Y ou probably missed it. But a new school of economics was unveiled last week shortly after health care reform passed the House of Representatives. Speaker Nancy Pelosi stepped to the podium in the House chamber and said the legislation will “unleash tremendous entrepreneurial power” and create millions of jobs. “Our economy needs something new, a jolt,” she said. And she and her Democratic colleagues had just delivered it.
Pelosi, author of the new departure in economic thinking, said we should now “imagine a society and an economy where a person could change jobs without losing health insurance, where they could be self-employed or start a small business.” With health care reform, “their entrepreneurial spirit will be unleashed.”
That’s not the half of it. While insuring 32 million more people, making insurance “more affordable for the middle class,” producing “a healthier America through prevention, through wellness and innovation,” and a whole lot more—in addition to all that, the legislation creates “4 million jobs in the life of the bill and [does] all that by saving the taxpayer $1.3 trillion.”
The proper response if you believe Pelosi even a little bit is, “Thank you, Nancy!” or perhaps simply, “Wow!”
But restrain yourself. Pelosi has a gift for economic lunacy. This wouldn’t be especially worrisome, except Pelosi is second in line to the presidency and would be prime minister if we had a parliamentary system.
So far as I know, Pelosi is the first person in the universe to regard the lack of portability of health insurance as a deathblow to entrepreneurship.
7 comments:
well, the author doesn't give any data to refute Pelosi's claim. I don't think her point was that lack of portability prevents most of us from starting a business. But I know from anectdotal evidence that there are plenty of people hanging around on $hit jobs instead of chasing their dreams because they don't want to lose coverage. There's also plenty of older folks who have the wealth to retire now and take those trips they've always planned, but are holding on because they don't want to lose coverage.
9:18....congress could have mandated portablilty and left it at that....but NO..they chose instead to mandate coverage for everyone and guess who is going to pay?....BUSINESSES....great way to "unleash" the economy....she's an idiot
mandated portability? As in, if I leave the company they still have to cover me?
I've said it before; if you don't want a coverage mandate, give up the right to receive treatment at the ER regardless of the ability to pay.
Business going to pay? Seems to me if it is easier for people to get their own insurance, business won't have to cover them. This is a major reason why companies take on part-time workers or reduce benefits for new full time employees.
aaaaand here we have yet another example of the 'baggers subscribing to an idea with support... rather like believing we can dance on clouds.
10:16...portability would also have meant that insurers could do business over state lines and in that manner increased thier risk pool which in turn would lower rates...it would have fostered a more competitive insurance industry
10:16....easier to get thier own insurance? In what risk pool? Individual policies are far more expensive than group policies. And do you really think that 32 million people didnt have insurance but could afford it? Most of them can't....so WHO is going to pay thier premiums???
Bill..dream on...the math does not work.
Post a Comment