in the individual insurance market in every state,” said Robert B. Doherty, senior vice president of the college, which represents 154,000 doctors who specialize in internal medicine.

Most economists assume that a worldwide recession is already underway — a synchronized downturn that is punishing countries indiscriminately, turning traditional economic strengths into alarming vulnerabilities.

The disruption of industry worldwide has drastically cut demand for commodities, walloping copper producers like Chile, Peru, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Zambia, along with zinc producers like Brazil and India. Oil exporters are especially susceptible to the downturn as prices remain cheap, pressuring Colombia, Algeria, Mozambique, Iraq, Nigeria and Mexico.

As the coronavirus pandemic brings the global economy to an astonishing halt, the world’s most vulnerable countries are suffering intensifying harm. Businesses faced with the disappearance of sales are laying off workers. Households short of income are skimping on food. International investment is fleeing so-called emerging markets at a pace not seen since the global financial crisis of 2008, diminishing the value of currencies and forcing people to pay more for imported goods like food and fuel.

In wealthy nations, quarantines have been mandated, while governments and central banks have unleashed trillions of dollars in spending and credit to limit the economic damage. But in poor countries, where families cram into teeming slums, quarantining may be impossible. People who support themselves by collecting scrap metal harvested from garbage dumps risk hunger if they stay home.

the penalty was never big enough to persuade a critical mass of people to buy insurance, so repealing it might not cripple the individual health-insurance market

Many Democrats say repealing the mandate would shred the ACA as younger, healthier people decline to get coverage, raising costs for older and sicker individuals

more experts are concluding that rising premiums next year would exempt many more people from the mandate.

a recent study that in the 15 most-expensive states, premiums would exceed the affordability threshold for a person with an income of $50,000

“Premiums for Obamacare policies next year will be so high that millions will be exempt from the tax penalty whether Congress repeals it or not.”

To qualify for the new benefits, people need to sign up for plans at Healthcare.gov or a state exchange website. The changes will be retroactive to Jan. 1, meaning that people who already have Obamacare plans will get money back. Anyone who is uninsured now can qualify for new prices as soon as they sign up.

All the eligible plans must cover a standard set of comprehensive benefits, including prenatal care, prescription drugs and mental health services

If you are receiving unemployment insurance, the legislation entitles you to a special discount: Regardless of your income, your premiums will look similar to that of the person earning $19,000 on our maps. And if you lost your coverage at work and want to keep it, the bill will also pay the full cost of your premiums for six months under the federal COBRA program.

Obama has been like a foreign policy version of Warren Buffett, a proudly pragmatic value investor less concerned with appearances and the whims of the moment, focused instead on making solid investments with an eye to long-term success

think back to 2008, with the U.S. economy shedding as many as 500,000 jobs a month and on the cusp of a second Great Depression, the U.S. military was stretched to the breaking point through fighting two wars, and many parts of the world associated the United States with militarism, Guantanamo Bay and torture. The picture looks very different today.

Considering the extent of today’s global disorder, it is tempting to succumb to a narrative of grievance and fear — sharpening the divisions between “us” and “them,” building walls longer and higher, and lashing out at enemies with force. Or to think it better that, to reduce exposure to such geopolitical risk, the United States should divest from its alliances. Despite all the talk of “strength,” what these impulses reflect is a core lack of confidence.

As Obama’s presidency nears its end, the state of the world is indeed tumultuous and ever changing, but we have good reason to be confident. The United States’ global position is sound. The United States has restored a sense of strategic solvency. Countries look to it for guidance, ideas, support and protection. It is again admired and inspiring, not just for what it can do abroad but also for its economic vitality and strong society at home.

A new study from the American Action Forum that looks at healthy 30-year-old men finds that underlying premiums for those individuals will increase by an average of 260 percent

. For example, the drop-down boxes for security questions aren’t working, which shouldn’t be a traffic-related problem

In a sense, the AAF study is more relevant to the problem at hand. Obamacare makes healthy people pay more for insurance in order to subsidize sicker people. It makes younger people pay more to subsidize older people. It makes men pay more to subsidize women. It makes everyone pay more to cover benefits, taxes, and fees that consumers might not ordinarily want.

This creates an effect that should be familiar to any economist: the laws of supply and demand raise the value of women’s erotic capital, in particular their beauty, sex appeal and sexual competence. It is happening in Scandinavia as well as Mediterranean countries, in China and the US. The pattern is confirmed even in countries that are sexually “liberated” such as Finland and France. Men are two to ten times more likely to have affairs, buy pornography, seek lap-dancing clubs and erotic entertainments. And call girls’ earnings can exceed wages in nearly all the professions, despite working shorter hours.

This is an implicit rebuttal to feminist thinkers (like Sylvia Walby, Mary Evans, Monique Wittig or most recently Kat Banyard) who argue that men and women are “equal” in their sexual interest, as in everything else. This is obviously not true, which is why it should not surprise us that some women do use sex, and their erotic capital more generally, to get what they want.

The economic benefits of being physically and socially attractive can be substantial, especially in marketing, public relations, television, advocacy in the courts, as well as for actors, singers and dancers. But it’s broader than this: people working in the better-paid parts of the private sector are more attractive than those in the public and non-profit sectors. Tall and attractive people are more likely to be employed in professional jobs, like law or banking. For the ugly and short, it gets worse. Good-looking people can earn 10 to 15 per cent more than the average-looking, who in turn can earn 10 to 15 per cent more than the plain or ugly. The tall earn more than the short; the obese have earnings 10 to 15 per cent below average. Statistical analysis shows this beauty premium is not really just about cleverly disguised differences in intelligence, social class or self-confidence. Studies of lawyers reveal that there is always a premium for attractiveness that varies in size, but is not due to employer discrimination. The most attractive can earn 12 per cent more than the unattractive, and are 20 per cent more likely to achieve partnership in their firm, because they are more effective at pulling in customers.

there is a 25 percentage point difference in average earnings between unattractive and attractive minorities. This impact can be as big as the gap between having a degree and no qualifications at all—although it ranks well below intelligence as a determinant of life outcomes.

erotic capital—if seen as an economic endowment—is an especially important asset for people with few intellectual abilities and qualifications. In Brazil, investing in cosmetic surgery is seen as a sensible way of getting ahead in a culture where looks and sensuality count. In Britain, too, a 2009 survey of teenage girls found that one-quarter think it is more important to be beautiful than clever.

the consequences if the suit were to prevail would be grotesque. States like California that run their own exchanges would be unaffected. But in places like New Jersey, where G.O.P. politicians refused to take a role, premiums would soar, healthy individuals would drop out, and health reform would go into a death spiral. (And since many people would lose crucial, lifesaving coverage, the deaths wouldn’t be just a metaphor.)

states could avoid this death spiral by establishing exchanges — which might involve nothing more than setting up links to the federal exchange. But how did we get to this point?

let’s be clear about what’s happening here. Judges who support this cruel absurdity aren’t stupid; they know what they’re doing. What they are, instead, is corrupt, willing to pervert the law to serve political masters. And what we’ll find out in the months ahead is how deep the corruption goes.

Many drivers say they prefer the elevated ride height and bigger cargo space. Auto manufacturers can charge a premium for the vehicles, which cost only slightly more to produce than similar-sized cars because they share much of the same engineering. For instance, the average price paid for a midsize SUV in May was $37,790, nearly $12,000 higher than a midsize sedan, according to sales data from Kelley Blue Book.

Japanese and South Korean car companies have also rolled out new sport-utility offerings as their earnings have been hit by slowing sedan sales—long a sweet spot for brands like Toyota and Honda.